[Asterisk-Dev] OT - Regulatory hurdles for Zaptel and Japanese PRI

[John Todd]

At 3:56 AM +0900 on 9/9/04, Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists wrote:
>On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 12:16:30 -0500, Steven Critchfield
><critch at basesys.com> wrote:
>>
>>  While I am certain it could be possible to write a asterisk stand in
>>  application to hook up the J1 modified libpri to the zapata card for
>>  testing, would that be sufficient for when you take out the stand in
>>  code and put asterisk back in it's place?
>
>The honest answer to that is "I don't know".
>
>For anyone interested in Japanese PRI here is the URL to NTT's specs
>(in English) ...
>
>http://www.ntt-east.co.jp/ISDN/tech/spec/espec/index.html
[snip]


So, I think someone had suggested before (a long, long time ago) that 
some other "filter" could be used to legalize connection of Asterisk 
to the PSTN in Japan.  This may not actually work in practice, but 
perhaps two back-to-back J1 CSU/DSU units would serve the purpose.


(PSTN) -> dmarc -> RJ-45 -> CSU/DSU -> v.35 cable -> CSU/DSU -> RJ-45 -> T100P

The piece of equipment that is connecting to the PSTN is a legally 
certified (and hopefully relatively low-cost) item, which would then 
just convert the signal to V.35 high-speed serial data.  Then, that 
cable would run to another CSU/DSU which would reverse the process, 
and from there right into the Asterisk card.  This is certainly 
breaking the spirit of the laws, but perhaps not the letter of the 
law.  In reality, it would be like connecting an Asterisk server to 
your PBX - is that permitted?  If the answer is "Yes" then I can't 
see how this configuration would be illegal, but of course regional 
legal issues change with the wind in protectionist environments.

While this is not the "right" solution, it certainly could be 
implemented almost immediately.  If a less expensive platform could 
be found for "conversion" of signals, then maybe that would just be 
the additional expected cost of doing business in Japan and the 
strains of J1 certification would not be required, though the 
development cycle of supporting J1 would still need to happen (unless 
the CSU/DSUs could also be made to convert between J1 and T1/E1, but 
that seems to be asking a lot.)

JT