Send cisco-voip mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cisco-voip digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: UC on UCS - platform selection: quantity vs quality
(Nick Matthews)
2. Sip and Early Offer (Carlo)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 17:32:05 -0500
From: Nick Matthews <[email protected]>
To: Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UC on UCS - platform selection: quantity vs
quality
Message-ID:
<CAM-K-NrSnY=tfpdisbhcx02fyxp5yq0-hmhh2bvp8g8exzn...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
A lot of it is IOPS from how many hard drive spindles you have. I believe a
good portion of the UC app suites are IO bound.
Realistically there is a lot of overhead with UC on UCS - the 'standard'
ships with 48 GB memory which you'll probably never use.
I view it more as risk mitigation. I had a customer with 2 C-series that
hit a Vmware issue that brought down the entire box. They have a 3 node
cluster, 1 pub 2 subs. Well, both subs were on the same Vmware box and they
were the only CTI subscribers for UCCX. So even though everything is
redundant, you have to be very careful about VM placement. As well, with 2
boxes rather than 4 the co-residency restrictions will be more severe as
you have more applications that have to agree on the co-res details.
But that's why they call it design and not science. There's good reasons
for wanting 2 boxes instead of 4 and it's dependent on your environment.
Or you could just host it all in the cloud, I'm told it's a cool place.
-nick
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks Terry. That would be great.
>
> While I understand there are doc based specs and real life, I'm a little
> concerned with the push to multiple chassis. There's quite a bit of
> overheard per chassis, including the additional VMware license and support
> costs. If there are concerns with running too many apps on one box, why
> don't they list that anywhere in the specs, i.e. for every 5 servers,
> reserve one free CPU, or something like that. They do that with the Unity
> Connection spec, so it's easy to do it with others.
>
> Anyways, I'll wait to hear back.
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Terry Oakley" <[email protected]>
> *To: *"Lelio Fulgenzi" <[email protected]>, "cisco-voip" <
> [email protected]>
> *Sent: *Monday, December 10, 2012 10:42:55 AM
> *Subject: *RE: [cisco-voip] UC on UCS - platform selection: quantity vs
> quality
>
>
> We are just starting to look at upgrading from HP hardware to UC on UCS so
> will forward our supports ?recommendations? once they arrive. Currently
> they are just getting the stats together but should have something in 2
> weeks but am curious to see how they match up to your supports
> recommendations.
>
>
>
> Terry
>
>
>
>
>
> Terry Oakley
>
> Telecommunication Coordinator, | Information Technology Services
>
> 100 College Blvd | Red Deer, AB T4N 5H5
>
> Tel (403) 342-3521 | [email protected]
>
> [image: Description: RDC Logo] <http://www.rdc.ab.ca/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Lelio Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* December-10-12 7:55 AM
> *To:* cisco-voip
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] UC on UCS - platform selection: quantity vs
> quality
>
>
>
>
> I had some interesting feedback from my SE after he discussed our UC on
> UCS requirements with his support network. Basically, the feedback was,
> rather than two UCS C260s, I should get four UCS 240s. This was to provide
> maximum hardware/software redundancy and maximum performance.
>
> While I understand the additional hardware/software redundancy, I'm not
> 100% convinced about the maximum performance. I mean we read through the
> requirements on the wiki, ensured we had the required CPUs for each
> application, and there was quite a bit of harddisk, cpu and memory to
> spare. I'd rather minimize the amount of time managing the hardware and
> also reduce costs as much as possible.
>
> I understand the C240s are the new M3 specs, and the C260s are the older
> M2 specs, but I'm guessing those too will be updated soon.
>
> What sort of feedback are others getting who are investigating UC on UCS
> chasis servers?
>
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20121211/b6d83bb6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2017 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20121211/b6d83bb6/attachment-0001.jpg>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 08:48:55 -0800
From: Carlo <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Sip and Early Offer
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I have a sip to a PRI with early offer forced set on the gateway, but when I
call an 800 number, I don't get the message, it just starts ringing. is there
something else I need to set.
The number I am trying to call is IBM at 800-426-7378
Thanks
Sent from my iPad
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
End of cisco-voip Digest, Vol 110, Issue 12
*******************************************
