Ver 7 implications

Home Forums Unified Communications MiVoice MX-ONE Ver 7 implications

Tagged: , ,

This topic contains 17 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by  Matthew Craughwell 2 days, 6 hours ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #4380

    Stephen Smith
    Participant

    Hi
    I was wondering whether anyone here has moved to Version 7 yet, as according to my maintainer the implications are considerable.

    My current understanding is as follows:

    1. For a remote ‘LIM’ to be survivable it has to have the new database ‘Cassandra’ running locally, this has implications for the local servers which obviously must be capable of supporting the new application.
    2. All drives running Cassandra must be SSD
    3. All connections between the locations running Cassandra must have 1Gb min connections
    4. A Ver 7 MX-One can currently only support a maximum of 10 ‘Data Centres’ – my maintainer believes a ‘Data Centre’ to be an instance of MX-One infrastructure that has a local copy of Cassandra i.e. a survivable element of the network.

    This appears to mean that apart from the additional costs incurred with upgrading hardware and circuits in order to support Ver 7/Cassandra, I can now only have a maximum of 10 locations on my network which are survivable. If correct, this means that the major selling point of the MX-One has been obliterated.

    We had fully intended amalgamating my existing 6 disparate systems down to 2 (and then 1 next year) as well as replacing our aging EBN’s with the smallest new MX-One solutions. However, due to the additional hardware and infrastructure requirements needed to support (survivable) version 7 this would now appear to be a non-starter. The apparent maximum of 10 survivable locations is a disastrous limit that means even if money wasn’t a consideration, we could not upgrade to Ver 7 on our system.

    Even if we could manage all the above, the net benefit to my users would be zero as they will not see any difference in the day to day operation of the system – apart from the forced migration to the lesser specified In-Attend consoles.

    The tragic irony of the above is that our only option would be upgrading to Ver 6 as this avoids much/all of the above. However, due to the Mitel policy of withdrawing support for older S/W Ver’s this would mean that our system would be time limited and we would presumably need to scrap it or move to Ver 7 in a year or so. To be honest, we could probably manage without the ability to report ‘new’ bugs as these would be rare in an established system, but with Mitel refusing to allow the purchase of additional licenses on non-supported S/W the situation will become untenable.

    Whilst the above may not affect users who do not have distributed systems, it will have major consequences for both my system and strategy and is moving even further away from the benefits that first attracted us to the MX-One solution. The impact is such that we may need to move to another platform as it would appear that the MX-One (Ver 7) is no longer fit for purpose. I now have to quickly decide whether to ‘waste’ money on an upgrade to Ver 6 or to trash the system and look elsewhere – hopefully to a company that still values its customers.

    I appreciate that things change and that Mitel have to continue to move forward and remain competitive, but if the information passed to me is correct then they have treated existing customers in an atrocious manner as apart from the ever escalating costs of this system, we are paying for developments that we do not want.
    Any comments and/or clarifications/solutions would be welcome.

    #4397

    Stephen Smith
    Participant

    It is interesting / concerning that nobody from Mitel has bothered to respond to my query/concerns (above) – either directly or via this forum!

    To put my concerns into context – we paid our maintainer over £200K last Feb to upgrade our system to Ver. 7 and to date we have received nothing back from our investment.

    This has been due to repeated delays to the projected release dates for Ver. 7, and now that it has finally been released, we now find that it is not fit for (our) purpose (based on current information). This has resulted in the need to rethink our entire Telecoms strategy – including whether it is even worth moving forward with MX-One or should we recover the money & invest it in developing a different Telecoms system that would be capable of meeting our needs.

    I recall Mr Rich McBee in recent Webcasts repeatedly stating that he wants every Mitel customer to have an AWESOME experience with their dealings with his company.

    Our recent experiences regarding our Mitel infrastructure have been more Abysmal than Awesome!

    #4553

    Jason Holt
    Participant

    Stephen,

    My name is Jason Holt. I am a semi long time user of the MX-One platform (BC-9). I am also a member of the North American user Group board.

    I wanted to reach out to you so we could both learn together about the changes you are being told about. I have not heard about many of items you are being told are requirements.

    Please give me a call, or an email and we can start digging into this together.

    We can then get some official information from Mitel, and go from there.

    Thank you,
    Jason Holt
    Cal Poly, SLO
    805-756-7310
    jdholt@calpoly.edu

    #4577

    Hello Steve,

    Your concerns above have been shared with our Mitel team.

    Mitel is engaged with your partner and a meeting is forthcoming to discuss your concerns, and clarify some comments on version 7.

    JASON HOLT – thank you for engaging with Steve as a board member and fellow MX-ONE user.

    Kind Regards,
    Denise Desjardins

    #4582

    Stephen Smith
    Participant

    Hi Denise

    Thank you for your response. I will not hold my breath for any update from Daisy UK.

    To put this into context:

    I had to wait over 15 months for an actual cost & technical proposal to upgrade my system(s).

    I have been repeatedly requesting a meeting with Mitel representatives (via our partner) to discuss some of our concerns for over 18 months and it is only in the last few weeks that there has been any contact from Mitel UK. I should add that I suspect that my requests/concerns were never forwarded to Mitel by our partner.

    I have previously raised similar concerns at the Mitel UK User Group with no subsequent contact forthcoming from Mitel UK.

    Hopefully, now that I have made contact with both you and also Eddie Lambert – things will begin to move forward. The contact from Jason Holt is also appreciated and hopefully will be beneficial all round.

    NB Regarding my actual current concerns regarding Ver 7.0 – it appears that some of the information received from my ‘partner’ may have been incorrect and/or exaggerated. However, the main concern regarding the limit of 10 Data Centres (w.r.t. Cassandra), does appear to be correct which still leaves me with a huge problem.

    Thanks again for the contact and hopefully I will now get my concerns/issues addressed.

    #4627

    Carlos Araújo
    Participant

    Hello Everyone,

    Like Stephen, i have some concerns about the new MX-ONE version 7.0, its seems that instead of simplified a great system it’s being more complex than ever. Higher performance servers and higher requirements will lead higher costs and customers are demanding the opposite, less costs and simpler solutions. One thing i see as very good is the change in licenses but removing wi-fi phones and soft-phones apps when market is demanding simple communication solutions and better mobility is like shooting the feet.(MiCollab is not a simple solution neither cheap one)
    Recent upgrades made with ASUs (8GB) will be almost useless for version 7.0, new gateways seems nice but should be used in the same way the MGU gateways not only as remote/branch.
    I’m still catching up the news about MX-ONE 7.0 but actually not seeing our customers to go ahead for version 7.0.

    Thank you Stephen to raised this post, and all the others that are involved to find the better clarifications.

    Cheers
    Carlos

    #4659

    Hello Stephen, Carlos and Jason

    We (Mitel) have read your messages on this discussion forum. Stay tuned for a response!

    Thank you for your patience (we are heading into the biggest holiday weekend in the US, so we might be a bit delayed).

    Thank you for participating in the user group, talk soon!

    Denise Desjardins
    Mitel User Group Liaison

    #4660

    Matthew Craughwell
    Participant

    Hi All

    Just to add to this post I do agree we are all striving to save cost on hardware and simplification of our MXOne infrastructure. However, it is also as important that the system are as resilient as possible which is why these database changes are necessary.

    I will be moving to version 7 very soon, all virtualised in an N+1 scenario running 3 cassandra DB’s. So I will hopefully be able to come back and alleviate your concerns in the new year as a successful customer upgrade to version 7!

    Agree, this is a very important conversation to be had when big upgrades like this are upon us and feedback from our early adopters may alleviate all those concerns.

    #4685

    Stephen Smith
    Participant

    Just letting everyone know, I still haven’t spoken/met with Mitel regarding my concerns – despite their assurances.

    A meeting was scheduled for yesterday (Tues 27/11) but was cancelled last Friday (by Mitel).

    No alternative date has been proposed yet and I am still none the wiser regarding my concerns with respect to my much delayed Ver 7 upgrade.

    #4706

    Stephen Smith
    Participant

    Despite Denise’s assurances above, I still haven’t received a formal response from Mitel – however, a new meeting has been scheduled for 12/12/18.

    It would appear that Mitel are insufficiently concerned about my issues to either ring me directly or to arrange a meeting with any urgency. It also appears that the User Group hierarchy has no influence over these issues (or even any actual ‘interest’) which is a shame as they should have assisted in applying some pressure to Mitel.

    #4707

    Jason Holt
    Participant

    Stephen,

    The user group IS working with Mitel to push for the best way to get the changes for v7 out to the membership.

    I agree that I wish everything was moving faster.

    Your concerns are shared by others as well, and we definitely want to understand the implications of Cassandra on our infrastructure, as well as any other architectural changes coming our way.

    I spoke with my distributor, and they would also like to hear from Mitel about some of the changes, so we’re definitely all looking for some information from Mitel.

    I hope we hear some news from Mitel this week.

    Thank you,
    Jason Holt

    #4708

    Matthew McKenna
    Participant

    Stephen,
    I’m an MX-One customer and on the North American board of directors for Mitel Users Group.

    Unfortunately we’re in the same position as you. We’re looking for information, our reseller doesn’t have much to offer, and we’re all waiting on Mitel product people to give us some details.

    We’re having a board of director call right now and discussing how to get Mitel to get us some information ASAP.

    Hang tight, we’re working on escalating this.

    #4712

    Hello all,

    I am working with the product team to organize a more in depth webinar for the user group that will cover release 7.0. Stay tuned! I am still here and very interested to help educate our MX-ONE customers and partners on this next release.

    Most sincerely,
    Denise

    #4716

    Stephen Smith
    Participant

    Hi Denise

    Given the (current) limitations around the implementation of Cassandra on MX-One, it is worrying that it has taken this long (since release) for Mitel to get their act together and to bother to bring their larger customers up to speed.

    Also, why was no mention made of the 10 ‘Data Centre’ limitation made in the Ver 7.0 Rel notes?

    To discover that we could not implement our upgrade several months after paying for it, has left us in a very difficult position – both technically & legally.

    #4740

    Good day all,

    As promised Mitel is holding a webinar for the user group that will cover further details about release 7.0. I realize that this is short notice, but our product expert will be out of the office next week until the new year. If this time is not suitable, please register for the webinar and you will receive the recording afterwards. Here is the webinar description and link:

    MX-ONE Release 7.0 Webinar

    Will you be upgrading to 7.0 in the near future? Then be sure to register for this webinar hosted by Eddie Lambert, Mitel Product Line Management on Wednesday, December 12th at 12pm EST.

    In version MiVoice MX-ONE 7.0 released in September, Mitel introduced a new database to replace the existing OpenLDAP data that has been part of MX-ONE since 2006. In an effort to demystify this new DB change, we will spend some time to go through a couple use case scenarios and address the questions brought up by the Mitel User Group community. We will then continue to highlight some of the other great things this release brings .. In particular, the move to SUSE’s SLES 12 OS, our new Branch office Survivable GWs, the refreshed management framework or the introduction of our simplified licensing concept are just some of the things that MiVoice MX-ONE 7.0 will bring in terms of added-value to your existing investments and provide you with a future proof solution going forward.

    This will be followed by a Q&A session to allow you to ask any questions that may remain unanswered.

    We look forward to having you there.

    If this time does not suit your schedule, please register and you will receive the recording afterwards.

    REGISTER: https://cc.readytalk.com/r/esd94dj1x0b6&eom

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.