Solved: Unity 4.0(5) Design question

angelique.devos · ‎09-02-2008

Hi,

We have a Unity 4.0(5) voicemail only configuration. The message store is off-box.

In the integrations, we see that there are 2 clusters configured, however these clusters point to the same callmanager.

We have Cluster 1 with CallManager1 as primary and CallManager2 as secondary and a Cluster 2 with CallManager2 as primary and CallManager1 as secondary. So actually, they configured two clusters in Unity but there's only one cluster...

If the MWI dials out, it dials out on both last MWI ports of the integrations.

This Unity was not installed by us and we wonder if there's a reason for configuring it like this and if it could pose any problems.

Best regards,

Angelique

eschulz · ‎09-03-2008

Angelique,

The configuration you have inherited is sometimes done for load balancing. See here for example:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/4x/42unity.html#wp1043885

Unfortunately, the Unity Integration/Cluster design was not really intended for this. The MWI behavior you see is an expected downside of the configuration. By reconfiguring your ports such that all are in a single group ("cluster") you will gain some efficiency in MWI but you will loose some load balancing on CUCM.

Regards,

Eric

View solution in original post

Chris Deren · ‎09-02-2008

I would delete one of the integrations as there is absolutely no need for it.

Make sure that the one integration you have left has the CM servers listed in the correct order, where the order of the server should match to order of server in the CM Group assigned to DP that VM ports are using.

HTH,

Chris

Jaime Valencia · ‎09-02-2008

i agree with Chris, and it cannot dial out both integrations. each subscriber is assigned only ONE integration and uses the ports from that particular integration. it's not possible that it dialed out on both integrations for 1 subscriber

that's reason tens of cases are opened with TAC, someone moved subscribers from integration and no MWI

in your case when you delete the integration you will be prompted to move the elements to another integration and then thru the UTIM just add a secondary server

HTH

java

if this helps, please rate

HTH

java

if this helps, please rate

angelique.devos · ‎09-03-2008

Java,

I have 2 integrations, both with 2 subscribers (the same ones, just in another order). So it can dial out on both integrations (these both integrations point to the same cluster...) as there are 48 ports on each cluster concfigured.

Can it have any impact when I just remove the second 'cluster' and reconfigure the ports?

Angelique

Jaime Valencia · ‎09-03-2008

most of the times the change won't affect anything within the system, in some cases it can happen that the value in the DB for the integration does not change and they will still be using the deleted integration.

the suggestion is to do this after-hours and perform some test to confirm they work fine, otherwise contact TAC so they can run some QRYs to fix that

HTH

java

if this helps, please rate

HTH

java

if this helps, please rate

eschulz · ‎09-03-2008

Angelique,

The configuration you have inherited is sometimes done for load balancing. See here for example:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/4x/42unity.html#wp1043885

Unfortunately, the Unity Integration/Cluster design was not really intended for this. The MWI behavior you see is an expected downside of the configuration. By reconfiguring your ports such that all are in a single group ("cluster") you will gain some efficiency in MWI but you will loose some load balancing on CUCM.

Regards,

Eric

angelique.devos · ‎09-03-2008

Eric,

Thanks, that was the document I was looking for!

Best regards,

Angelique