Guess the biggest advantage is to streamline it with the CUCM deployment.
CUCM is the main focus, so why run around with dead weight which slows you down.
The VCS also has a b2bua, not only the lync gw but also the media encryption policy part.
Dont see a reason why a policy/api based system could not archive the same, maybe even
in a more advanced way as the conductor could control different vcs via the api.
Maybe even the failover handling and signaling could have benefits from the old style of api/policy way.
That said, in theory, yes, with a b2bua on a conductor you have control over the call,
and yes you could take action on it. but at least I did not see anything that this is possbile
by today.
Guess the biggest challenge is to properly identify that there is an issue where it can benefit
from being moved. From my perspective I would say its quite hard to filter out false positives and false
negatives. In addition its does not get easier if you have a component which tries to be more clever
than the user is, ...
Especally on geo redundancy it can be a challenge when you have a partial network outage
how to say what happens now, ...
(that could be a case for example where a api/policy based model could have an advantage).
To be honest, how often did you had issues that a MCU was plain dead in comparison to
network or human based errors.
So yea, it sounds like a cool feature, but think what other things might be more critical
Please remember to rate helpful responses and identify helpful or correct answers.
