Unified Messaging v/s Voice Mail

[rush2amol]

Can any one tell me if we can have same Unity server for UM and VM. For example few users can receive Voice Message on their MS outlook by intergrating unity and MS exchange and few users can receive Voice Message from their IP phones; achieving this by a single Unity Server.

[Hin Lee]

Unfortunately you cannot mix them. When VM-only licensing is purchased, Cisco provides the run-time licensing for exchange mailboxes. In UM, the cust provides exchange or domino client licensing because the email mailbox will already have existed (or will exist). There is no way to separate out the mailboxes. If you so choose, you could create a separate mailbox on exchange for voicemail-only subscribers but you would take two hits on the licensing of exchange/domino licenses; the subscriber will still be issued unified messaging licensing.

[rush2amol]

yes this makes sense, the licensing can be glitch here. but recently i have found this document on the site.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/sw/voicesw/ps2237/products_tech_note09186a00800945e1.shtml

kindly comment on this

[Ginger Dillon]

Hi -

This document is old - you don't need to update the registry entries to hide a user from the Global Address List in the current versions of Unity. But basically, you can create a new account/inbox in your Exchange environment and import that into Unity. Using a class of service you can disable TTS and the Unity Inbox/Unity Assistant, which basically makes this a voicemail only inbox. The user gets access to voicemail from ONLY the phone interface, no Outlook. However, in this type of scenario, the user is still using a UM license on the server. The UM features are just disabled by class of service and hiding the account from the GAL so that other users don't send email to it.

Ginger

[Tommer Catlin]

I had heard a rumor mixed license might be available on future releases. The only way you can do this right now is to purchase all UM license, then have seperate mailboxes for the VM only users. This way, the end users will not get VM's in their Outlook box. You can then hide these in the Address Book for views such as:

John Doe (jdoe@company.com)

John Doe VM (jdoevm@company.com) hide this address.

But for the purpose of saving money on license, it's one way.

Hope this helps.

Tommer

[mmclean]

Looks like you can now mix licenses but obviously still all mailboxes have to be on same server/cluster.

Mick

[Hin Lee]

This is mick's link

White Paper: Licensing for Mixed Voice Messaging/Unified Messaging (Cisco Unity Version 4.2 with Microsoft Exchange)

---------------------------

Published March 6, 2006

http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/voice/c_unity/whitpapr/vmumwp.htm

[rush2amol]

Yes the third license can get to a much organised approach to the solution.

But my crude way of creating a second user in the AD hiding it in the exchange importing it in unity have also workied fine. Thereby this user has no inbox in ecxhange and all its voice mails land up in the Phone.

Thank You for the information.

[jblalock1337]

I'm just a little confused. So there is no method in Unity itself that differentiates between using a UM or VM license?

I am in the process of upgrading Unity to 4.2 in order to utilize mixed licensing. If I purchase 1000 UM licenses, and then 500 VM licenses, is it just up to the administrator to track the licenses and separate the mailboxes through Exchange (denying outlook access, et al)?