There seems to be more hoo-rah and hype around Lync and still, I think Cisco has aptly nailed Microsoft Lync as being immature. I have questions about Lync's ability to sync. Since IT wants to move voice to the data center and then add the resiliency by backing up the data center to another data center, this is where my concern and questions begin to focus, and in multi-site environments deploying multiple Lync servers.
Lync has an interesting component: Central Management Store (CMS), and this is a repository of management information including topology, configurations and policies. CMS operates in a single master to multiple replication systems with one master CMS on a server that updates all other servers. Every 60 seconds a task is initiated to determine if a change has been made by the CMS Master and if the change(s) need to be replicated to the other CMS servers. CMS is a critical component of Lync and requires high availability. In IT time, 60 seconds is a lifetime. In fact it could be an eternity. There's only one Master CMS so if it fails or there is disruption to any of the links to other servers, then it seems that Lync is going to be out of sync. What are those consequences?
My last post Lync: Don’t Tread On My PBX! questions Lync, keeping voice separate and the complexity and cost of building and then supporting Lync. Microsoft is using a proprietary video protocol, not H.264, an industry standard found in numerous mobile devices. Microsoft isn't natively using XMPP, another industry standard for IM/Chat and again, as Cisco noted: "The Microsoft offering relies on a Microsoft-specific variation of SIP/SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions (SIP/SIMPLE) and requires a separate gateway. This architecture supports only XMPP federation with OCS. The promise of XMPP delivering presence awareness to any web-enabled application is not supported through this Microsoft approach." Microsoft has built a PROPRIETARY solution with some industry interoperability and they've ignored two standards: H.264 and XMPP. Federation is lacking and Microsoft's declaration that PBXs are in decline is not news; and it's not because of Lync, although they would like you to think so.
Cisco made striking points and I think there are questions about the granular details of how Lync stands up during failover, disasters and even during a security crisis. CMS requires high availability in and out of the data center and to every Lync server in the network, then if there’s only one Master CMS what are the ramifications during failover and disasters, disruptions to links between sites? Lync is far from being "time tested" and proven.
Is Microsoft out of sync with the industry or is it trying to boost its "un-standard" as being the "standard" for enterprise that wants Lync? Then, I can't help but think that much of the song and dance about Lync is promotion. I read with anticipation comments about my last post. Whether you agree or not that IT and Voice (people, departments) are co-joined at the hip and unified into one happy family led me into some interesting conversations, and my comments aren't unfounded. The FUD out there is created when IT endorses a solution before mastering the art and then returns numerous times with ancillary fixes and workarounds. This is akin to the phone guy hearing, "are you here to fix the phones again?" This doesn't win customer love, free lunches or cups of coffee.
