Multi-Site Deployment

[David Trad]

Hi There,

A quick question to ask about Multi-Site deployment.

• Is there a way to do Multi-Site deployments with the UC320W? And if so how would you go about it?? And if not is there any plans for such a move on a great box like this one???
• Has interropt between the UC320W and a UC-500 series device been tested? I.E having the 320 talk back to the 500 via a global SIP registered DN??
• Will Cisco look at releasing a SPA8800 with BRI ports on them? I understand that BRI is not viewed as a progressive technology, however it is still the most preferred option by small business
• Lastly I might have missed this one, but can this device also do a remote TFTP backup to a server if you elected not to use one of the USB ports?

Thank you in advance for assisting with the answering of these questions.

Cheers,

David.

[Alberto Montilla · Accepted solution]

Hi David;

Thanks for reaching. Please see below my comments to your questions.

Hi There,
A quick question to ask about Multi-Site deployment.
Is there a way to do Multi-Site deployments with the UC320W? And if so how would you go about it?? And if not is there any plans for such a move on a great box like this one???
[Alberto] As of release 2.0 answer is no. UC320 is designed to be connected to a Service Provider network (ISDN, PSTN, SIP), this is mainly related to dial plan configuration. Current release supports only standard country dial plans. On later releases we will explore these options but nothing committed and no timelines yet.
Has interropt between the UC320W and a UC-500 series device been tested? I.E having the 320 talk back to the 500 via a global SIP registered DN??
[Alberto] See above.
Will Cisco look at releasing a SPA8800 with BRI ports on them? I understand that BRI is not viewed as a progressive technology, however it is still the most preferred option by small business
[Alberto] At this moment, there are no plans for it. As you may have seen on the documentation already, we support full interoperability between the UC320 and the Mediatrix 4400 ISDN Digital Gateways (4401, 4402 and 4404). The integration is very straight forward and from experience I can tell you the Mediatrix GW is of good quality.
Lastly I might have missed this one, but can this device also do a remote TFTP backup to a server if you elected not to use one of the USB ports?
[Alberto] Not at this stage. Backup can be done locally via the Configuration utility or through the USB port.
Thank you in advance for assisting with the answering of these questions.
Cheers,
David.

[David Trad]

Hi Alberto,

Thank you for your response, and I hope you don't mind me wanting to continue this discussion.

[Alberto] As of release 2.0 answer is no. UC320 is designed to be connected to a Service Provider network (ISDN, PSTN, SIP), this is mainly related to dial plan configuration. Current release supports only standard country dial plans. On later releases we will explore these options but nothing committed and no timelines yet.

Would it be hard to allow for a Multi-Site SIP trunk to be created? You could actually do this by having this as reserved programming within the system itself I.E having a specifically designed SIP trunk that has essential QoS on it being a Site-2-Site config, this way the Installer/Engineer just ticks a box, designates its multi-site number and away we go... (Yes I know I am making it sound simple, that is because I am hoping to keep it simple).

NOTE: The UC320W plays a crucial part in the Small Business market (5-15 Seats), but it will also play a significant part in multi-site business such as the 4 I am quoting on now that are ideal for a UC320W, Multi-Site deployment capabilities puts us far far far ahead of the competing products we are quoting again such as the LG-Erricons IPECS system.

[Alberto] At this moment, there are no plans for it. As you may have seen on the documentation already, we support full interoperability between the UC320 and the Mediatrix 4400 ISDN Digital Gateways (4401, 4402 and 4404). The integration is very straight forward and from experience I can tell you the Mediatrix GW is of good quality.

This is not useful to me, I have checked the specifications of this unit and have found it to not be compliant at this stage with C-Tick and or A-Tick compliance for Australian use, I would get my head cut of by our regulatory authority if I was to deploy one of these units... Unless of course the information I found on them was out dated, and they have since upgraded the approvals of them. FXO services are slowly being reduced as things like SNR and Call forwarding and similar type bridged services create the worst nightmare for us, ISDN on the other hand do not suffer the same fate as PSTN services with port lock-up (Line not tearing down properly), so ISDN is preferred by most installers/engineers these days.

[Alberto] Not at this stage. Backup can be done locally via the Configuration utility or through the USB port.

No thats fine, ther will be a way for me to create my own TFTP environment, it was just a product development question actually, but I got the answer i was after... Thank you

I hope you take my above comments as an effective discussion, like always I just like to put my opinion forward when it comes to seeing Cisco products receiving community input for better development.

Thanks Alberto

Cheers,

David.

[Alberto Montilla · Accepted solution]

Hi Alberto,
Thank you for your response, and I hope you don't mind me wanting to continue this discussion.
[Alberto] As of release 2.0 answer is no. UC320 is designed to be connected to a Service Provider network (ISDN, PSTN, SIP), this is mainly related to dial plan configuration. Current release supports only standard country dial plans. On later releases we will explore these options but nothing committed and no timelines yet.
Would it be hard to allow for a Multi-Site SIP trunk to be created? You could actually do this by having this as reserved programming within the system itself I.E having a specifically designed SIP trunk that has essential QoS on it being a Site-2-Site config, this way the Installer/Engineer just ticks a box, designates its multi-site number and away we go... (Yes I know I am making it sound simple, that is because I am hoping to keep it simple).
[Alberto] Yes, this would require more flexibility on the dial plans. Could be as you suggest or more flexible.
NOTE: The UC320W plays a crucial part in the Small Business market (5-15 Seats), but it will also play a significant part in multi-site business such as the 4 I am quoting on now that are ideal for a UC320W, Multi-Site deployment capabilities puts us far far far ahead of the competing products we are quoting again such as the LG-Erricons IPECS system.
[Alberto] At this moment, there are no plans for it. As you may have seen on the documentation already, we support full interoperability between the UC320 and the Mediatrix 4400 ISDN Digital Gateways (4401, 4402 and 4404). The integration is very straight forward and from experience I can tell you the Mediatrix GW is of good quality.
This is not useful to me, I have checked the specifications of this unit and have found it to not be compliant at this stage with C-Tick and or A-Tick compliance for Australian use, I would get my head cut of by our regulatory authority if I was to deploy one of these units... Unless of course the information I found on them was out dated, and they have since upgraded the approvals of them. FXO services are slowly being reduced as things like SNR and Call forwarding and similar type bridged services create the worst nightmare for us, ISDN on the other hand do not suffer the same fate as PSTN services with port lock-up (Line not tearing down properly), so ISDN is preferred by most installers/engineers these days.
[Alberto] Thanks for the feedback, under discussions with Mediatrix regarding Australia availability.
[Alberto] Not at this stage. Backup can be done locally via the Configuration utility or through the USB port.
No thats fine, ther will be a way for me to create my own TFTP environment, it was just a product development question actually, but I got the answer i was after... Thank you 
[Alberto] Stay tuned, we are working on integrating UC320 into PSP (Partner Service Platform). Not sure you are part of PSP trial.
I hope you take my above comments as an effective discussion, like always I just like to put my opinion forward when it comes to seeing Cisco products receiving community input for better development.
Thanks Alberto 
Cheers,
David.

[abillington]

hi Alberto / David,

If I had, say, three sites with UC320 deployed and all define a SIP trunk that goes to a SIP registrar/proxy within our network, would that achieve a basic multisite as long as the SIP proxy could handle the routing? Less than ideal and I don't want to get into complex SIP stuff .. would be much easier if the UC320 could do multisite, and would be great if it could do multisite with a mix of UC500 sites as well !

Apologies if a stupid question, just looking for a quick way to achieve multisite voice :-)

Andy

Message was edited by: abillington

[Alberto Montilla · Accepted solution]

Hi Andy;

What you propose is doable, but with limitations, so I don't recommend it.

* Setup:

(a) You configure a higher-hierarchy proxy, and setup a SIP trunk to each UC320. Each user (on each UC320) needs to have a DID configured (not only an extension number, as the SIP trunk dial plan follows the local/national/international numbering plan), e.g.

Site 1:

Main number (SIP trunk ID) - 408555123455

101 - 408555123456

102 - 408555123457

103 - 408555123458

Site 2:

Main number (SIP trunk ID) - 408555123450

101 -  408555123460

102 - 408555123461

103 - 408555123462

Site 3:

Main number (SIP trunk ID) - 408555123463

101 -  408555123464

102 - 408555123465

103 - 408555123466

(b) You need to configure inbound DID mapping on the SIP trunk to each extension number on each site.

With this configuration you can do it only with one SIP trunk.

Then the limitations:

(a) Users will need to dial the whole DID number of the person, no inter-site extension dialing possible.

(b) Not possible to call back, or call return on call history. All outgoing calls go with main did number on the From header.

(c) All sites (UC300 WAN IP addresses) must be on same VPN domain as proxy in order to avoid NAT issues

Hope this helps.

Regards
Alberto

[abillington]

I can see why you wouldn't recommend it

Thanks,

Andy

[David Trad]

Hi Andy,

I have proposed a solution that Mark is looking into, since the UC-320W operates on open standards SIP there is no reason what so ever that a Multi-Site deployment could not be created by the creation of SIP trunks between the sites and then using Dial-Peers for Multi-Site calling, this would such a very simple setup it would be easier to setup and work than the current way the UC-500 series does it.

Also I do not believe the UC-320W performing multi-site deployments would take it out of its intended market scope, as small business are not restricted to single sites, they may not have large amounts of workers but they could have multiple sites.

According to a post from Mark this might be evaluated, I certainly hope so as it just puts the unit into a market position that other units struggle and or provide half measures.

Here's to hoping Cisco look at this with all seriousness

Cheers,

David.

[abillington]

I hope they will - the scenario I'm looking at is a small business with three sites, one is about to deploy a UC540W (seventeen staff), and the plan at present is a SPA525G at each of the other two, providing one and only one handset at each of two sites that have five or six staff at each. There's a chance it could be grown into a UC540W plus one or even two UC320W's if the multi-site stuff worked.

Andy

[mrarmando007]

I hope cisco does look into this. I currently am working on 2 site. Multi site deployment on 2 cisco uc320w would be the most cost effective way to go. Each site is only carrying less than 10 ip phones. If setting up 2 uc320w to connect to one another so that communication between both sites can exist while style being able to easily dial an extension and transfer calls between sites would work, cisco would be far more ahead than any competitor. Though in my opinion they already are this would just leap them more ahead in the small business category.

[abe]

I know this is an old thread, but still seems the most relevant to my question. If the total number of users is less than the max for one uc320w, could a vpn tunnel be established from remote sites to main site where the uc320w is installed?