Upgrading from Call Manager 6.1.3 to version 8.0

[Steve Baker]

Hi,

We are currently looking into upgrading our Call Manager software and I was hoping for some advice on a couple of issues.

Firstly was the licensing. I have read that DLU licensing is no longer used from Call Manager 8.0. Does anyone have any links to articles / knowledge of how we convert our current DLU's to the newer licensing model?

Secondly is that we currently use the attendant console. At the moment its just for 3 users on our reception desk who handle all calls coming in on the offices main line number. Would CUDAC be a suitable replacement and are there extra costs for this or does it come with CUCM 8.

Lastly is that we also use Unity Connection 7.0.2. If we upgrade Call Manager would we need to upgrade Unity as well?

Thanks in advance for any advice people have.

Steve

[Jose Mendez]

Hi Steve,

DLUs are the same. When you purchase them (through a newer model in terms of which features you get bundled by price X) you will get a license file just as you would with CallManager 7 or before. Those licenses are installed the same in the Publisher server.

Communications Manager Attendant Console is no longer supported, so CUDAC would be a good replacement. You can start off here: www.cisco.com/go/ac

There are extra costs as the application requires a separate Windows based server with necessarly licenses of its own.

Unity 7 is compatible with CallManager 8, so you are good to go.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/prod/collateral/voicesw/ps6789/ps7046/ps7282/product_data_sheet0900aecd805e6a67.html

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/prod/collateral/voicesw/ps6789/ps7046/ps7282/data_sheet_c78-520987.html

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/unity/compatibility/matrix/cutspmtx.html

[Jonathan Schulenberg]

Communications Manager Attendant Console is no longer supported, so CUDAC would be a good replacement.

I disagree here. CUDAC (vs. CUBAC/CUEAC) has a few serious limitations. If you talk to the PM for that product the CUDAC edition was only intended for departmental assistants that are supporting a few people, not company-wide operators. The CUBAC edition was intended for Business Edition customers while CUEAC was meant for everyone else. Look at the Product Feature Table in the release notes. It will show you what each license gets you.

[barry]

I agree with Jonathan.

To be perfectly honest, none of the new Cisco Attendant Console offerings is that great, and they all have limitations. CUEAC for instance (last time I checked anyway) doesn't allow an operator to see user Presence status from the directory list, and each user has to be selected one at a time to view it. (It is possible that this behaviour has changed in a more recent release, but I had a TAC case open about it and was told that this behaviour wouldn't be changed). I kind of stopped looking at CUEAC after this, as this was something you got in the old AC.

For alternatives to the new Cisco AC offerings (which all now cost $$$s) you can look at ARC Solutions (who write the Cisco ACs anyway) or something like Zeacom.

I've actually got a couple of clients who have told me they won't upgrade past V7 because of losing the old Cisco AC and are cancelling ESW/UCSS when their contracts expire.

HTH. Barry

[jamgale]

BLF is standard out of the box functionality, this is available in the directory screen for the users displayed, along with Presence information if you are using CUP or OCS/Lync.

[barry]

Hi Jamie

Yes and No. BLF is available, however when I tested it, you had to press F2 over each user to display it. From the directory list itself, it was not displayed.

I did raise a TAC case and was told by the engineer that this that behaviour had been changed in a specific CUEAC release (it only applied to CUEAC and not CUDAC or CUBAC) and the BU were adamant that it would not be changed back - something to do with the load on the server. To be honest at that point I deinstalled it and haven't had the inclination to go back to look at it again.

I can get the TAC case number if you need it.

IM(very)HO, there are better, simpler and cheaper consoles out there.

Regards

Barry.

Edit: Corrected to say F2, rather than F4.

TAC SR Number ws 612084717

[jamgale]

Hi Barry,

The way in which you are descibing the BLF is true in older versions, the reason for this was because the requests which were being sent to UCM for the state would crash the UCM and cause all sort of issues hence why they didnt dynamically show in the console directory screen.

This was resolved in release 3.1.1.5 of the products (CUDAC, CUBAC and CUEAC), this version was available late 2009.

The BLF since then shows in the directory screen for all the users which are displayed, there is no longer a need to press F2 in order to get the BLF status.

The products themselves have come a long way since the version you were testing and is still being updated/imporoved with every release we have.

[barry]

Thanks for the reply Jamie; good to know that Cisco are listening to their customers here. The TAC engineer I worked with on the case was adamant that he'd been told that the behaviour I documented was here to stay and would not be being changed.

Now if only we could get away from the requirement for a standalone server for these products we would really be heading in the right direction (or is this just wishful thinking!)

Regards, Barry

[droutledge]

If CUDAC doesn't work out for you, you can check this out.  It has some extra features like sms style phone messaging, paging, and really leverages the great capabilities of the Cisco IP Phones.  It's affordible, powerful, and can import all the speed dials right from the legacy Cisco AC.http://www.bridgeoc.com

[Christian Bongiovanni]

If you want a Professional to Enterprise solution, easy to use, trendy and feature rich, have a look at:

http://www.imagicle.com/Products/Collaboration/AttendantConsoleandCTI/BluesAttendantEnterprise/tabid/383/language/en-US/Default.aspx