[Asterisk-biz] 911 Thread

Pete Largo pete.largo at asylumgroup.net
Sat May 7 20:51:07 MST 2005 

Interesting, I wonder how they would know? 

Cutting the line at the house is no different than having no phones plugged
into the jack(s) inside the house or the power brick being unplugged from
the wall for cordless phones...  Technically, there is no way for the alarm
company to know that the wire has been cut on the side of the house that I
am aware of (except to have the alarm connected to the monitoring system
24/7/265 in which case the line would be unusable for anything else)...



 

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Alex Pui
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 10:43 PM
To: 'Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion'
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-biz] 911 Thread

I have installed an alarm system at home and the alarm monitoring service
said if the phone line is cut (they use the phone line to pass the alarm
signal) then they will know that and will treat it as an alarm.

Would the PSTN provider do the same thing, you can now cut the line and see
what will happen and let us know :).

Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Pete Largo
Sent: May 7, 2005 8:25 PM
To: 'Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion'
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-biz] 911 Thread

IF and I do mean IF, I was a bad guy, and I was going to kick down your door
to do 'something' to you or your house, I'd cut the phone line on the side
of the house first...



 

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Mojo Jojo
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 10:19 PM
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-biz] 911 Thread

Well among other idiotic questions that the FCC or the politicians or
lawyers CAN'T answer...

Let me start here..

1- If my someone is kicking my door in and I have my handy dandy FRESHLY
mandated VOIP service from one of the only few providers left after the FCC
put all the others out of business....

and.. I pick up my phone, now feeling safe that the folks in DC have made
sure I can call 911 and keep this bad guy from killing me..

As I pick up my phone to call 911 and I have no dialtone or my call won't go
through because my cable internet connection is down AGAIN for the third
time this week, who does my family sue after the bad guy kills me?

Do they sue the cable provider because they unlawfully allowed my DSL to be
down right when I needed to make my 911 call?

Or maybe it's the FCC for giving me this false sense of security by putting
a law in place that can't possibly make my 911 as reliable as a pots line?

Funny how the FCC, politicians and lawyers want to put these laws in place
because the poor consumer doesn't understand that they aren't getting the
same 911 service that they get with a pots line. Seems like VOIP providers
are being blamed for creating a false sense of security which is exactly
what any laws would do.

WAKE UP lawyers, FCC and politicians, it's not a POTs line, it never will be
so how is a law going to make VOIP as reliable in a 911 situation?

Internet connections go down all the time and this is what the phone service
runs on!

Make all the laws you want, until you can make a law that will magically
create a 100% reliable and redundant internet, 911 will never work on VOIP
as it does on POTs.

ARGGG!!! They just don't get it!


I wish I had time to go to DC and hear the FCC respond to this..

Rant over, for now!

--
Private Label Wholesale Internet Access!
http://www.YourOwnISP.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul" <digium-list at 9ux.com>
To: "Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion" 
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-biz] 911 Thread


> Jason P. Talley wrote:
>
>> I just returned from DC where I had meetings with commissioners and 
>> their

>> staff of the FCC regarding the upcoming May 19, 2005 meeting.  As 
>> most of

>> you know there will most likely be an order issued regarding 911 and 
>> VoIP

>> providers.  My concern after our meetings is that the proposed order 
>> will

>> be very harmful to the VoIP industry, especially those providers 
>> without the ability or resources to provide 911 solutions.  It 
>> appears that if you provide VoIP services you are going to have to 
>> allow for any emergency call to be routed to the proper PSAP via the 
>> selective routers and allow for ALI via the database.  To my 
>> knowledge there is no provision that requires the ILEC to allow you 
>> access to the selective router and there is no IP method of 
>> interconnection.  This means that if you offer VoIP in a single 
>> market (ie you only have DIDs from one or limited rate centers) and 
>> your product is mobile (you can move it to different broadband 
>> connections) you will have to interconnect with all
>> 6600+ PSAPS natively in the US.  This totally ignores the reality of
>> having to pass 10 digit numbers instead of 7 digit numbers to the 
>> selective router.  This would require some type of innovation like 
>> pseudo-ani that the wireless industry uses right now  and we all know 
>> how

>> long that took to implement.  As you can see, this is a tremendous 
>> burden. The order essentially mandates the NENA I-2 solution in the 
>> next
>> 3-4 months without the tools to be able to do it.
>>
>>
>> Here at Nuvio we have invested some serious R&D into being able to 
>> offer a limited implementation of e911 in some of the rate centers 
>> that we serve, but it is far from being a perfect solution.  It 
>> certainly will not be sufficient for what we believe the FCC may be
considering.
>> Honestly, nobody could fulfill that right now.
>>
>>
>> While public safety is of paramount concern, and here at Nuvio we 
>> take it

>> very seriously, it is not an issue that can be resolved within the 
>> next
>> 3-4 months by simple mandate.  I expect that unless there are some 
>> serious revisions that go into place, this is going to be tough if 
>> not impossible for most VoIP providers to accomplish.
>>
>> We are mounting a campaign and I will be asking for help from those 
>> of you interested in participating.  I believe we have a 
>> responsibility for public safety, but any orders need to be 
>> technically and practically possible.
>>
>>
> Jason, thank you very much for being our voice with big brother in DC.
>
> This makes me wonder just how far the FCC intends to go when it comes 
> to voip termination for business. Let's take a look at some typical 
> non-voip phone system 911 issues first.
>
> 1) Does the FCC or any regulator require that the pbx switch handles 911?
>
> 2) If so, is it illegal to use or sell an old switch that doesn't 
> handle 911(or 9 for outside line followed by 911)?
>
> 3) If only up-to-date switches are legal does the FCC require battery 
> backup in case of power failure?
>
> 4) If battery backup is required, how much runtime is required?
>
> 5) When the switch fails for any reason(including exhausted batteries) 
> what are the requirements? Is there supposed to be a pots interface 
> with a

> red telephone always plugged in? Do all outbound T-1's and PRI's have 
> to include a pots interface for the "emergency phone"? Are we required 
> to have an extension jack with another red telephone on every floor 
> and within every n square feet of the building?
>
> Now think about adding voip to the above setup. As long as the system 
> has a single line or channel that the ILEC supports 911 on, what 
> difference does it make if we use voip for most termination. As long 
> as we are meeting the same requirements that go with a pbx connected 
> to analog/digital telco trunking, we are providing the same level of
safety.
>
> If somebody already knows the answers to my questions above, please 
> post them. Then we can draft something to send to the lawmakers that 
> makes it clear that the FCC is way out of line.
>
> One thing we can point out about residential and business users with 
> traditional pots lines: There are many who only have telephones that 
> require a non-telco power source. All those phones come with warnings 
> that

> the phone will not work during a power failure. Many people never read 
> the

> warning. Many others read it and never heed it. If a bad guy turns off 
> the

> electricity and starts kicking the door in, how do you call 911 when 
> you only have a cordless phone? I just checked 2 of mine to be sure. 
> Unplug the power and you can't make calls from the handset or the 
> base. So maybe the FCC needs to outlaw those. Future models will have 
> to also have a trimline handset with a relay that connects it directly 
> to the line when power is off?
>
> It looks to me like the FCC already allows some possibly dangerous 
> practices. They just want to beat up on the voip crowd.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Biz mailing list
> Asterisk-Biz at lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
> 


_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Biz mailing list
Asterisk-Biz at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz


_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Biz mailing list
Asterisk-Biz at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz


_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Biz mailing list
Asterisk-Biz at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz

More information about the asterisk-biz mailing list