Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM trunk connection

On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>wrote:

> Hey Frog,
>
> SIP trunks can be used as ICTs, so I don't see why you say "if you don't
> want funky features". Is there any feature not supported by SIP trunks ?
>
> >> not that I am aware of. Let's say a CUCM cluster has 100 features. you
installed another cucm cluster that also has 100 features. now you want to
interconnect them.
a) using SIP - only 30 features will work. inter-cluster EM doesn't work
for example.
b) Using ICT - may be 90+ feature working.

for general call transfer between cluster - "ANY" trunking method is OK.
Just like ISL vs Dot1q or EIGRP vs OSPF. all protocol routes a subnet. some
work better than others. properietry vs open and the list goes on.

> Also, cisco is moving from H.323 to SIP (slowly but steadily) IMHO.
>
>> that is the ultimate roadmap, however, I am not seeing that to happen
for the next 5 years at least.

> Would you please share some support info for "H323 is the preferred
> method" ?
>
> >> H323 CPS is proven. SIP doesn't have high rate of CPS and is process
extnsive.

> -Carlos
>
> Radioactive Frog @ 10/12/2011 07:45 -0300 dixit:
>
> In a nutshell,
>>
>> 1. ICT trunk = need to keep features on like Extension mobility between
>> clusters (this is one of 100's feature)
>> 2. SIP trunk = if you just need a call between cluster users but don't
>> want
>> funky features to maintain (see above#1)
>> c. H323 trunk = same as sip trunk. however this is prefered method over
>> SIP.
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 4:33 AM, Ryan Ratliff <rratliff_at_cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>> This chapter of the SRND should be a good read for you.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/**docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/**
>>> 8x/trunks.html#wp1126<http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/8x/trunks.html#wp1126>
>>> 551
>>>
>>> -Ryan
>>>
>>> On Dec 8, 2011, at 1:44 PM, Dennis Heim wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the goal is ultimately end to end sip anymore. If you have SIP,
>>> sccp,
>>> etc phones, the interconnect between cm nodes should not matter. The big
>>> advantage like Matthew said is the ability to propagate presence
>>> information
>>> between clusters.
>>>
>>> If you have numerous clusters, then it probably deserves a conversation
>>> of
>>> Callmanager SME in between all your clusters to simplify your design at
>>> each
>>> cluster.
>>>
>>> Dennis Heim
>>> Senior Engineer (Unified Communications)
>>> CDW Advanced Technology Services
>>> 10610 9th Place
>>> Bellevue, WA 98004
>>>
>>> 425.310.5299 Single Number Reach (WA)
>>> 317.569.4255 Single Number Reach (IN)
>>> 317.569.4201 Fax
>>> dennis.heim_at_cdw.com
>>> cdw.com/content/solutions/**unified-communications/<http://cdw.com/content/solutions/unified-communications/>
>>>
>>> From: cisco-voip-bounces_at_puck.**nether.net<cisco-voip-bounces_at_puck.nether.net>
>>> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@**puck.nether.net<cisco-voip-bounces_at_puck.nether.net>]
>>> On Behalf OfMatthew Loraditch
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 7:00 AM
>>> To: davidytk; cisco-voip_at_puck.nether.net; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
>>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM trunk connection
>>>
>>> I have used SIP for intercluster in the past as it allowed presence
>>> information to be shared. I think that answers 1 and 2, not sure about 3.
>>>
>>> Matthew Loraditch, CCVP, CCNA, CCDA
>>> 1965 Greenspring Drive
>>> Timonium, MD 21093
>>> support_at_heliontechnologies.com
>>> (p) (410) 252-8830
>>> (F) (443) 541-1593
>>>
>>> Visit us at www.heliontechnologies.com
>>> Support Issue? Email support_at_heliontechnologies.com for fast assistance!
>>>
>>> From: cisco-voip-bounces_at_puck.**nether.net<cisco-voip-bounces_at_puck.nether.net>
>>> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@**puck.nether.net<cisco-voip-bounces_at_puck.nether.net>]
>>> On Behalf Of davidytk
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 9:26 AM
>>> To: cisco-voip_at_puck.nether.net; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
>>> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM trunk connection
>>>
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>> For CUCM cluster interconnection, we also use inter-cluster trunk on the
>>> CUCM.
>>>
>>> For my client standard, they use SIP trunk for the CUCM cluster
>>> inter-connection. I have some question about this design.
>>>
>>> 1. Is it possible to use SIP trunk to the CUCM interconnection.
>>> 2. If the design is correct, what is the advantage for using SIP
>>> trunk
>>> instead of inter-cluster trunk.
>>> 3. As my client has Cisco SIP phone, is it the reason they need
>>> SIP
>>> trunk to the CUCM interconnection.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Best Regards
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>>> signature
>>> database 6694 (20111208) __________
>>>
>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>
>>> http://www.eset.com
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>> cisco-voip_at_puck.nether.net
>>> https://puck.nether.net/**mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip>
>>>
>>>
>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>
>>> ______________________________**______________________________**
>>> ___________
>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/**list/CCIELab.html<http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> ______________________________**______________________________**
>> ___________
>> Subscription information may be found at: http://www.groupstudy.com/**
>> list/CCIELab.html <http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar> LW7 EQI Argentina

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Sun Dec 11 2011 - 16:17:38 ART