Thanks Brian,
I totally agree with you, I also have read in the SRND and didn’t
find anything suggesting this approach, this idea was raised from the client
side and I preferred to double check with the experts before I answer him.
Thank again.
Best Regards
Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
Senior Network Engineer
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Meade
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 5:16 PM
To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Redundancy
Ahmed,
I don't think this is a good route to go. Really you should have no dependence
on the publisher besides configuration updates so it shouldn't be anything that
affects operation.
I would be concerned that the subscribers would have a more updated version of
the database than the cold-standby publisher.
Brian
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi All,
I have a UC cluster V10.5 on 2 UCS Blade servers having 1 Pub and 4
Subs, and I’d like to ask if there is any need or benefit from having a cold
standby virtual machine for the Pub server (a replicated VM for the Pub which
is turned off to backup Pub functionality in case of Pub failure), and also if
the license will be valid on this cold standby VM for the Pub so that if the
main Pub fails and we turned on the cold standby Pub VM everything will be fine
and the operation continues normally.
Waiting your feedback.
Best Regards
Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
Senior Network Engineer
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
