In a Cisco Unified Contact Center Enterprise deployment with geographically redundant central controllers, a new site is added with new redundancy requirements for Administration. Which option is…

Question

Options

• A1 - Primary AW, 1 - Secondary AW
• B1 - Primary AW, 1 ?Administration Client
• C1 - Secondary AW, 1 ?Administration Client
• D2 - Primary Administration Client, 1 - Secondary Administration Client

• A
  85% (22)
• B
  4% (1)
• C
  4% (1)
• D
  8% (2)

Explanation

Option A is correct because when adding a new site with redundancy requirements in a Cisco UCCE deployment, you need a Primary AW to serve as the main administrative interface (with local HDS database and full configuration sync from the central controller) and a Secondary AW to provide failover protection - mirroring the duplex redundancy model used by the central controllers themselves.

Option B is wrong because an Administration Client is merely a GUI front-end that connects to an existing AW; it holds no local database and provides no AW-level redundancy if the Primary AW fails. Option C is wrong for the same reason, and additionally lacks a Primary AW entirely - a Secondary AW alone cannot function independently without a Primary to replicate from. Option D is wrong because "Administration Client" is not a redundancy tier in UCCE architecture; stacking multiples of them does nothing to protect AW availability.

Memory tip: Think of AW redundancy like the central controllers themselves - they come in a Primary/Secondary pair. Any site with true redundancy requirements needs the same pairing: one Primary AW (active) + one Secondary AW (standby). If it's not a real AW, it's not real redundancy.

No community discussion yet for this question.