Mailing List Archive

I wouldn't see a reason not to just up-size the two nodes you have now to the 2.5k OVA (use 2 vCPU on each node). For the 15 pieces of flair, I'd then add in a 3rd 2.5k OVA w/o the CCM service enabled and run TFTP.. etc on it and give the pub a break.

-Ryan

________________________________
From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net> on behalf of Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:10 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Expansion


One of my biggest customers is experiencing issues that appear to be related to resource utilization. I’ve never had a customer who needed more than a 2 node 1000 user cluster.



They are getting close to some of the capacity levels listed in the sizing guides.



I’m looking for some opinions on what the best way to deal with this. I have the hardware capacity for either method.



Add a Third 1000 user Subscriber and turn off call processing and tftp on the Pub?



Rebuild both existing servers to 2500 user OVAs?



Add a third and do the rebuild also?



Can I just make the existing server be the 2500 capacity level? I actually don’t understand the difference between the 2500 and 1000 user OVAs, the 2500 appears to actually be lesser capacity by default (1 less cpu). So go to 7500?



I’d appreciate any opinions out there. Going to be doing some reading over the next few days to try and figure this out.



Thanks all!


Matthew Loraditch?
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518<tel:443.541.1518>
w: www.heliontechnologies.com<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615655267&sdata=av6L%2B8viyiswpC6HDUy2aENY%2BvceWoIpyhx%2Fx3deO1g%3D&reserved=0> | e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
[Helion Technologies]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615665263&sdata=KTsNdyJfIruWPtocwe6cT8ks%2FTnLd9THp5GMr09izVI%3D&reserved=0>
[Facebook]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615675256&sdata=E2t8noyd7FAVcVK7RbeWYoh0zb%2BrfN8ObogJSIXJ5U8%3D&reserved=0>
[Twitter]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615685252&sdata=hQjHhB%2FvQdfN7kBXyGgYIMDxtXuO%2BqUDZ0sWRxFWu%2F4%3D&reserved=0>
[LinkedIn]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompany%2Fhelion-technologies&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615695252&sdata=J%2F2wJkkdgWKkf5OIe35L5NeJRHu4qcEVeWnIe%2B3DUck%3D&reserved=0>
[cid:image971111.jpg@4984E7DE.6A13F86D]

Yeah, I’m just trying to understand (as I read the ovf file) what the actual difference is between the 1000/2500 user OVA. I seem to be missing something (or maybe not). CPU is actually 1 less starting but same reservation, same RAM, same HDD.


Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com
From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:21 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: CUCM Cluster Expansion

[EXTERNAL]

I wouldn't see a reason not to just up-size the two nodes you have now to the 2.5k OVA (use 2 vCPU on each node). For the 15 pieces of flair, I'd then add in a 3rd 2.5k OVA w/o the CCM service enabled and run TFTP.. etc on it and give the pub a break.

-Ryan

________________________________
From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net>> on behalf of Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:10 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Expansion


One of my biggest customers is experiencing issues that appear to be related to resource utilization. I’ve never had a customer who needed more than a 2 node 1000 user cluster.



They are getting close to some of the capacity levels listed in the sizing guides.



I’m looking for some opinions on what the best way to deal with this. I have the hardware capacity for either method.



Add a Third 1000 user Subscriber and turn off call processing and tftp on the Pub?



Rebuild both existing servers to 2500 user OVAs?



Add a third and do the rebuild also?



Can I just make the existing server be the 2500 capacity level? I actually don’t understand the difference between the 2500 and 1000 user OVAs, the 2500 appears to actually be lesser capacity by default (1 less cpu). So go to 7500?



I’d appreciate any opinions out there. Going to be doing some reading over the next few days to try and figure this out.



Thanks all!

Matthew Loraditch?
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518<tel:443.541.1518>
w: www.heliontechnologies.com<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615655267&sdata=av6L%2B8viyiswpC6HDUy2aENY%2BvceWoIpyhx%2Fx3deO1g%3D&reserved=0>
|
e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
[Helion Technologies]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615665263&sdata=KTsNdyJfIruWPtocwe6cT8ks%2FTnLd9THp5GMr09izVI%3D&reserved=0>
[Facebook]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615675256&sdata=E2t8noyd7FAVcVK7RbeWYoh0zb%2BrfN8ObogJSIXJ5U8%3D&reserved=0>
[Twitter]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615685252&sdata=hQjHhB%2FvQdfN7kBXyGgYIMDxtXuO%2BqUDZ0sWRxFWu%2F4%3D&reserved=0>
[LinkedIn]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompany%2Fhelion-technologies&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615695252&sdata=J%2F2wJkkdgWKkf5OIe35L5NeJRHu4qcEVeWnIe%2B3DUck%3D&reserved=0>
[cid:image005.jpg@01D5E292.7B702F70]

For 11.x, but I've found this helpful: https://www.cisco.com/web/software/283088407/126036/cucm-11.0.ova.readme.txt

Thanks,

Ryan
________________________________
From: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:24 PM
To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
Subject: RE: CUCM Cluster Expansion


Yeah, I’m just trying to understand (as I read the ovf file) what the actual difference is between the 1000/2500 user OVA. I seem to be missing something (or maybe not). CPU is actually 1 less starting but same reservation, same RAM, same HDD.




Matthew Loraditch?
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518<tel:443.541.1518>
w: www.heliontechnologies.com<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940368611&sdata=ww50XQlOxzvtFefHk4RctzhWcpQQKqPCH4xs8OZ%2B%2FDw%3D&reserved=0> | e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
[Helion Technologies]<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940368611&sdata=ww50XQlOxzvtFefHk4RctzhWcpQQKqPCH4xs8OZ%2B%2FDw%3D&reserved=0>
[Facebook]<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940368611&sdata=RD2UyFewYGZLwT%2FGsd5HarqTn%2FMfDk43r1rdmjAIcsk%3D&reserved=0>
[Twitter]<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940378606&sdata=JO5DlIcPtTlBXNw5256jlxtNOsf3npNKOWm%2FgVtC4Lo%3D&reserved=0>
[LinkedIn]<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompany%2Fhelion-technologies&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940378606&sdata=4JQ%2B5HXNAIXx7CcRWUJZdQIa1zew0C%2Bs1TngQP54PbU%3D&reserved=0>
[cid:image566398.jpg@28ECD857.07B60024]

From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:21 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: CUCM Cluster Expansion



[EXTERNAL]



I wouldn't see a reason not to just up-size the two nodes you have now to the 2.5k OVA (use 2 vCPU on each node). For the 15 pieces of flair, I'd then add in a 3rd 2.5k OVA w/o the CCM service enabled and run TFTP.. etc on it and give the pub a break.



-Ryan



________________________________

From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net>> on behalf of Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:10 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Expansion



One of my biggest customers is experiencing issues that appear to be related to resource utilization. I’ve never had a customer who needed more than a 2 node 1000 user cluster.



They are getting close to some of the capacity levels listed in the sizing guides.



I’m looking for some opinions on what the best way to deal with this. I have the hardware capacity for either method.



Add a Third 1000 user Subscriber and turn off call processing and tftp on the Pub?



Rebuild both existing servers to 2500 user OVAs?



Add a third and do the rebuild also?



Can I just make the existing server be the 2500 capacity level? I actually don’t understand the difference between the 2500 and 1000 user OVAs, the 2500 appears to actually be lesser capacity by default (1 less cpu). So go to 7500?



I’d appreciate any opinions out there. Going to be doing some reading over the next few days to try and figure this out.



Thanks all!



Matthew Loraditch?

Sr. Network Engineer

p: 443.541.1518<tel:443.541.1518>

w: www.heliontechnologies.com<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940388599&sdata=yAzbJWPtOMwm29dX1obySnDEihiAcKFqy1ylYXqF2R0%3D&reserved=0>

|

e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>

[Helion Technologies]<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940388599&sdata=yAzbJWPtOMwm29dX1obySnDEihiAcKFqy1ylYXqF2R0%3D&reserved=0>

[Facebook]<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940398594&sdata=OC39dwtF40eWAxrHHlX8cHJ%2FqcslFDUgw6d5xJ2lIX4%3D&reserved=0>

[Twitter]<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940398594&sdata=XagZoBF9%2FQ%2FDbYYB6Vy43XWLlcX6b5AdDF6SVtp09BA%3D&reserved=0>

[LinkedIn]<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompany%2Fhelion-technologies&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940398594&sdata=Hh3mroBv5ieE0E3vgzCnfRVti5ZpQPMusFwn%2F%2F342T8%3D&reserved=0>

[cid:image005.jpg@01D5E292.7B702F70]

I always do the 7.5k cucm size. I hate single cpu cucm, ram is usually not a problem and I’d rather have the 110GB disk because upgrades about never work on the 80gb without clearing some space. Even 110GB has become a problem lately.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 13, 2020, at 3:29 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com> wrote:
>
> ?
> For 11.x, but I've found this helpful: https://www.cisco.com/web/software/283088407/126036/cucm-11.0.ova.readme.txt
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ryan
> From: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:24 PM
> To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> Subject: RE: CUCM Cluster Expansion
>
> Yeah, I’m just trying to understand (as I read the ovf file) what the actual difference is between the 1000/2500 user OVA. I seem to be missing something (or maybe not). CPU is actually 1 less starting but same reservation, same RAM, same HDD.
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch?
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: 443.541.1518
> w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com
> <image370933.png>
> <image243092.png>
> <image307094.png>
> <image105143.png>
> <image566398.jpg>
> From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:21 PM
> To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: CUCM Cluster Expansion
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
> I wouldn't see a reason not to just up-size the two nodes you have now to the 2.5k OVA (use 2 vCPU on each node). For the 15 pieces of flair, I'd then add in a 3rd 2.5k OVA w/o the CCM service enabled and run TFTP.. etc on it and give the pub a break.
>
> -Ryan
>
> From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net> on behalf of Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:10 PM
> To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Expansion
>
> One of my biggest customers is experiencing issues that appear to be related to resource utilization. I’ve never had a customer who needed more than a 2 node 1000 user cluster.
>
> They are getting close to some of the capacity levels listed in the sizing guides.
>
> I’m looking for some opinions on what the best way to deal with this. I have the hardware capacity for either method.
>
> Add a Third 1000 user Subscriber and turn off call processing and tftp on the Pub?
>
> Rebuild both existing servers to 2500 user OVAs?
>
> Add a third and do the rebuild also?
>
> Can I just make the existing server be the 2500 capacity level? I actually don’t understand the difference between the 2500 and 1000 user OVAs, the 2500 appears to actually be lesser capacity by default (1 less cpu). So go to 7500?
>
> I’d appreciate any opinions out there. Going to be doing some reading over the next few days to try and figure this out.
>
> Thanks all!
>
> Matthew Loraditch?
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: 443.541.1518
> w: www.heliontechnologies.com
> |
> e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com
> <image006.png>
> <image002.png>
> <image003.png>
> <image004.png>
> <image005.jpg>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

1000 user OVA is for “restricted” CPUs AKA CPUs under 2.5Ghz.

The 2500 user OVA is for “full performance” CPUs 2.5Ghz or higher

Thanks

Tommy

Tommy Schlotterer | Engineer

Presidio
| presidio.com<http://www.presidio.com/>

20 N Saint Clair 3rd Floor, Toledo, OH 43604
D: 419.214.1415<tel:419.214.1415> | C: 419.706.0259<tel:419.706.0259> | tschlotterer@presidio.com<mailto:tschlotterer@presidio.com>



[https://www2.presidio.com/signatures/Presidio_Blue_FutureBuilt_200px.png]<http://www.presidio.com/>




From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:25 PM
To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Expansion

EXTERNAL EMAIL




Yeah, I’m just trying to understand (as I read the ovf file) what the actual difference is between the 1000/2500 user OVA. I seem to be missing something (or maybe not). CPU is actually 1 less starting but same reservation, same RAM, same HDD.



Matthew Loraditch?

Sr. Network Engineer


p: 443.541.1518<tel:443.541.1518>



w: www.heliontechnologies.com<http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>

|

e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>


[Helion Technologies]<http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>


[Facebook]<https://facebook.com/heliontech>


[Twitter]<https://twitter.com/heliontech>


[LinkedIn]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies>






[cid:image005.jpg@01D5E2AC.2EEA3190]



From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com<mailto:ryanhuff@outlook.com>>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:21 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: CUCM Cluster Expansion

[EXTERNAL]

I wouldn't see a reason not to just up-size the two nodes you have now to the 2.5k OVA (use 2 vCPU on each node). For the 15 pieces of flair, I'd then add in a 3rd 2.5k OVA w/o the CCM service enabled and run TFTP.. etc on it and give the pub a break.

-Ryan

________________________________
From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net>> on behalf of Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:10 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Expansion


One of my biggest customers is experiencing issues that appear to be related to resource utilization. I’ve never had a customer who needed more than a 2 node 1000 user cluster.



They are getting close to some of the capacity levels listed in the sizing guides.



I’m looking for some opinions on what the best way to deal with this. I have the hardware capacity for either method.



Add a Third 1000 user Subscriber and turn off call processing and tftp on the Pub?



Rebuild both existing servers to 2500 user OVAs?



Add a third and do the rebuild also?



Can I just make the existing server be the 2500 capacity level? I actually don’t understand the difference between the 2500 and 1000 user OVAs, the 2500 appears to actually be lesser capacity by default (1 less cpu). So go to 7500?



I’d appreciate any opinions out there. Going to be doing some reading over the next few days to try and figure this out.



Thanks all!


Matthew Loraditch?

Sr. Network Engineer


p: 443.541.1518<tel:443.541.1518>



w: www.heliontechnologies.com<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615655267&sdata=av6L%2B8viyiswpC6HDUy2aENY%2BvceWoIpyhx%2Fx3deO1g%3D&reserved=0>

|

e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>


[Helion Technologies]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615665263&sdata=KTsNdyJfIruWPtocwe6cT8ks%2FTnLd9THp5GMr09izVI%3D&reserved=0>


[Facebook]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615675256&sdata=E2t8noyd7FAVcVK7RbeWYoh0zb%2BrfN8ObogJSIXJ5U8%3D&reserved=0>


[Twitter]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615685252&sdata=hQjHhB%2FvQdfN7kBXyGgYIMDxtXuO%2BqUDZ0sWRxFWu%2F4%3D&reserved=0>


[LinkedIn]<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompany%2Fhelion-technologies&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cce2d6c568b074e59d89b08d7b0d19c0e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172286615695252&sdata=J%2F2wJkkdgWKkf5OIe35L5NeJRHu4qcEVeWnIe%2B3DUck%3D&reserved=0>






[cid:image005.jpg@01D5E2AC.2EEA3190]






This message w/attachments (message) is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or proprietary. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, and then please delete and destroy all copies and attachments. Please be advised that any review or dissemination of, or the taking of any action in reliance on, the information contained in or attached to this message is prohibited.

Agreed 100% on this, unless you are on be6k stuff. Prior to the m5
hardware, it was cut and dry, if you had > 2.5ghz processors, you could use
the 7500 user or larger with no problem. 1000 user ova was less can be on
2.0 - 2.4ghz, and most of the be6k stuff came with 2.4ghz. There are some
other restrictions on cpu types, but in the enterprise, I haven't seen much
that didn't fit, other than just speed.

Some of the be6k for the m5 hardware, I'm seeing some other cpu's in use
now (like 2.2ghz). Cisco also has some additional criteria if you don't
want to do 2.5ghz and not 1:1 vCpu to core, but it's on an approval basis.

Read up here
https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/uc_system/virtualization/collaboration-virtualization-hardware.html

Basically, if your hardware supports it, go with the 7500 user, makes your
life easier down the road.



On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 5:40 PM NateCCIE <nateccie@gmail.com> wrote:

> I always do the 7.5k cucm size. I hate single cpu cucm, ram is usually
> not a problem and I’d rather have the 110GB disk because upgrades about
> never work on the 80gb without clearing some space. Even 110GB has become
> a problem lately.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 13, 2020, at 3:29 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com> wrote:
>
> ?
> For 11.x, but I've found this helpful:
> https://www.cisco.com/web/software/283088407/126036/cucm-11.0.ova.readme.txt
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ryan
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:24 PM
> *To:* Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* RE: CUCM Cluster Expansion
>
>
> Yeah, I’m just trying to understand (as I read the ovf file) what the
> actual difference is between the 1000/2500 user OVA. I seem to be missing
> something (or maybe not). CPU is actually 1 less starting but same
> reservation, same RAM, same HDD.
>
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch?
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940368611&sdata=ww50XQlOxzvtFefHk4RctzhWcpQQKqPCH4xs8OZ%2B%2FDw%3D&reserved=0>
> | e: *MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com*
> <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
>
> <image370933.png>
>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940368611&sdata=ww50XQlOxzvtFefHk4RctzhWcpQQKqPCH4xs8OZ%2B%2FDw%3D&reserved=0>
>
> <image243092.png>
>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940368611&sdata=RD2UyFewYGZLwT%2FGsd5HarqTn%2FMfDk43r1rdmjAIcsk%3D&reserved=0>
>
> <image307094.png>
>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940378606&sdata=JO5DlIcPtTlBXNw5256jlxtNOsf3npNKOWm%2FgVtC4Lo%3D&reserved=0>
>
> <image105143.png>
>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompany%2Fhelion-technologies&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940378606&sdata=4JQ%2B5HXNAIXx7CcRWUJZdQIa1zew0C%2Bs1TngQP54PbU%3D&reserved=0>
>
> <image566398.jpg>
>
> *From:* Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:21 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>;
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: CUCM Cluster Expansion
>
>
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> I wouldn't see a reason not to just up-size the two nodes you have now to
> the 2.5k OVA (use 2 vCPU on each node). For the *15 pieces of flair*, I'd
> then add in a 3rd 2.5k OVA w/o the CCM service enabled and run TFTP.. etc
> on it and give the pub a break.
>
>
>
> -Ryan
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net> on behalf of
> Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:10 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Expansion
>
>
>
> One of my biggest customers is experiencing issues that appear to be
> related to resource utilization. I’ve never had a customer who needed more
> than a 2 node 1000 user cluster.
>
>
>
> They are getting close to some of the capacity levels listed in the sizing
> guides.
>
>
>
> I’m looking for some opinions on what the best way to deal with this. I
> have the hardware capacity for either method.
>
>
>
> Add a Third 1000 user Subscriber and turn off call processing and tftp on
> the Pub?
>
>
>
> Rebuild both existing servers to 2500 user OVAs?
>
>
>
> Add a third and do the rebuild also?
>
>
>
> Can I just make the existing server be the 2500 capacity level? I actually
> don’t understand the difference between the 2500 and 1000 user OVAs, the
> 2500 appears to actually be lesser capacity by default (1 less cpu). So go
> to 7500?
>
>
>
> I’d appreciate any opinions out there. Going to be doing some reading over
> the next few days to try and figure this out.
>
>
>
> Thanks all!
>
>
>
> *Matthew Loraditch**?*
>
> *Sr. Network Engineer*
>
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940388599&sdata=yAzbJWPtOMwm29dX1obySnDEihiAcKFqy1ylYXqF2R0%3D&reserved=0>
>
> |
>
> e: *MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com* <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
>
>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940388599&sdata=yAzbJWPtOMwm29dX1obySnDEihiAcKFqy1ylYXqF2R0%3D&reserved=0>
> <image006.png>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heliontechnologies.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940388599&sdata=yAzbJWPtOMwm29dX1obySnDEihiAcKFqy1ylYXqF2R0%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940398594&sdata=OC39dwtF40eWAxrHHlX8cHJ%2FqcslFDUgw6d5xJ2lIX4%3D&reserved=0>
> <image002.png>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940398594&sdata=OC39dwtF40eWAxrHHlX8cHJ%2FqcslFDUgw6d5xJ2lIX4%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940398594&sdata=XagZoBF9%2FQ%2FDbYYB6Vy43XWLlcX6b5AdDF6SVtp09BA%3D&reserved=0>
> <image003.png>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fheliontech&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940398594&sdata=XagZoBF9%2FQ%2FDbYYB6Vy43XWLlcX6b5AdDF6SVtp09BA%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompany%2Fhelion-technologies&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940398594&sdata=Hh3mroBv5ieE0E3vgzCnfRVti5ZpQPMusFwn%2F%2F342T8%3D&reserved=0>
> <image004.png>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompany%2Fhelion-technologies&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb901de494ade429758b908d7b0d38c4d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637172294940398594&sdata=Hh3mroBv5ieE0E3vgzCnfRVti5ZpQPMusFwn%2F%2F342T8%3D&reserved=0>
>
> <image005.jpg>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>

Just wait till 14 is released. They will change something.... because they can


Kent

> On Feb 13, 2020, at 18:31, Charles Goldsmith <w@woka.us> wrote:
>
> ?
> Agreed 100% on this, unless you are on be6k stuff. Prior to the m5 hardware, it was cut and dry, if you had > 2.5ghz processors, you could use the 7500 user or larger with no problem. 1000 user ova was less can be on 2.0 - 2.4ghz, and most of the be6k stuff came with 2.4ghz. There are some other restrictions on cpu types, but in the enterprise, I haven't seen much that didn't fit, other than just speed.
>
> Some of the be6k for the m5 hardware, I'm seeing some other cpu's in use now (like 2.2ghz). Cisco also has some additional criteria if you don't want to do 2.5ghz and not 1:1 vCpu to core, but it's on an approval basis.
>
> Read up here https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/uc_system/virtualization/collaboration-virtualization-hardware.html
>
> Basically, if your hardware supports it, go with the 7500 user, makes your life easier down the road.
>
>
>
>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 5:40 PM NateCCIE <nateccie@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I always do the 7.5k cucm size. I hate single cpu cucm, ram is usually not a problem and I’d rather have the 110GB disk because upgrades about never work on the 80gb without clearing some space. Even 110GB has become a problem lately.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>>> On Feb 13, 2020, at 3:29 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>> ?
>>> For 11.x, but I've found this helpful: https://www.cisco.com/web/software/283088407/126036/cucm-11.0.ova.readme.txt
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Ryan
>>> From: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:24 PM
>>> To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>>> Subject: RE: CUCM Cluster Expansion
>>>
>>> Yeah, I’m just trying to understand (as I read the ovf file) what the actual difference is between the 1000/2500 user OVA. I seem to be missing something (or maybe not). CPU is actually 1 less starting but same reservation, same RAM, same HDD.
>>>
>>>
>>> Matthew Loraditch?
>>> Sr. Network Engineer
>>> p: 443.541.1518
>>> w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com
>>> <image370933.png>
>>> <image243092.png>
>>> <image307094.png>
>>> <image105143.png>
>>> <image566398.jpg>
>>> From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff@outlook.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:21 PM
>>> To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>> Subject: Re: CUCM Cluster Expansion
>>>
>>> [EXTERNAL]
>>>
>>> I wouldn't see a reason not to just up-size the two nodes you have now to the 2.5k OVA (use 2 vCPU on each node). For the 15 pieces of flair, I'd then add in a 3rd 2.5k OVA w/o the CCM service enabled and run TFTP.. etc on it and give the pub a break.
>>>
>>> -Ryan
>>>
>>> From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net> on behalf of Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:10 PM
>>> To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>>> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Expansion
>>>
>>> One of my biggest customers is experiencing issues that appear to be related to resource utilization. I’ve never had a customer who needed more than a 2 node 1000 user cluster.
>>>
>>> They are getting close to some of the capacity levels listed in the sizing guides.
>>>
>>> I’m looking for some opinions on what the best way to deal with this. I have the hardware capacity for either method.
>>>
>>> Add a Third 1000 user Subscriber and turn off call processing and tftp on the Pub?
>>>
>>> Rebuild both existing servers to 2500 user OVAs?
>>>
>>> Add a third and do the rebuild also?
>>>
>>> Can I just make the existing server be the 2500 capacity level? I actually don’t understand the difference between the 2500 and 1000 user OVAs, the 2500 appears to actually be lesser capacity by default (1 less cpu). So go to 7500?
>>>
>>> I’d appreciate any opinions out there. Going to be doing some reading over the next few days to try and figure this out.
>>>
>>> Thanks all!
>>>
>>> Matthew Loraditch?
>>> Sr. Network Engineer
>>> p: 443.541.1518
>>> w: www.heliontechnologies.com
>>> |
>>> e: MLoraditch@heliontechnologies.com
>>> <image006.png>
>>> <image002.png>
>>> <image003.png>
>>> <image004.png>
>>> <image005.jpg>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip