Hello, <br>We're currently running Unity 2.4.161 VM only and Call Manager 3.13a in a centralized call processing environment.<br>Our Call Manager's and Unity are located at our central site, and we have users from second site connected via a full T1. We've just completed our migration to Ex2k and have a Exchange 2000 server in each site, configured in seperate routing groups.<br>We are planning our migration to Unified messaging, and have noticed that Unity 3 will only support a single routing group. We could consolidate our servers into a single routing group but I'm unclear what the bandwidth impact of streaming voicemail across the WAN would be. We have good QoS and regularly support as many as 10 G7.11 VOIP calls across the WAN, but I'm guessing that traffic between the Exchange Server and Unity would be data and not VOIP. <br>Any suggestions?<br><br>Walter Williams<br>IS Manager<br>Graphics Microsystems Inc.<br><br>
There is no hard and fast you need "X" mbs for "Y" users in your voice mail system that I can give you here but generally the only reason to use routing groups is for connecting Exchange servers across lower bandwidth connections which is why we don't support a single Unity server crossing routing group boundaries. I'm curious why you needed seperate routing groups if the bandwidth between them is high.
Unity is streaming messages directly out of Exchnage when playing back via the phone, of course, and into exchange when subscribers are leaving messages for other subscribers. This is done directly to the respective home store so if the bandwidth to the Exchange server that houses the subscriber in question is low, you're going to have trouble. We're also monitoring the inboxes on the respective Exchange servers for notification events (MWI and pagers etc...) which can add some overhead but not a huge amount. Of course when you call in and log in over the phone we run a filter on your inbox to get your message count. We also "ping" each Exchange server periodically to make sure it's up and alive so we don't try to attach to it and stream messages when it's down (MAPI timeouts are horrible when you do this and it's off line).
Short story, most of your bandwidth is taken up with streaming messages in/out of the mailstores in Exchange store but that's not the full story. You can reasonably easily estimate the amount of bandwidth needed for streaming messages stored in G711 or G729a and multiplying by the number of users who could be checking messages at the same time over the phone, nothing overly complicated there but it's hard to give you a firm number in a formula you can just chunk through to get the bandwidth reccomendation as a whole. The solutions group is working on a big, detailed white paper that will help folks figure out what they should really need in the way of bandwidth that'll hopefully be published in a couple months.
To answer your question (re:why seperate routing groups) We just completed a migration from Exchange 5.5 which were configured as two sites. The decision to have two sites was made at a time when we had much less bandwidth. I'm seriously considering consolidating the routing groups.
We only have 71 voice mail users spread across two sites, and we rarely use more than 4 ports at a time, so my gut says that we could get by with a single Unity server at our central site, but I wanted a sanity check from someone with more experience with unified.
Walter Williams IS Manager Graphics Microsystems Inc.
Walter Williams IS Manager Graphics Microsystems Inc.
I was directed to this post by TAC. We are deploying a Unity UM 3.1 solution, where we need to have Exchange 2000 server in a central location. Unity server will have access to the server over 10M ATM pipe. We have 12 port capacity for VM access and I am not sure that checking a VM over the phone, takes up a port out of this pool. I understand that it does. So maximum possible users accessing VM at one time would be no more than 12. We are using G711, so actual bandwidth we need to reserve ~12*106k=1.2M. Now when you said that VM are streamed to the phone user from Exchange, does it actually go through Unity or goes directly to phone. I would think through Unity, since users is actually using Unity to access VM. In this case I should plan on enabling QoS from voice traffic between Exchange and Unity? If not, then I should enable QoS for VM traffic from Exchange to IP Phones? Your advise would be highly appreciated.
Also you mentioned that solutions group is working on some white paper on this. Please send me the link if the paper is available.
SIP traces provide key information in troubleshooting SIP Trunks, SIP
endpoints and other SIP related issues. Even though these traces are in
clear text, these texts can be gibberish unless you understand fully
what they mean. This document attempts to br...
Please find the attached HTML document, download and open it on your PC.
This provides an easy to use form where you simply answer a few
questions and it will render the proper jabber-config.xml file for you
to copy/paste. There is built in logic to verif...
CUCM Database Replication is an area in which Cisco customers and
partners have asked for more in-depth training in being able to properly
assess a replication problem and potentially resolve an issue without
involving TAC. This document discusses the bas...