ASK THE EXPERTS - UC 500 SYSTEM VOICE TECHNOLOGIES

[ciscomoderator]

Welcome to the Cisco Networking Professionals Ask the Expert conversation. This is an opportunity to learn about the voice capabilities of the UC 500 system with Marcos Hernandez.  Marcos is a Technical Marketing Engineer with the Small Business Technology Group at Cisco. He has more than 14 years of experience with voice-over-packet technologies, with focus on VoIP, SIP, QoS, Cisco Unified CallManager Express, and managed services.

Remember to use the rating system to let Marcos know if you have received an adequate response.

Marcos might not be able to answer each question due to the volume expected during this event. Our moderators will post many of the unanswered questions in other discussion forums shortly after the event. This event lasts through July 30, 2010. Visit this forum often to view responses to your questions and the questions of other community members.

[inewman]

Hello Marcos,

I have a question about site connections.

I have two office locations (T1) and one home (cable modem). UC520 8 users license, and SPA525G. Currently the sites are connected but the config was done by someone else. When I use CCA 2.2.2 and click multi site management it says this configuration is not supported, as well as the the firewall tab.

I recently got an offer from my ISP/Telco that would give me much better rates if I have all my phone numbers on one bill/location. Can I have one of my UC520's be the main gateway for all external calls (the one at HQ), so my second site would use the lines/trunks at HQ?

If so can I configure this will CCA 2.2.2? Will I run into licenseing issues (each site is maxed out with 8 users at each locaion)? What documentaion should I read up on?

Thank you!

[Marcos Hernandez]

Hi,

The licensing is not a problem, since phones will still register to their local UC500. The issue here is that the CCA multisite manager is not designed to handle centralized call control scenarios, but rather extension to extension dialing (on two or more different sites).

The good news is that you can implement a CLI workaround and still get support for your UC520. If you email me at marchern@cisco.com and send me both configurations, I can suggest which CLI edits are necessary, so you don't have to reconfigure your system from scratch.

Thanks!

Marcos

[John Platts]

I noticed that CCA 2.2 and earlier were released within 4 months of the last major release, but 8 months have elapsed after the CCA 2.2 release and CCA 2.3 has not yet been released. Why was CCA 2.3 delayed for so long? Will there be as long as a delay between CCA 2.3 and CCA 2.4, or will CCA 2.4 be released within 3-4 months of CCA 2.3?

[Marcos Hernandez]

John,

There are plans for a 2.2.5 release of CCA (due in a couple of weeks or so) and a 3.0 fall release.

Marcos

[bcronje]

Hi Marcos,

From a pre-sales point of view, where does Cisco position the UC500 series compared with CME on ISR router? To me it seems that whenever we have a customer that requires voice and WAN/Internet data connectivity it always makes more sense to go with CME as the UC500 series lacks any WIC slots. So I'm a bit unclear as to when UC500 will be a better choice than CME.

Also, can the UC500 interconnect with other SIP/H323 systems via trunks? I.e. If the customer has 3 branches, can one interconnect these branches using the UC500 series?

Thanks

Beyers Cronje

[Marcos Hernandez]

Hi Beyers,

We recommend that UC500 be deployed as a voice appliance primarily. ISR's being multi-purpose and as you correctly point out, expandable, are normally used in the SMB space to combine WAN termination and multi-service applications (voice, security, VPN, etc.). Even though some of these applications are also present in UC500, you will notice that they will always tend to gravitate towards voice, and their corresponding scalability numbers are typically lower than ISR.

There is another dimension in our positioning, and it is support. UC500 currently enjoys a specific and more comprehensive support model than its larger counterparts (with the exception of UC520, which is still supported by traditional TAC).

Finally, a third dimension is partner profile and certification. UC500 requires that you obtain a Cisco certification that is more reachable, giving you the option to evolve into more advanced specializations that would allow you to position ISR's. We are not opposed to this idea and we actually encourage and celebrate this growth in our partners' practices.

Thanks,

Marcos

[John Platts]

Are there any plans to support data T-1s or a combination voice and data T-1 on the UC500 platform? I have previously heard SBCS partners requesting data T-1 support on the UC500.

Reasons why data T-1 support on the UC500 platform should be considered:

• UC500 platform supports SPA500 and CP-500 phones, and ISRs do not support SPA500 and CP-500 phones.
• There are other features that are supported on the UC500 platform, but not on ISRs with both CME and CUE, including:
  • Smart CallConnector support
  • WebEx PhoneConnect
    
  • CCA configurability
  • Cisco Small Business Office Manager
• T-1s that carry a combination of voice (using PRI) and data are supported only on the IAD 2430, 2800 series ISR, 2900 series ISR, 3800 series ISR, and 3900 series ISR platforms, whereas the 1841, 1921, 1941, and SR520-T1 do support data T-1s but not combination voice/data T-1s.
• CCA already supports data T-1 connections on SR520-T1. Implementing support for data T-1s on the UC500 platform in CCA is possible if the UC500 hardware and the IOS images on the UC500 platform also support data T-1s.
• Cisco has released several UC500 models with built-in T-1 ports, and support for data T-1s might make these models more attractive for UC500 partners. The models of the UC500 equipped with a built-in T-1 port are:
  • UC520-48U-T/E/F-K9
  • UC520-48U-T/E/B-K9
  • UC560-T1E1-K9
• There are already competitors with SMB VoIP solutions that support data T-1s, voice T-1s, or T-1s carrying a combination of data and voice.
• The addition of data T-1 support reduces the cost of deploying the SBCS solution by eliminating the cost of an additional T-1 router, especially when T-1s carrying both voice and data are used.

[Marcos Hernandez]

Hi John,

There are no plans to support T1 data termination on UC500.

Marcos

[John Platts]

Are there enhancements planned for Live Record in future versions of Cisco Unity Express? I do not know any improvements made to the Live Record feature in CUE 7.0, 7.1, or 8.0. One of the problems that we have noticed with the CUE live record feature is that messages have to be stored within a mailbox. We want live recorded calls stored separately from voicemails left by individuals calling in. We also want to be able to transfer live recorded calls to an external device.

[emphillips]

Can a UC500 be connected to an external paging system? My customer has a Bogen TPU-100 paging system and would still like to be able to do overhead paging rather than paging through the handset, as they are in a manufacturing environment.

[John Platts]

You have posted a document at https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-9465 describing how to use a SPA8000 with the UC500.

The problems with the SPA8000 integration with the UC500 today:

• The UC500 side of the integration must be configured using CLI
• The SPA8000 must be manually configured via its Web GUI to integrate with the UC500
• The SPA8000 is not capable of grabbing its configuration from the UC500 like the 7900 series, CP-500 series, and SPA500 series phones can

Are there plans to support the SPA8000 or any of the other SPA FXS gateways in CCA in the future? Are there plans for any SPA FXS gateways that can pull their configuration from a UC500?