Cisco Blogs


Cisco Blog > Collaboration

Cisco and Microsoft Lync Content Sharing

Cisco has a proven track record of supporting open standards, designed for maximum scalability and effectiveness.  Our mission is to enable any to any collaboration – in a simple, intuitive and user friendly way. Unfortunately not all vendors are adapting to open standards. And customers that have already made significant investments in proprietary technologies are asking Cisco to help them bring these worlds together. To solve our customers’ challenges, Cisco has decided to expand our industry leading interoperability to include two way content sharing with Microsoft Lync 2013. This will be a software upgrade to existing solution. Stay tuned for more information as we get closer to a release.

Tags: , , , ,

In an effort to keep conversations fresh, Cisco Blogs closes comments after 60 days. Please visit the Cisco Blogs hub page for the latest content.

18 Comments.


  1. Would love to hear more about content sharing with Lync.

       5 likes

    • Jacob Nordan

      Thanks for your interest in our solution. We are not disclosing shipment dates at this point in time but expect to hear more about this evolution as we get into the fall.

         0 likes

  2. looking forward, When is this available ? end of year ?

       1 like

  3. when is going to be available federation between CUCM 10 with Lync 2013 (Presense and Remote Call Control).

    Thank you

       1 like

  4. Why wait when Pexip already provides this in their VMR or as a Gateway?

       6 likes

    • Jacob Nordan

      There are multiple vendors offering Cisco/Lync interoperability today. The primary difference between Cisco’s approach and other vendors is that it ours will be a SW update to existing architecture rather than bringing in additional boxes/vendors/cost to solve this for a short period of time.

      Cisco already supports HD video interop with Lync 2013 + content sharing from TP Endpoints to Lync clients. We are now enabling Lync clients to share content with any standards based video endpoint.

         1 like

      • this ‘multiple vendors’ as you mention they are ex-TANDBERG two companies build by ex TAA employees after Cisco’s aquisitions. Pexip and Acano have full cooperation with Lync HD/GW/two ways contect sharing – any to any.

           0 likes

        • Jacob Nordan

          These vendors and many more offering services like this – and the two companies mentioned was not even the first ones to market. The good news is that it gives customers more options. However, with more services coming to market (Cisco being one of them), interop with Lync 2013 and standards based video is starting to become too crowded for differentiation. It will become a tick in the box.

             0 likes

      • Jacob, you’re speaking in riddles. Although I suppose you work for Cisco so this is the norm!

        Two items that need clarification:

        1. When you say your endpoints support content to Lync today, surely you’re not referring to BFCP content within people video? If so this really should not be regarded as Lync content support.

        2. When you say update via the infrastructure, are you referring to a “free” update to the TP server/bridge? Again this is free figuratively speaking, there’s a pretty large Capex to shell out here and most Lync customers will find this hard to swallow!

        Welcome your feedback and some actual detail on this?

        A

           4 likes

        • Not sure why it isn’t Lync content support, if only one way because Lync doesnt support BFCP. You get to see the content not sure what the confusion is. The fact other vendors and Cisco are choosing to support RDP shows their commitment to their customers to offer better interop scenarios regardless of MSFT’s hardline on RDP. Maybe you should be asking MSFT why they dont support BFCP. Its a fair question that no one has ever had a response to.

          You second free comment, be real here. Lync isn’t free either otherwise customers wouldn’t be paying SA or O365 subscription fees (and that is just the MSFT support costs not inclduing seperate partner maint agreements if applicable). Requirements are requirments and if Lync doesnt match them then a customer has plenty of choices including non-Cisco ones. Regardless of capex or opex, money is money and depending on the company some like to spend more of one than the other. So yes there maybe an investment up front but the same can be said with Lync so lets not hide the truth with a shell game of where the money comes from either.

             6 likes

  5. When will you expand your interop story to TMS to support provisioning and management of other endpoints? Polycom’s Group Series, for example.

    I am told that the API’s are there, but are not published or supported. THIS would be a huge stride forward in interop.

       1 like

  6. Why use Pexip when Acano has bi-directional content sharing while also providing direct dial utilizing their gateway functionality as well as drag and drop in the Lync client to a standards based endpoint. coCloud architecture will blow your socks off

       0 likes

    • Jacob Nordan

      See reply to Ashley Rudds comment. In addition, by solving this in the infrastructure Cisco automatically also enable Gateway Services for point-to-point calls. Without adding boxes/vendors/cost to the solution.

         0 likes

    • Because Pexip have better quality, they *actually* have the features they say they have, and they don’t come in a box.

         4 likes

  7. Hi Jacob

    Is inter domain federation supported for office 365 Lync 2013 assuming its configured to allow the CuCM 10 domain for federation ?

    Will the subscriber limit on VCS also be addressed, currently limited to 100

    Garvan

       0 likes

  8. I look forward to this new interoperability as customers and users stand to be winners. Cisco the best..
    Garry

       0 likes