[asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
Jonn Taylor
jonnt at taylortelephone.com
Tue Feb 17 17:11:25 CST 2009
John Novack wrote:
> Jonn Taylor wrote:
>
>> Jon Pounder wrote:
>>
>>> Don E. Wisdom wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 2/17/09 2:05 PM, "Jon Pounder" <jonp at inline.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Jeff LaCoursiere wrote:
>>>> > What do you suppose we have as liability if we are asked to
>>>> install such
>>>> > systems? Is it the responsibility of the business owner that
>>>> orders the
>>>> > system to meet all applicable codes? If (god forbid) someone was
>>>> hurt in
>>>> > such a situation and the alarm didn't get passed because of being
>>>> > delivered by VoIP for whatever reason, does the system installer
>>>> have any
>>>> > liability?
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> >well here's a question - which is more reliable ?
>>>> >- a single copper line dialed on demand when there is a problem
>>>> >- voip or other internet technology, using internet connections on
>>>> more
>>>> >than one media (say phone and cable), voip connected to multiple
>>>> servers
>>>> >in a failover configuration.
>>>>
>>>> >its not uncommon for even a house to have multiple internet
>>>> connections,
>>>> >but how many buildings have phone lines that connect back to different
>>>> >CO's and fail over ?
>>>>
>>>> >The best bet if you really care about what you are trying to
>>>> protect is
>>>> >make sure the message can get out as many ways as possible, whether it
>>>> >be phone, voip, network, cellmodem, etc. Forget what regulations
>>>> >require, no one says you can't go further than the minimum if you
>>>> want.
>>>>
>>>> In a REAL emergency internet/cell is more likely to fail than the
>>>> phone companys pots network.
>>>> Cable/DSLAM etc only have about 4 hours of battery power. The CO
>>>> has a entire battery room which will last a whole lot longer. Not
>>>> to mention that it may stay up longer than your VoIP network. You
>>>> also have to take into account everything between you& the CO or
>>>> cable company. If just ONE thing fails you loose voip. Copper is a
>>>> lot more forgiving & has failover modes versus the phone co’s ATM
>>>> network or the cable companies “network” (or lack there of)
>>>>
>>>> --Don
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I don't know if thats really true any more, all the new areas around
>>> here have satellite CO's where fibre comes out to a box on the street
>>> with some batteries etc and copper runs out from there - great for dsl
>>> since its close, but at the mercy of whatever batteries are in there.
>>>
>>>
>> The dial tone for the phone line still comes from the CO. The phone
>> companies loop there copper cable in and out of the remote cabinets.
>>
> Obviously you are unaware of the very many SLIC cabinets and vaults in
> use in the US.
> Fewer and fewer "dial tone" comes directly from the CO.
> He is correct. These are remote D to A converters that are at the mercy
> of the batteries in the remotes, some last 4 hours, if they are
> maintained. In other areas the Telco's have to scramble with portable
> generators to keep service up. In other cases even the CO's can't
> outlast the devastation of an ice storm, and have to have power brought
> in, all assuming the local Telco is able to.
>
I am very aware of how the public telephone network works as our company
installs CO's for many different telephone companies all over the US.
Yes some of them install all of the equipment in the remote cabinets and
others do not. Some do fiber to home. They all have batteries that can
fail.
>>> maybe your alarm needs to report in since there is a fire in your phone equipment - what then ?
>>>
>>> I have seen every type of media go down or have problems no matter how stable - the only answer is have more than one so you always have a backup. Poles get hit, cables get cut, equipment breaks, its just a fact
>>> of life.
>>>
>>>
>> This is true, that is why most fire panels have to have 2 phone lines.
>>
>
> True, but when both lines are served from the same CO, over the same
> cable, it is really a false sense of security.
> In the US also, dry copper supervised pairs are scarce as hens teeth any
> more. Time was a copper pair was supervised with a DC current from end
> to end, and if something would open the circuit, that alerted the
> monitoring station there was a trouble. If there was a real alarm, they
> DC was reversed, and the monitoring station would react accordingly.
> Ancient history now. Dry pairs have disappeared over the last 20-30
> years, and many other schemes have come and gone.
>
Not true!!! The telephone companies today are driven by money. They
still can provide dry pairs. They just do not want to, its not in their
best interest.
> Few UL and NFPA systems allow VOIP though. Risk management still
> considers it unreliable, and of course, they are correct.
> Anyone who believes otherwise, ask your business insurance provider for
> a ruling.
>
This is very true. Anyone ever read the disclaimer from vonage?
> John Novack
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > j
>>>> >
>>>> > On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Jason Aarons (US) wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> http://www.iccsafe.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001650
>>>> >> ;p=1
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I can't see the Dept Transportation running copper to all the
>>>> motorist
>>>> >> aid boxes along the highway. I thought most of your alarm panels
>>>> have
>>>> >> moved to GSM/CDMA backup communications. I'd like to see a fire
>>>> >> marshall not give a permit for having a VoIP ATA or Vonage.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> http://www.iccsafe.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001650
>>>> >> ;p=1
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It's permitted in Chapter 8 2002 & 2007 "Alternative Methods of
>>>> >> Communication" and these still have supervision in accordance
>>>> with Chap
>>>> >> 4 and it's sub-section.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 8.5.2.2* Alternate Methods.
>>>> >> 8.5.4 Other Transmission Technologies.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 8.6.2.2* Alternate Methods.
>>>> >> 8.6.4 Other Transmission Technologies.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> There is nothing specific with regards to voice over internet
>>>> protocal
>>>> >> and leaves room to add new technology proposals with requirements in
>>>> >> future editions according to A8.5.2.2. or A8.6.2.2 respectively.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>>> >> From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
>>>> >> [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
>>>> >> LaCoursiere
>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 3:28 PM
>>>> >> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
>>>> >> Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Credit Card processing machines
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Jonn Taylor wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> If you are in the US, ANY life safety system has to be
>>>> connected to a
>>>> >>> dedicated copper POTS line. VOIP is NOT ok to use for this. It
>>>> is in
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> the
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> NFPA.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> What is the NFPA? Do analog extensions in traditional PBXes count?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> j
>>>> >>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by
>>>> http://www.api-digital.com --
>>>> >>
>>>> >> asterisk-users mailing list
>>>> >> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>>>> >> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -----------------------------------------
>>>> >> Disclaimer:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
>>>> >> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
>>>> >> designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
>>>> >> intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
>>>> >> this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
>>>> >> this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
>>>> >> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
>>>> >> notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
>>>> >> from your computer. Thank you.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by
>>>> http://www.api-digital.com --
>>>> >>
>>>> >> asterisk-users mailing list
>>>> >> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>>>> >> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>>>> >
>>>> > asterisk-users mailing list
>>>> > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>>>> > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>>>>
>>>> asterisk-users mailing list
>>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>>>> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>>>>
>>>> asterisk-users mailing list
>>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>>>> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>>>
>>> asterisk-users mailing list
>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>>> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>>
>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>>
>> asterisk-users mailing list
>> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20090217/bbfa8f98/attachment.htm
More information about the asterisk-users
mailing list