UCCX 5.0(1) to 5.0(2) Caveat

Unanswered Question
May 14th, 2008
User Badges:

Anyone familiar with this? A TAC Engineer told me of this licensing caveat with UCCX 5.x:

UCCX 5.0(1) allows Standard Seat licenses to use CAD, but 5.0(2) requires an Enhanced Seat to use CAD.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Michael Owuor Wed, 05/14/2008 - 06:33
User Badges:
  • Cisco Employee,

Tis true.

Release Notes for CRS 5.0(2) states:

Standard license repackaging to include skill based routing. Only IPPA is supported in the standard package. CAD is supported only on Enhanced and Premium license.


SRND for UCCX 5.x states:

For Unified CCX 5.0(2), the standard package will support skill and competency-based routing. However, it will no longer support Cisco Agent Desktop. IP Phone Agent and Cisco Supervisor Desktop will continue to be supported.


Hope this helps.



Brian Carscadden Wed, 05/14/2008 - 06:38
User Badges:

Michael - thanks, yes this is helpful. I guess the problem I have is Cisco making a significant licensing change in what effectively a minor update (5.0(1) to 5.0(2)). I think this was a very bad decision at best.

Michael Owuor Wed, 05/14/2008 - 07:35
User Badges:
  • Cisco Employee,


Certainly good feedback which I hope you have channeled to your Cisco Account Team.

The 5.0(2) release was deemed as more than a maintenance release as it was targeted to support CUCM 6.1.

My understanding is that the driver for standard license repackaging was so that it would effectively address the entry level ACD market segment. A business/marketing decision that obviously had implications for those customer's that are already using the CAD with the standard package CAD and looking to upgrade to 5.0(2). I may be wrong but I suspect there may be discounts or promos to 'ease' the migration for such customers. Check with your friendly Cisco Account Team.

I hope this helps.



Brian Carscadden Wed, 05/14/2008 - 09:19
User Badges:

Thanks Michael, this is promising news. We have addressed it with our account team and are awaiting feedback.




This Discussion