1 / 42

Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Unified Messaging in the Real World

Required Slide. SESSION CODE: UNC308. Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Unified Messaging in the Real World. Christian Stegh CTO Enabling Technologies Corporation. U.S. Systems Integrator specializing in messaging One of the original 15 UC partners in the Microsoft Voice Program

brewster
Download Presentation

Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Unified Messaging in the Real World

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Required Slide SESSION CODE: UNC308 Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Unified Messaging in the Real World Christian Stegh CTO Enabling Technologies Corporation

  2. U.S. Systems Integrator specializing in messaging One of the original 15 UC partners in the Microsoft Voice Program Over 200 Exchange UM and 150 OCS Voice installs since 2007 Laser-focus on Exchange, UM, OCS, and surrounding applications Key Partnerships with MS UC Ecosystem Introducing Enabling Technologies

  3. Agenda • Market Motivators for Unified Messaging • Features and Value Points • Concepts & protocols • Case studies: • IP PBX • Standard PBX • OCS • Exchange Implications

  4. Real-World Motivators for Unified Messaging Drivers: Trends: • End of Life Voicemail Systems • Cost savings from: • Consolidated licensing • Simplified maintenance • Centralized administration • Unified user experience • Up until 18 months ago, pilots and small rollouts • Starting 18 months ago, massive migrations and replacements of global voicemail systems

  5. Key Features • Exchange 2007 (and 2010): • Voicemail • Auto-attendant • Speech access to email, calendar, contacts • Exchange 2010: • Voice Mail Preview • Call Answering Rules • Message Waiting Indicator • Administrative roles • Protected Voice Mail

  6. Other enterprise-class options • AVST Call Xpress • Avaya • Cisco If the company owns eCALs for Exchange, Exchange UM should be a no-brainer, price/performance wise

  7. Integrating Exchange UM with an IP PBX

  8. UM and IP PBX Architecture AD DS Called Party IP PBX LDAP Unified Messaging Server Hub Transport Server TDM SIP Trunk/RTP SMTP Caller RPC Mailbox Server PSTN Client Access Server

  9. UM Role Specifications • Processor: • Four (4) 64-bit processors if Voice Mail Preview will not be used • Eight (8) 64 bit processors if Voice Mail Preview will be used • RAM: 8 GB Ram • Storage: • At least 1.2 GB on the drive on which you install Exchange • An additional 500 MB of available disk space for each Unified Messaging (UM) language pack that you plan to install • 200 MB of available disk space on the system drive Each Server can handle 100 simultaneous calls by default (3000-10000 users)

  10. IP PBX Lessons • Each standalone IP PBX will need its own SIP trunk to UM (UM can handle many) • If IP PBX is centralized to handle multiple sites, only one SIP trunk from main PBX to UM is needed • Not all IP PBXs are created equal • Cisco 5.x+ required • Nortel 5.x+ and higher • Avaya requires extra SIP proxy for S87x0

  11. IP PBX Case StudyGeorgia Tech Research Institute • Existing voicemail system was expensive to license and maintain • Saved 25% in up front costs by not having licensing fees • Now save $10,000 a year on yearly maintenance • Exchange UM was foundation of their UC strategy • Have gone on to add OCS for presence and collaboration “It was a matter of Exchange Server UM bringing us a cheaper licensing solution, along with additional functionality. It’s not often you find something that costs you less and gives you more.” - Chris Slater, Manager of System Development, GTRI

  12. IP PBX Case Study – Georgia Tech Research Institute

  13. Integrating Exchange UM with a Traditional PBX

  14. VoIP GatewayFunction Gateway links PBX to Exchange UM IP Analog OR Exchange UM Digital Circuit-switching Protocols Packet-switching VoIP protocols June 10, 2010 | Page 14

  15. UM and TDM PBX Architecture AD DS Called Party LDAP Unified Messaging Server Hub Transport Server TDM SIP Trunk/ RTP TDM SMTP VoIP Gateway Caller TDM PBX RPC Mailbox Server PSTN Client Access Server

  16. TDM PBX Lessons • Select the right gateway • Ensure a certified configuration • T1 (QSIG or CAS) • Digital Set Emulation • SMDI • Check the Exchange Telephony Advisor site and Manufacturers’ links • Audiocodes • Dialogic • NET • Consider redundancy requirements http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee364753.aspx http://www.audiocodes.com/exchange http://www.dialogic.com/microsoftuc/pbx_integration.htm

  17. Redundant (n+1) Unified Messaging • Gateways can retrieve the list of UM servers from Domain Name System • Gateways can route calls to UM servers in a round-robin fashion • If the call isn't accepted by a UM server, call will be presented to another • PBX can be set up to sense the availability of the circuits to the Gateways and reroute calls over to an available channel / VoIP Gateway Redundant Exchange UM should use round robin DNS, not Network Load Balancing

  18. Redundant (n+1) Unified Messaging AD DS Called Party LDAP UM #1 Hub Transport Server TDM SIP/RTP SIP/RTP TDM TDM SMTP VoIP Gateway VoIP Gateway Caller TDM PBX RPC UM #2 Mailbox Server PSTN Client Access Server 18

  19. TDM PBX Lessons, cont • Provision as many ports as the current voicemail system, plus growth for Office Communications Server • Not all QSIG is created equal • QSIG Supplementary Services carries the correct called number info to UM • May require an upgrade or alternate integration • Networked TDM PBXs are tricky

  20. Case Study: IDEXXFeature Requirements and ROI Data

  21. Case Study: IDEXX Architecture • Problem • Various Avaya PBXs with standalone voicemail systems, across the globe • Overlapping extensions • Solution • Centralized Exchange Server 2007 • Co-located a VoIP Gateway with each TDM PBX • Voicemail to/from NOC over WAN Avaya S8700 Exchange Server 2007 SIP Headquarters Office Location Avaya Definity PBX DSE VoIP Gateway Branch Office Location Avaya S8300 SMDI VoIP Gateway Branch Office Location

  22. Handling Overlapping Extensions with UM Dial Plans • In Active Directory, two users had the same telephone extension number • Two options: • Change phone numbers in AD to E.164 format • Place overlapping users into two separate UM dial plans to make their extension unique within Exchange UM

  23. UM Configuration Object Associations • All UM system configuration is stored in AD UM Servers can handle calls for multipleDial Plans. Each Dial Plan can be associated with multipleUM Servers. This represents a set of telephony-enabled endpoints (extensions), sharing a common numbering or naming plan, defined by the telephone network (e.g. PBX). An IP gateway represents any SIP/RTP-capable“peer”server with which UM is allowed to communicate. This includes VoIP gateways, IP PBXs and Office Communications Server. An Automated Attendant allows administrators to provide callers with DTMF- and speech-enabled access to users, operators and phone numbers. A hunt group associates an IP Gateway with a Dial Plan, and may have a pilotnumber to distinguish gateway associations with different Dial Plans. Automated Attendants can be joined together to form multi-level menus. Users can havesecondaryextensions, and these can be in different Dial Plans. This associates the UM user with their DialPlan. Many properties can be configured here (“class of service”). This represents the UM-enabled user. It has an extension, in an associated DialPlan

  24. Centralized Unified Messaging can handle latency because: It uses SIP and RTP Voice messaging is largely unidirectional Round-trip time between VoIP gateway should be less than 1,000 milliseconds (1 sec) Bandwidth requirements per concurrent call: < 100 kbps with G.711 audio per active call < 24 kbps with G.723 audio per active call Gateways and UM support DiffServ for QoS WAN Bandwidth Planning Latency Tolerance

  25. Case Study: IDEXX End-User Feedback “Love the voicemail aspects of unified messaging, once familiarized.” “I especially like the Outlook notification when I've missed a call or have a new voice mail.” “I feel it would be good for people that really need to be in touch with their calendar.” “This is going to change the way many of us work. More so for the better.” “BIG IMPROVEMENT!”

  26. Integrating Exchange UM with Office Communications Server 2007

  27. Exchange UM Architecture with OCS LDAP AD DS Partner Fax SMTP Intranet RTP Unified Messaging Server Hub Transport Server Mediation Server RPC SIP RTP TDM Client Access Server VoIP Gateway Mailbox Server Front End Server PSTN Caller RTAudio SIP Fax Called Party

  28. Case Study: Ameritox OCS & Exchange UM

  29. Faxing Case Study: Ameritox • Single-# faxing – no user intervention if it’s a fax • NET detects fax tones, sends call to SagemComXmediusFax • Xmedius answers the fax, then uses its Exchange/AD interface to find the mailbox that phone # is affiliated with • Xmedius sends via MAPI connector to Exchange mailbox

  30. Exchange Lessons Learned

  31. Exchange Lessons Learned • Storage impact on mail store minimal • Decide on policy that allows for different retention times based on the type of message (e-mail or voice mail) • Put the UM role near the mailbox role

  32. Key Takeaways • Design a rock-solid environment for email, while considering the UM overlay • Get end-user buy in on features/functionality • Use web resources to pick the right integration type (gateway or SIP Trunk) • Create pilot in production environment • Watch out for networked PBXs • Have fun with it!

  33. Related Content • UNC201 Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 SP1: An Overview of What’s Coming • UNC303 Upgrading from Microsoft Exchange Server 2003/2007 to Exchange Server 2010: Tips, Tricks, and Lessons Learned • UNC321 Microsoft Communications Server “14” Interoperability: Voice, Video, Conferencing, IM, and Presence • UNC314 Microsoft Communications Server “14”: Voice Deployment Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Unified Messaging in the Real World

  34. Unified Communications Track Call to Action! Learn More! • View Related Unified Communications (UNC) Content at TechEd/after at TechEd Online • Visit microsoft.com/communicationsserver for more Communications Server “14” product information • Find additional Communications Server “14” content in the Technical Library, weekly technical articles at NextHop, and follow DrRez on Twitter • Check out Microsoft TechNet resources for Communications Server and Exchange Server • Visit additional Exchange 2010 IT Professional-focused content • Partner LinkorCustomer Link (Name: ExProPword: EHLO!world) Try It Out! • Exchange 2010 SP1 Beta downloadis now available from the download center!

  35. Required Slide Resources Learning • Sessions On-Demand & Community • Microsoft Certification & Training Resources www.microsoft.com/teched www.microsoft.com/learning • Resources for IT Professionals • Resources for Developers • http://microsoft.com/technet • http://microsoft.com/msdn

  36. Required Slide Complete an evaluation on CommNet and enter to win!

  37. Sign up for Tech·Ed 2011 and save $500 starting June 8 – June 31st http://northamerica.msteched.com/registration You can also register at the North America 2011 kiosk located at registrationJoin us in Atlanta next year

  38. Appendix

  39. Technical Definitions

  40. Technical Definitions

  41. © 2010 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Microsoft, Windows, Windows Vista and other product names are or may be registered trademarks and/or trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries. The information herein is for informational purposes only and represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation as of the date of this presentation. Because Microsoft must respond to changing market conditions, it should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information provided after the date of this presentation. MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION.

  42. Required Slide

More Related