NICE Perform 3.2, CM 3.1.5 integration 1

[BIS]

Hi All,

Looking for a fourth opinion here...

Have a CM 3.1.5 site (S8710/G650) with an LSP (S8500G700) over MPLS and needing to integrate with NICE Perform 3.2

Main Site is all IP stations, LSP is digital callmaster 4/5.
ISDN 30's all terminate locally (main site/lsp).

What is the preferred method? We will go AES 4.2, but - TSAPI? CMAPI? A mixture? Can anyone shed some light on the best way of doing this?

Any help much appreciated, especially if you could explain the pros and cons of the different integration methods.

Our BP has their idea, I hear other ideas from other contacts, looking for an impartial opinion from people (dwalin?) who actually know what they are talking about.

Thanks.

 

[dufus2506]

We have a Witness system that's configured pretty much the same way you describe. Generally AES with TSAPI is good for monitoring stations you want to record. The PBX will let the system know when a call begins and ends.

TSAPI licenses aren't pricey (around $30 each) and an AES server isn't expensive either. (Right around $10K to start off.)

If you're not doing call control you really don't need much more than TSAPI licenses to get call progress results, and station status.


Carpe dialem! (Seize the line!)

 

[BIS]

Would these work with digital stations though? Or do I also need CMAPI for example?

 

[nohuhu]

BIS,

you're mixing cti integration with capture type. in order to know what's going on at the agents' phones, you'll definitely need aes with tsapi basic, dufus is right. well, alternatively you can use cvlan but you won't like the pricing. tsapi basic partner license gives you two actual tsapi basic ports for around $40, it's not that much.
now, what you actually need to consider is capture type. it can be quite different even within one system: trunk side, extension side, passive voip or active voip (cmapi). trunk and extension side are very expensive and not hassle-free but in some cases may be the only choice - not for your main site for sure, you can use passive voip there. handle it with care, though, passive voip has its own quirks and plenty of 'em: port mirroring issues, shuffling needs to be turned off for internal calls recording, phone ip address detection method, etc; but it's robust enough to be considered total recording. on the other hand, active voip utilizes cmapi (dmcc) protocol to register virtual extensions on pbx and uses either service observing or single step conferencing to obtain a copy of the voice path for recording. it doesn't make difference between ip or digital or analog stations, you can service observe any kind - but here goes the price: less conferencing parties for agent (one is service observer or ssc party); +1 tdm time slot used per recorded call that lowers your port network call capacity significantly, especially if there are only agents on it and you want to record them all; additional dsp resources are used to send rtp streams to the logger; and finally, inability to service observe an agent twice - it's either logger or supervisor, not both. and then there goes the long list of situations when calls *won't* be recorded - like when one recorded agent transfers to other recorded agent - all of these are service observing constraints, of course. believe me, i've designed and installed cmapi recorders from the very beginning and i learned not to overestimate cmapi. it has its disadvantages, and the main one is its relatively low reliability. i'm not trying to say it wont't work at all, it works good but it can't be even considered for environments where call recording is mandatory - in my practice, every cmapi logger loses some amount of calls and i consider 99% recorded calls a week a good figure. couldn't ever bring it to 100% and my other colleagues confirm this. well, for quality monitoring it's not even an issue but it isn't suited for total call recording. that's why nice calls it "all calls recording", not quite the same thing as total.
having said all this, now to the point: i think, generally it will be better to use passive voip for main site and not cmapi for the lsp site, because g700s there are very limited on dsp resources. well, usually. if you can describe your setup in more detail, i'll tell you for sure but my rule of thumb is no cmapi with g700's, very low capacity they have. and considering that they're EoS already along with mm760s, may be downright impossible to obtain 'em. so there are some options still, either using extension/trunk side recorder or upgrade your system to cm5 - depending on the size of the system, it hasn't necessarily be that expensive, if you upgrade only cm without call center licenses - and replace g700 with g450, then use cmapi. i think it may be rather cheaper than a hardware logger, either trunk side or extension side. they're really expensive.

 

[BIS]

Thanks dwalin, that is very helpful.