[Asterisk-Users] Ha, just found a way around australia approvals......

[Steve Underwood]

Florian Overkamp wrote:

> At 23:52 9-5-2003 +0800, you wrote:
>
>> This may be true, but be very careful. In some countries such 
>> indirectly connected unapproved equipment is OK. In other places it 
>> is not. It can be quite hard, sometimes, to get a straight answer 
>> about what is allowed. When I lived in the UK many people said 
>> similar things were OK, but they were not (I think they maybe OK now, 
>> but not back then). The rules clearly stated that "equipment connect 
>> directly or indirectly" to the PSTN needed approval. The back of a 
>> switch is definitely an indirect connection.
>
>
> Thats debatable :) If the intermediate system uses galvanic separation 
> (i.e. use a transformer with 1:1 coils to transport the signal) you 
> are very likely to be home free. You can easily argue in such a 
> situation there is no real connection (directly or indirectly) between 
> the systems, they just transfer the signal via electromagnetic fields. 

By your logic modems would not need approving. They all use 1:1 
transformers, and some of thise are separately approved barrier modules. 
I've yet to see a modem that didn't need approval, though.

> This technique only works for analog systems though :) but there are 
> probably are alternatives ? 

The more indirect you make the connection, the more it fits the 
description of an indirect connection. So, they more the rules would 
seem to apply :-) Seriously, the indirect connection thing is usually 
backed up by detailed descriptions of what has to be approved. Any PBX 
made in the last 20 years uses a PCM core, so there is only a tenuous 
connection between any two ports.

Regards,
Steve