10 Cisco/Microsoft Hybrid UC Deployment Options10 Cisco/Microsoft Hybrid UC Deployment Options
You've deployed Cisco voice or video and Microsoft Skype for Business... now how do you make them interoperate?
August 3, 2016
You've deployed Cisco voice or video and Microsoft Skype for Business... now how do you make them interoperate?
If your organization is like many others, you've got a mix of Cisco and Microsoft unified communications tools in use -- and that can mean interoperability challenges ahead.
Market statistics indicate that 70% to 75% of enterprises in the U.S. has deployed Cisco networking equipment and 25% to 35% uses Cisco voice solutions, while 60% to 65% of enterprises has implemented Microsoft's Skype for Business UC platform (a global integrator has validated these figures, with 21% of its customers having deployed Cisco Voice and Skype for Business). Furthermore, approximately one third of respondents in a recent No Jitter survey indicate use of UC capabilities from each vendor.
Based on these statistics, we estimate that roughly 20% of the market has deployed both Cisco Voice and Microsoft Skype for Business.
If your organization is one of the many that has deployed Cisco Unified Communications Manager (CUCM) for voice and Microsoft Skype for Business for IM/presence and/or some conferencing, what can you do to unify these disparate communications and collaboration environments? In this article, I'll share 10 ways to integrate Cisco telephony and Microsoft UC platforms, along with the pros and cons of each.
Before discussing these hybrid options, however, I must point out that if you truly want a unified communications experience, one in which users can seamlessly escalate IM to voice to conferencing to video, you will need to eliminate one of the vendors. The same is true if you would like to use any combination of communications modalities in an ad hoc, as-needed fashion. However, some hybrid options do provide a good user experience while obviating the need to eliminate one of the vendors.
Option 1 – Jabber-Skype for Business Federation Using Cisco Expressway and Cisco UC Manager
In this scenario, Cisco Expressway and CUCM enable a shared corporate directory between Jabber and Skype for Business as well as federate IM, presence, voice, and video between them. The implication here is that some users would be relying on Cisco voice and Jabber UC while others would be using Skype for Business. This deployment model is really intended to allow Jabber and Skype for Business clients to interact with one another primarily in a point-to-point fashion, although multipoint interaction is also possible.
Here's how this integration works:
1. An Expressway gateway sitting between Skype for Business and Jabber clients uses an internal "SIP broker" to distinguish between IM/presence streams and voice/video streams.
2. For IM and presence between Jabber and Skype for Business, Expressway detects the Microsoft IM/presence messaging stream and forwards it to an IM/presence node in the CUCM cluster that provides a translation between Jabber IM/presence and Sype for Business IM/presence.
3. For voice and video, Expressway converts Skype for Business' audio and video into Cisco's audio and video formats, and then routes these streams to CUCM. In this way, Skype for Business users can interact via audio and video with people who are using Jabber and other Cisco video endpoints.
4. For content sharing, there are two scenarios:
- When a Skype for Business client shares content, this content is encapsulated in Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) and transmitted to an Expressway device. Expressway converts the packets to a Binary Floor Control Protocol (BFCP) stream, which Cisco uses for content sharing, and then routes the BFCP packets to the endpoints in a particular session.
Pros
This deployment is relatively straightforward to implement. It really is intended to bring Jabber and Skype for Business together.
Skype for Business users only need a Skype for Business standard client access license (CAL) for this solution to work (no Enterprise or Plus CALs are required).
Enterprises with a Skype for Business Plus CAL can set up a SIP trunk between the Microsoft Mediation Server and CUCM so that users can dial out to the PSTN (via CUCM, which effectively becomes a PSTN gateway).
Cons
Content sharing is not as rich going from a Cisco endpoint to a Skype for Business client as it is going from a Skype for Business client to a Cisco endpoint.
This simple hybrid solution doesn't enable Web conferencing directly between Jabber and Skype for Business (as a workaround, see Option 2 below; alternatively, see Option 5).
Click to Page 2: The WebEx Productivity Tools Approach
Option 2 – The WebEx Productivity Tools Approach
As part of its WebEx Productivity Tools suite, Cisco provides a plug-in that gives Skype for Business users a "Start WebEx Meeting" option, either in a pull-down menu or in a bar above an IM/chat window. Clicking on this button sends a URL to participants (Skype for Business and/or Jabber users) via IM. When users click on this link, WebEx launches in the user's browser for voice, video, and data collaboration.
Pros
Supports quick and easy integration between Skype for Business and WebEx.
Provides desired ad hoc escalation capabilities, such as to the ability to launch richer collaboration from within an IM session.
Works with the free, three-person version of WebEx (as well as the paid version).
Only requires Skype for Business Standard CAL.
Con
Skype for Business users do not use the native, ad hoc Skype for Business collaboration tools that allow mixed-mode conferencing.
Click to Page 3: The CUCILYNC Approach
Option 3 – The CUCILYNC Approach
Cisco's CUCILync plug-in provides the ability to place calls using the Cisco voice infrastructure, including the Cisco phone, using the "Place a Call" option in the Skype for Business client menu. In this instance, the Skype for Business client provides an interface for launching the call rather than serving as a voice (or video) endpoint.
Pros
Users can launch Cisco voice calls to the PSTN or to other users from the Skype for Business client.
Cisco phone presence displays in the Skype for Business interface.
Implementation preserves existing Cisco voice infrastructure for placing calls.
Only requires Microsoft standard CAL.
Cons
CUCILync is only supported on the Microsoft Windows operating system (32- and 64-bit versions). So, for people using Macs, Linux, or mobile devices, this solution would not be available (Skype for Business APIs don't exist for these platforms). This is one reason why organizations that have tried this solution in real-world deployments indicate that users are often not fully satisfied with the CUCILync integration.
Does not preserve the concept of seamless, ad hoc multimodal communications.
CUCILync is a free client, but requires the appropriate Cisco license for registration with CUCM.
Click to Page 4: The Jabber Voice Client Approach
Option 4 – The Jabber Voice Client Approach
In this scenario, both Jabber and Skype for Business are deployed. Skype for Business is used exclusively for IM/presence, and to avoid confusion for the user, peer-to-peer voice/video calling is disabled. Jabber is employed when a user wants to place or receive phone calls, as well as for joining video sessions with other Cisco video endpoints. It is not used for IM/presence.
This is effectively a two-client solution.
Pros
Users have most of the functionality of a UC solution, including IM/presence, voice, video, and collaboration.
The Jabber client is essentially free to organizations, although the appropriate license is required to register Jabber with CUCM for voice/video calls. Jabber can also leverage the free three-person WebEx license or a paid WebEx licensing for conferencing.
Only requires Microsoft Standard CAL.
Works on Windows, Mac, and mobile devices.
Cons
This two-client approach is more complicated for the user. If most users are on mobile devices, then using different clients for specific functionality is likely OK because mobile apps are built around a particular use cases. It is more annoying in desktop environments.
UC functionality resides in silos -- IM/presence in the Skype for Business client, and voice, video, and collaboration in the Jabber client. Users cannot escalate to a Jabber voice or video call from a Skype for Business IM chat.
Click to Page 5: Cisco Conference Meeting Room Federation with Skype for Business
Option 5 – Cisco Conference Meeting Room Federation with Skype for Business
This is a federation solution between Cisco Collaboration Meeting Room (CMR) and Skype for Business. In CMR environments, users get their own meeting rooms. Each room has a uniform resource identifier (URI) that Skype for Business, Cisco, and third-party voice or video devices can use to join the meeting. In addition, Cisco provides an Outlook scheduling plug-in that can schedule a meeting and distribute the URI to attendees.
During the meeting, Skype for Business users can view shared content and share their own content via the standard Skype for Business interfaces.
Cisco CMR federation with Skype for Business is available as an on-premises or hybrid solution. Expressway handles the real-time audio and video from Skype for Business, providing gateway capability between Skype for Business and the rest of the Cisco infrastructure.
CMR creates a user-customizable video layout for distribution to Skype for Business and all other video endpoints (this is done by the on-premises Cisco Telepresence Server via Expressway in the same way referenced in Option 1).
When content is being shared, Skype for Business users get a composite image that shows both the meeting content and gallery-like video images of the other participants. When a Skype for Business user shares content, Expressway converts the Skype for Business RDP stream (which contains the content) to the standards-based BFCP format, and the Cisco Telepresence Server disseminates the content to other conference endpoints.
Pros
Excellent solution for organizations that have already deployed Cisco Telepresence solutions and use Skype for Business for IM and presence.
Allows a Skype for Business endpoint to become a full participant in collaboration sessions involving Cisco Telepresence systems.
Only requires the Microsoft Standard CAL.
Skype for Business endpoints can dial out to the PSTN via a SIP trunk between the Skype for Business Mediation Server and CUCM.
Cons
Skype for Business in this scenario is still not a fully-functioning UC solution in that users cannot escalate IM/presence to voice, video, and data collaboration seamlessly in an ad hoc fashion.
Skype for Business endpoints can still engage in Skype for Business conferencing if the organization has purchased the Microsoft Enterprise CAL, but double licensing (for Skype for Business and WebEx) would be required.
Click to Page 6: The Session Border Controller Approach
Option 6 – The Session Border Controller (SBC) Approach
An SBC at the network's edge can route calls to users with Cisco phones to CUCM and Skype for Business calls to Skype for Business endpoints. Users gets the capabilities of the respective systems they are on. We know of many large organizations running this kind of a co-existence deployment model.
Pros
In this scenario, Skype for Business users get the full capabilities that Skype for Business offers while Jabber users get the full UC and collaboration capabilities Cisco provides.
Skype for Business users can dial out to the PSTN using their Skype for Business clients as voice endpoints.
Those with Cisco voice handsets have the same functionality they have always had.
Cons
Disparate capabilities arise between users. Those on the Skype for Business side get full UC and collaboration capabilities, while those on the Cisco side get only voice. This may not be all bad as long as a company properly profiles users and moves only those who need advanced collaboration to the Skype for Business side.
Requires purchase of an SBC that supports Skype for Business and CUCM (most do); this may not be a trivial expense.
SBC must host the corporate dial plan.
Skype for Business Enterprise and Plus CALs must be in place to make this a full UC solution. Also, the appropriate Cisco licensing must be in place to allow Jabber to register with CUCM. As long as users are assigned to one or the other system, "double licensing" isn't necessary.
Click to Page 7: The "Saving on Conferencing Services" Approach
Option 7 – The "Saving on Conferencing Services" Approach
A number of companies have reported success using Skype for Business for IM/presence and conferencing while maintaining their Cisco voice investment. Typically, they use the money they would have spent on a third-party conferencing services provider to expand their Skype for Business pools so they can support audio and Web conferencing.
Some large companies have adopted this hybrid solution, saving several million dollars annually on conferencing services. We believe the same strategy could potentially be applied using Jabber and Cisco WebEx Meeting Server (WebEx on-prem) with similar results.
Another option would be to use the Acano bridge dual-homed (see Option 9), which would maintain the native user experience on both the Cisco and Skype for Business sides.
Pros
Users are able to easily escalate an IM session to voice and video conferencing using Skype for Business as an endpoint.
Some companies experience significant cost savings in this scenario.
Users can still use the same techniques they are familiar with for joining conferences, which often consists of dialing in using the Cisco phone and clicking on a link to join the Web conference.
More advanced users can have the full Skype for Business conferencing experience using Skype for Business as the voice and video endpoint.
Cons
This is still not a unified communications solution since Skype for Business clients do not have PSTN dial-out capability.
Dialing into a conference from the Cisco phone or from the PSTN may require advanced scheduling as opposed to ad hoc use if the conference is hosted on Skype for Business servers.
Requires the Microsoft Enterprise CAL.
Typically, an SBC is deployed to enable PSTN dial-in to Skype for Business-based conferences, which means accounting for that additional expense.
Requires acquiring and managing direct-inward-dial and toll-free telephone numbers.
Conferencing infrastructure must accommodate peak loads, which may increase some costs and leave unused capacity during off-peak hours.
Does not address video interoperability between Skype for Business and Cisco or other third-party video solutions.
Skype for Business-enabled Android mobile devices presently cannot view meeting content.
Click to Page 8: Skype for Business Video Interop Server for Video Conferencing
Option 8 – Skype for Business Video Interop Server for Video Conferencing
The Skype for Business Video Interop Server (VIS), which is a new standalone server role available for on-premises installations, acts as a video gateway between third-party H.264 SIP-based video systems and Skype for Business. The initial VIS role focuses on interoperability between Cisco video systems and Skype for Business.
In this solution, Cisco endpoints register with CUCM as usual. They can dial into a Skype for Business conference using the Skype for Business conference telephone number, or they can dial to a Skype for Business endpoint directly using that endpoint's phone number. Cisco endpoints send a single H.264 video stream to VIS, which converts this stream to the H.264 SVC protocol Microsoft uses. This VIS converts this stream to the H.264 SVC protocol used by Microsoft, including different resolutions requested by the Skype for Business endpoints. Mid-call controls such as mute, pause video, lock video, and call hold are supported.
VIS will support approximately 16 simultaneous Cisco video endpoints at 720p resolution, and can transcode each Cisco video stream into 720p, 360p, and 180p streams. An organization can spin up additional VIS servers to support greater capacity and provide for fail-over. When transcoding is turned off, VIS uses the lowest common denominator video stream.
Pros
Allows Skype for Business video to interoperate with Cisco video endpoints.
New Skype for Business CALs aren't required. If an organization already has the Enterprise CAL that enables Skype for Business conferencing, VIS does not require additional licensing.
Cons
Skype for Business endpoints cannot dial out to a Cisco video endpoint. Cisco endpoints must dial in to a Skype for Business endpoint or a Skype for Business conference.
VIS doesn't support drag-and-drop conferencing for Cisco endpoints or application/screen sharing.
Offers only limited support for Cisco endpoints.
Application/screen sharing is not an option.
Does not work for Skype for Business clients that are part of an Office 365 deployment, or for conferences between federated domains.
Skype for Business VIS requires CUCM 10.5 or above.
Limitations make for low adoption rate.
Click to Page 9: Using Acano for Video Bridging and Content Sharing
Option 9 – Using Acano for Video Bridging and Content Sharing
Cisco Acano provides each individual with a personal meeting room environment, called a "Space." The Skype for Business contact list can include Acano Spaces, providing the ability to add participants to video calls via the usual Skype for Business drag-and-drop mechanism.
Scheduled meeting invitations contain links to a Space with appropriate URIs/URLs for standards-based video units, Skype for Business endpoints, and WebRTC-enabled browsers. Acano comes with support for bidirectional content sharing on Skype for Business, Cisco, and other endpoint types, including WebRTC. Acano has created a dual-homed capability that splits a single conference between a component running on Acano, for managing the non-Skype for Business endpoints, and a component running on Skype for Business Server, for seamlessly joining participants together and maintaining the full user experience for both types of endpoints.
Pricing is by the port or via an enterprise license agreement. On-premises solutions are available as virtual instances, which are infinitely scalable, or as appliances.
Pros
Enables Skype for Business and Cisco video interoperability.
Allows bidirectional content sharing between Cisco and Skype for Business endpoints.
Supports point-to-point calling using Acano as a gateway between Skype for Business clients and Cisco endpoints.
Organizations paying for Expressway licenses could possibly discontinue these because Acano provides a SIP Edge component that traverses network address translation/firewalls at no additional cost. This will be only temporary, however, as Cisco will incorporate the SIP Edge functionality into Expressway in the future.
Skype for Business users can see the presence status of an Acano Space on the contact list and can click to call from that list.
Requires no new Skype for Business CALs.
Supports WebRTC-based endpoints at no additional cost.
Cons Frankly, this approach for integrating Cisco and Skype for Business environments offers a lot to like and few real downsides.
Click to Page 10: Third-Party Video Bridging and Content Sharing Solutions and A Pending Offering
Option 10 – Third-Party Video Bridging and Content Sharing Solutions
(Editor's Note: This description is an updated version of the content as originally published.)
Several third-party vendors provide video bridging solutions that support standards-based video conferencing endpoints from companies like Cisco, Lifesize, and Polycom; Skype for Business; and WebRTC-enabled browsers. These are available as on-premises or cloud-based solutions, depending on the vendor.
Pexip and Blue Jeans Network are the most prevalent among the third-party companies offering video bridging and content sharing in CUCM and Skype for Business environments, although there are others (Starleaf, Lifesize, etc).
In an approach that is similar to Acano's, Pexip offers a Virtual Meeting Room (VMR) that supports Skype for Business, Cisco, and other standards-based endpoints, and WebRTC. It also supports bi-directional content sharing among those endpoints. Pexip primarily sells through its service provider partners rather than directly to the enterprise.
Pexip also has a gateway product that enables interoperability with existing infrastructure. For example, a company using Skype for Business could use the Pexip gateway to support interoperability with Cisco (and other) video endpoints as well as with WebRTC. The gateway does the protocol transcoding so that voice, video, and screen sharing data are mixed on the Skype for Business A/V server and an appropriately transcoded stream is sent back to the endpoint. This would allow an organization to take advantage of its existing Skype for Business infrastructure.
Blue Jeans Networks offers a cloud-based video bridging service that allows endpoints from many different manufacturers to join a single meeting, including Cisco and Skype for Business. Joining a BlueJeans video conference is easy; all users have to do is dial a SIP URI. Bidirectional content sharing allows Cisco or Skype for Business endpoints to share content with one another (and with any other endpoints in the conference). BlueJeans also supports WebRTC.
Pros
Enable Skype for Business and Cisco video interoperability.
Allows bidirectional content sharing between Cisco and Skype for Business endpoints.
Skype for Business users can see the presence status of a Pexip VMR on the contact list and can click to call from that list.
Requires no new Skype for Business CALs.
Some support WebRTC-based endpoints at no additional cost.
Pexip and BlueJeans are available as cloud-based services; Pexip is also available as an on-premises solution.
Cons These offerings come with a lot to like and few real downsides. However, companies might consider the following characteristics in their evaluations. These offerings:
A Pending Offering
In what may prove to be an important development, Polycom and Microsoft announced a cloud-based video interoperability service at Enterprise Connect 2016. Polycom will operate the service, which will reside in the Microsoft Office 365 cloud.
Designed for Office 365 users and based on Polycom's RealConnect technology, this service will enable video endpoints from Microsoft, Polycom, Cisco, and others to join the same video conference.
Essentially, a new URL will be added to Skype for Business meeting invitations that legacy devices can use to connect to the conference. The service will provide Skype for Business users and those with non-Microsoft endpoints a similar collaboration experience because each endpoint will connect directly to the service, avoiding the necessity of feeding a composite video stream into the Skype for Business meeting. The service should improve fidelity and capability.
More details on this joint Polycom-Microsoft cloud-based video interoperability service may be forthcoming at Microsoft Ignite in September, with general availability slated for later this year. Until more details are available, assessing the service is difficult.
Click to Page 11: Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions and Recommendations
As I noted in my introduction, any organization that wants a truly unified communications experience that includes CUCM and Skype for Business and allows seamless escalation from IM to voice to conferencing to video will need to eliminate products from one of the vendors. The same is true if you'd like to use any combination of communications modalities in an ad hoc, as-needed fashion. However, organizations may encounter significant costs and some downsides in doing so.
Organizations need to ask themselves, "What it is worth to have a UC solution that allows ad hoc, multimodal interaction?" For many organizations, one of the solutions outlined above for a hybrid CUCM/Skype for Business deployment may satisfactorily meet their needs. We are aware of a number of organizations that have successfully rolled out some of these hybrid deployments.
. Of the 10 options discussed above, we believe the following have the most merit:
Cisco will often recommend Option 1 for organizations that have significant existing video infrastructure and need to integrate Cisco endpoints with individual Skype for Business clients. For greenfield video deployments, Cisco recommends Option 9, the Acano solution, for Cisco/Microsoft interoperability. One roadmap shows the Acano capabilities becoming part of the CMR option (Option 5).
We recommend options that offer the user a single client, unless the organization has good reason to deploy both Skype for Business and Jabber or Cisco Spark.
We have personally seen a number of companies that have deployed options 6 and 7, with excellent results. Option 2 seems to be a good approach for those that have standardized on Skype for Business for IM/presence and WebEx for conferencing. Options 5 and 9 are great approaches for those that have deployed Cisco video conferencing endpoints and that also want Microsoft Skype for Business video integration. Option 10 is seeing significant traction by companies that use video and want seamless content sharing without having to deploy their own on-premises Cisco/Microsoft integration solutions.
We are aware of a few additional integration options not listed here, but we have not discussed them as they are usually special cases for things like telephony presence or some type of IM/presence federation. Which of these 10 options might help address your Cisco-Microsoft interoperability challenge?
