Mitel vs. Cisco & Resiliency

[alaanajim]

Hi All,

I have went through the thread of Mitel vs. Nortel, and it was a great one. But what about Mitel vs. Cisco, I'm really curious to know why for example I should go for Mitel 3300ICP and not Cisco Call Manger, vise versa will apply.

And another question for Mitel people, If I have system which currently running with 230 IP users, 2 ISDN. What do I need to provide them Resiliency system, in term of Hardware and software(Licenses) in details.

 

[TheMitelGuy]

To be honest, Mitel & Cisco take almost similar approaches to call resiliency. Mitel does do it a slightly better, which I will describe why here...

First, both Cisco & Mitel require dual controllers to provide resiliency. There is a difference between resiliency and redundancy. Redundant refers to the ability to duplicate hardware (RAID1 and dual power core power supplies). Both Cisco and Mitel (Cisco on IBM servers for this example) will support redundancy.

Resiliency refers to the ability to for sets and peripherals (voice mail etc.) to swap, or failover to a secondary controller, should the main controller go down.

Let's have some examples...
First Mitel calls controllers 1 & 2, pretty much anything they want. A & B, 1 & 2, Primary & Alternate etc.
Cisco calls their controllers 1 & 2, Subscriber & Publisher respectfully.

**Two internal parties talk to each other on their IP extensions:
CISCO: If Subscriber goes down, both phones perform a mini-reset (even though there is an active call) and the phones re-register to the Publisher. Users can then pick up their phones and redial the call. Approximately 10-15 seconds for this to happen based on a 250 user IP phone system.

MITEL: If Controller A was to go down, both sets would display three special characters in the top right-hand corner of the display. This indicates that failover is taking place, and provides a start to finish indicator (i.e. starting, almost done, failed-over). In this example the call continues uninterrupted. Users who are not watching their display will have no idea failover have taken place. Nor should a user care failover is taking place, they just need the phone to work, and the Mitel controller will send an e-mail at the same time to system administrators and the VAR indicating trouble has happened.

**A single user on a T1/PRI call to an external party:
CISCO: If the Subscriber was to go down, the call is dropped, the phone would failover to the Publisher and the call could be redialed. Approximately 10 seconds again.

MITEL: Pending you have a T1/PRI card that went into production in 2006, or later, the call would continue without interruption. The phone would failover to the secondary controller (same display in the right-hand corner), but the T1 call would remain active as the T1/PRI card is connected to both the primary and secondary ICP (ICP = controller). Again the user would have no clue what happened unless they were looking at their display.


To Make Resiliency Work:
MITEL:
A device license (and only a device license) needs to be purchased. You do not need an IP set license on the secondary controller. You of course will need a secondary MX/MXe controller. That is it + the proper software configuration (i.e. get someone to program the 3300 correctly).

CISCO:
Pretty much the same thing. Need an IP license for each phone on the secondary controller and a secondary controller.

Reasons for selecting Mitel over Cisco:
? As a party that is pro Mitel, I would recommend Mitel over Cisco. Mitel has years (30) in addition to Cisco for telephony. Your users will adapt and learn Mitel easier then Cisco. Cisco makes a good solution, but you will find the Mitel easier to maintain (installer or end-user/customer). If it was me, I would go for RAID1 and Dual Core Power Supplies and skip the resiliency option to save money, but that is just me. A good Mitel dealer will love the Cisco/Mitel battle as win in almost every single category. Hands down.
? Mitel will be cheaper for sure then Cisco.
? During the sales process ensure the Cisco and Mitel platforms do what you want them to do. If there is something Mitel does not do, Mitel will take a serious look at it and see if it is something they should add to their system. Try that with Cisco.
? For those that think Mitel is a little company in Canada, just stand back and look at what they have done to IP Telephony in the last year alone. Amazing sets. Amazing functionality. Amazing integration to Microsoft and Sun Systems. Compare that to Cisco. And if you think Mitel is resting now, just wait until you see what is coming out next. You will be blown away!
? Finally, Mitel cares about you! If for any reason you do not think Mitel is not the type of company that cares about its customers, ask your VAR to have Don Smith (the President of Mitel) call you and answer your questions. Then turn to your Cisco VAR and ask them to have John Chambers (the President of Cisco) call you to discuss his system. Chances are the Cisco rep will be stunned and will laugh. Your Mitel VAR will have Don give you a call.

 

[slapin]

That's true regarding communication and support. The only difference is that Cisco will give you as an end user ALL the information how to setup and maintain the system and will not force you to go to a VAR for a little change in the system, who will take your arm and you will bring your leg later. BUT I have to admit that most of VARs will consider to give you admin access. If you screw it up, too bad, they will charge you recover the system