To some extent I agree with Lelio and Scott, but it may be worth it to
you to consider some other points:

* 4.x will not have SIP lines for several years at best
* 5.x has the option for SIP and SCCP
* it could be difficult to upgrade 4.2 -> 5.x because some of the
user features in 4.2 are not duplicated in 5.x for several years
at best
* 5.x is a RH Linux train, 4.2 is windows so your considerations for
hardware, organizational policies or tech philosophies,
engineering skillset, etc _may_ be different

Candace

> Subject:
> [cisco-voip] Torn apart by choices - old or new solutions? Simply
> speaking: CM5.0 or CM4.x
> From:
> Netfortius <netfortius@gmail.com>
> Date:
> Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:33:58 -0500
>
> To:
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>
>
> You may have already gotten used to my last string of questions here, whic
h -
> I am not hiding it - are part of my attempt to gain info from the more
> experienced people, on this subject, regarding a project I am working on f
or
> deployment of multi-site IPT & VoIP. I have gone into some details, for so
me
> questions I had, but now - reading tons of material every day, I have beco
me
> very worried about the full blown solution chosen, vs. what is being promi
sed
> just "around the corner". Here is where I would appreciate any comments, o
f
> any nature, thoughts, experience, "what-if" - anything you can share about
> this subject:
>
> Scenario: multi-site deployment of cisco CM, with the following objectives
 in
> mind:
>
> 1. Replacement of existing old telephony solution, Nortel-based, consistin
g of
> PBX in each location, with Cisco-based IP-based communication systems (and
> not only one-to-one replacement of phones, but also steps toward unified
> communications)
>
> 2. Installation of cisco solution consisting of:
> 	a. CM 4.x (advised by Cisco) at the HQ + Unity integrated with Exchange 2
003
> and a handful of IP phones (major testers of the technology) and integrati
on
> with existing Nortel PBX at the HQ (PHASE 1)
> 	b. IP phones in the remote location (complete replacement of everything o
ld,
> including PBX) + SRST + standalone (storage-wise) Unity (PHASE 1)
> 	c. Unified messaging at the HQ, in the "pilot" group, to the best of the
> abilities and availability of products around CM 4.x (e.g. PA, among other
s,
> as an example of what I am getting at) (PHASE 1)
> 	d. Experience from c> ==> full implementation of unified messaging at the
> first remote ("upgrade" of the standalone Unity into an Exchange-tied one 
-
> is this even possible?!?) (PHASE 2)
> 	e. remote site used as template fro all other sites (PHASE 2)
> 	f. full upgrade at the HQ (PHASE 2), with the exception of Call Center
> 	g. cisco IPCC replacement of the existing Nortel Call Center, after the
> entire VoIP and IPT has proven reliable to sustain a Customer Service (PHA
SE
> 3)
>
> 3. The unified communications (including messaging) will eventually adddre
ss
> various business needs, primarily focused on mobility and real-time
> communications and sharing
>
> Having said all of the above, here are the issues I am struggling with:
>
> - I have (and nobody in my network geeks group) no real experience with Ci
sco
> VoIP/IPT;
> - the suggested solution, from Cisco, revolves around a CM 4.2 and, gradua
lly,
> as explained above, updates to the point of full unified messaging - still
> 4.2-based
> - I am getting conflicting messages from our cisco group - they advise us 
to
> do the install with CM 4.2 (which would end up as a cluster of multiple
> servers, at the HQ), not CM 5.0, but:
> - I am reading and reading, and it appears to me that some features associ
ated
> with CM 4.2 are dying (e.g. PA), while CM 5.0 seems to open the door for m
uch
> more, but not everything backward compatible with 4.x
> - tons of features are being advertised as related to CM 5.0, only, but ar
e
> not ready yet, and are to be released this year (majority in second quarte
r)
>
> Bottom line - I am struggling with one major question (with no easy answer
 -
> thus appreciating any comments this list may have): should I move ahead as
> started, with the one site + pilot HQ, on CM 4.2 (PHASE 1), then go over a
ll
> phases, then analyze what would need to be upgraded to a 5.0 environment, 
if
> certain additional features would become available and needed, and not
> backward compatible
> OR
> should I just put a stop to the CM 4.x analysis and planning, and redo
> everything (with the delay caused by various products availability) around
 CM
> 5.0?
>
> As I said - any $0.02-$64K comments will be really appreciated. I will try
 to
> consolidate this type of info, in something useful, if enough data warrant
s
> it.
>
> Thanks,
> Stefan
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]