October 15, 2018 at 1:23 am #4320
We were expecting MiCollab 8.1 to have this feature included but it’s a bit vague.
The 8.1 What’s New says :
Multi-MiCollab scaling: Multi-MiCollab feature enables you to connect multiple MiCollab servers (up to three) to multiple MiVoice Business servers in a cluster, thereby scaling the number of users that can be serviced, from the existing limit of 5000 users to 15000 users.
Note: Multi-MiCollab is supported only with MiCloud Management Portal (MMP).
There nothing in the online help nor the rest of the documentation for MiCollab….?
In a 8.0sp3 MCD, you have in the online help What’s New,
Support extended for SDS data sharing with upto three MiCollab 8.1 servers.
For the required configuration on MiCollab, refer to micollab admin online help.
In MCD 9.0 is no longer there in the Whats New section….
That sentence is removed.
Can you pls explain what is going on here ?
Is the feature available or not ?October 25, 2018 at 3:41 pm #4374Michael WiblishouserParticipant
Hello Stefan. This feature was introduced only for Mitel MiCloud or hosted MiVoice Business scenarios. This feature is not available for on premise MiVoice Business systems. I defiantly could see this in the future of MiCollab. Stay tuned.December 10, 2018 at 8:52 pm #4746
It’s a bit disappointing as it was announced as an all feature, working on all platforms.
Then when it was implemented and delivered on MiCollab, it turned out to be only for Mitel MiCloud ;-(January 8, 2019 at 5:52 pm #4815
Would you know how other customers/resellers get around this ?
As we’re coming across this again and again, for a multi site customer.
For example existing head office site in Location A, vMCD with vMiCollab, all good.
New Site in a completely different location B with the same setup.
They have VPNs in between with MCD clustering.
They want a MiCollab at each location due to if the Internet link goes down at the main site with a single MiCollab it takes out all their TW/softphones. IE MiCollab has to be at each Location. This is a mandatory requirement from the customer.
Customer also of course wants clustering and resiliency between locations.
This is where it all fails, as currently we can only have ONE MiCollab connected to a cluster of MCDs.
IE we can no longer offer a complete solution to the customer.
It’s like we’re missing a piece in the whole puzzle.January 8, 2019 at 6:25 pm #4816jeremy ThomasParticipant
I also have the same issue.
I have not clustered the MiVB’s due to this and just have IP trunks with peering between the 2 x MiCollab’s.
It’s not ideal that I cannot cluster and causes a few headaches.January 11, 2019 at 12:52 pm #4822
Hi folks – It looks like there are several concerns here and I will do my best to address them.
First – It is possible to have multiple MiCollabs and a cluster of MiVoice Business’, however with more than one MiCollab, what you would lose is the ability to do Flow Through Provisioning. Each MiCollab would have its own set of users and of course Server Manager would allow you to program all applications (MiCollab UM, MiCollab Client, possibly MiCollab AWV credentials and Teleworker if desired) for those users. All phone programming would need to be done on the MiVoice Business’ within the cluster.
Second – let’s look at your initial question, Multi-MiCollab for scaling with up to three MiCollab servers in a cluster and using Mitel Management Portal (MMP). This is definitely available within the MiCloud Business environment because MMP is already used in that environment for programming. It is the MMP that provides the mechanism to support Flow Through Provisioning. Mitel has actually introduced this same capability for on-premise in a controlled introduction environment. I would recommend you speak with your Mitel sales rep if this is something you would like to pursue.
Third – in your second message from January 8th, it appears that your interest in multiple MiCollabs is not related to ease of programming (Flow Through Provisioning) but instead related to business continuity. It is definitely possible to have multiple MiVoice Border Gateways clustered across the different locations to support the Teleworkers in a distributed solution. That way if Site A MBG fails, the Teleworker devices can be made aware of up to four MBG IP addresses in total and could communicate with a second MBG to gain access to call control easily. In addition, if they are using the MiCollab SIP Softphone, it uses an FQDN representing the MBG and uses DNS lookup to resolve to the IP. The SIP Softphone supports the DNS SRV record where by it will resolve to multiple IP addresses, each representing a different MBG.
Please let me know if you have further questions.January 15, 2019 at 10:15 pm #4844
Not having Flow Through Provisioning makes it impossible to maintain especially when you have lots of mobile softphones. We have a customer with 4x sites, a MCD and MiCollab at each site. All MCDs are clustered. They are a heavy user of UCC mobile softphones. No redundancy requirements for this customer, but we’re unable to maintain the system in a proper way without Flow Through Prov.
Good to hear that the same capability is coming for on-premise.
We’ve been told i’s not on the roadmap.
Controlled introduction now, do you have an estimated release date ?
The customers want it all, the want the ease of programming (Flow Through Prov), they want redundancy.
I understand we can cluster MBGs to provide redundancy from that angle.
But we need the MCDs to be clustered together for all that it brings, we then also need the MCDs resilient. None of which is possible with two or more MiCollabs.
It’s like we’re currently missing a piece in the complete solution.
Another customer has 2 sites next door to each other, two separate entities.
Each with MCD and MiCollab. A MCD cluster with 6 additional sites.
Customer wants all sites clustered together and the two sites beside each other should also be redundant to each other. Ideal solution you would think as they have separate trunk connections as well. But we can’t deliver on that at the moment…January 17, 2019 at 2:44 pm #4851
Hi Stefan – It sounds like you are a dealer? If yes, please email Corporate Sales Engineering for assistance. I would like to escalate this to the appropriate parties to see if anything available now can assist you with the customer’s to whom you are referring. You can find our email address on InfoChannel under Sales > Sales Engineering. I look forward to speaking with you directly.February 24, 2019 at 6:40 pm #4949
Emailed email@example.com on the 18th of Jan 2019 but have heard nothing.
I would have expected something back but sofar nothing.February 26, 2019 at 3:56 pm #4955Michael WiblishouserParticipant
Jill is out this week but I sent her an email reminding her to follow up with you. Sorry for the delay but look for the update next week.February 26, 2019 at 4:55 pm #4957
Thanks MichaelMarch 5, 2019 at 3:56 pm #4997
Hi Stefan –
My apologies. I did receive your email on January 18th, but somehow it got shuffled and missed. I have forwarded the information up the line to see what can be done for this customer. In hind sight, if a virtual MiVoice Business had been sold to the customer for Brisbane, instead of MiVoice Business Express, then they could have used the existing single MiCollab for Flow Through provisioning in the cluster. However, it has been sold, so let’s see if anything can be done. I will respond to you directly as soon as I have more information. Again, I apologize for the delay.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.