<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CUCiMOC recently released!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.blindhog.net/cucimoc-recently-released/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.blindhog.net/cucimoc-recently-released/</link>
	<description>Tips and Video Tutorials - Cisco .:. Linux .:. VOIP</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:55:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ali</title>
		<link>http://www.blindhog.net/cucimoc-recently-released/comment-page-1/#comment-32533</link>
		<dc:creator>Ali</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:54:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blindhog.net/?p=850#comment-32533</guid>
		<description>Is it possible or have it been tested to do this integration without disabling the A/V features.

Cant afford to lose functions such as:
- Video
- Live Meeting

do you think there will be any effects from integration point view if these features were not disabled.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it possible or have it been tested to do this integration without disabling the A/V features.</p>
<p>Cant afford to lose functions such as:<br />
- Video<br />
- Live Meeting</p>
<p>do you think there will be any effects from integration point view if these features were not disabled.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jugin</title>
		<link>http://www.blindhog.net/cucimoc-recently-released/comment-page-1/#comment-32493</link>
		<dc:creator>Jugin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Jul 2009 09:36:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blindhog.net/?p=850#comment-32493</guid>
		<description>Hi James,
CUCiMOC (Single Call Control via CUCM) is a lot easier to implement as an Dual Call Control solution. 
Issues:
- convince the IT on the customer for CUCiMOC rollout (task on the customer side)
- release and patchmanagement 2 worlds Microsoft + Cisco Who manages this?
- you should have a lot of answers for difficult customers ;) (video, live meeting)
- If customer need a high call-availability, it will be less difficult to sell CUCiMOC.
- you can sell support for rollout

...

Jugin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi James,<br />
CUCiMOC (Single Call Control via CUCM) is a lot easier to implement as an Dual Call Control solution.<br />
Issues:<br />
- convince the IT on the customer for CUCiMOC rollout (task on the customer side)<br />
- release and patchmanagement 2 worlds Microsoft + Cisco Who manages this?<br />
- you should have a lot of answers for difficult customers <img src='http://www.blindhog.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' />  (video, live meeting)<br />
- If customer need a high call-availability, it will be less difficult to sell CUCiMOC.<br />
- you can sell support for rollout</p>
<p>&#8230;</p>
<p>Jugin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://www.blindhog.net/cucimoc-recently-released/comment-page-1/#comment-32488</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 12:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blindhog.net/?p=850#comment-32488</guid>
		<description>Jugin,
Thanks for the info.  I am really looking forward to digging into CUCiMOC and seeing what benefits as well limitations like the ones you have listed are.  Have you had a chance to lab it up yet?  If so, what are your overall thoughts?

James</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jugin,<br />
Thanks for the info.  I am really looking forward to digging into CUCiMOC and seeing what benefits as well limitations like the ones you have listed are.  Have you had a chance to lab it up yet?  If so, what are your overall thoughts?</p>
<p>James</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jugin</title>
		<link>http://www.blindhog.net/cucimoc-recently-released/comment-page-1/#comment-32487</link>
		<dc:creator>Jugin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 05:56:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blindhog.net/?p=850#comment-32487</guid>
		<description>an importent thing is, that CUCiMOC castrate important MOC-features. Internal MOC-Calls, don&#039;t care audio or video are not possible after mode-switching. the whole mediatermination on MOC must be shutdown. Cisco says, it is important für CAC and QOS. I say, they want make money ;) at least Cisco could let the decission on the customer side. You know what it costs to implement video from Cisco.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>an importent thing is, that CUCiMOC castrate important MOC-features. Internal MOC-Calls, don&#8217;t care audio or video are not possible after mode-switching. the whole mediatermination on MOC must be shutdown. Cisco says, it is important für CAC and QOS. I say, they want make money <img src='http://www.blindhog.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' />  at least Cisco could let the decission on the customer side. You know what it costs to implement video from Cisco.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
