[cisco-voip] Alarm lines and CCM?

[Madziarczyk, Jonathan]

Thanks for the heads up Robert, I did find the document you're referring
to, and it makes sense.

I haven't found a national or state/county code on burglar alarms, but I
hear there is an ASME A17 document on Elevators, but I can't seem to
find anywhere that doesn't want to charge $200+ for me to look at it.

So if anyone's already been through the code on elevators and knows what
it says about the phone lines :)  feel free to pass on the info.

Unfortunately the alarm company here does not have pots lines and uses a
polarity line (leased copper at about $55-$80/mo) to send it's signal to
the police, so I'm working with them to try and at least get the pots
option.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Robert
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 9:34 AM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Alarm lines and CCM?

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 16:08 -0500, Madziarczyk, Jonathan wrote:


> Is there any precedent for running things like Fire and Burglar alarms
> and Elevator phones through CCM instead of using things like leased
> lines and pots lines?  Has anyone done this, and have they researched
> the codes regarding such things?

Electrically, they work pretty well, especially elevator phones.
Fire/burglar alarms can have similar communication problems as fax
machines do over VoIP channels, but generally I have had them work well
also.

The bigger issue is compliance with NFPA 72, the standards document
governing many things fire-alarm wise. You can get a copy of the
document at
http://www.nfpa.org/aboutthecodes/AboutTheCodes.asp?DocNum=72

The concern is that LEC provided POTS lines are, generally speaking,
extremely reliable. They are unaffected by power or data circuit
outages. A VoIP system can deny communications due to a failure at a
distant facility and where life safety is involved, it's not worth the
risk. If the victims don't sue, their insurance companies probably will.

I have been out of the alarm business for about 5 years now and my
experience is in Texas, but at that time, the state fire marshal's
standards required two "channels" of communications on any fire alarm
system and at least one of them was required to be a dedicated POTS
line, specifically prohibited from being on a PBX or other telephone
system. Most of the time, it was easiest to just use two dedicated POTS
lines, but we have used one POTS and one PBX line and still received
certification.

On the other hand, we had a huge bank chain customer that connected
their security systems to the aux port of the Cisco routers and sent all
security system communications over their own network, completely
eliminating any POTS lines, dialing, modems, etc and giving pretty much
instant notification of opening, closing and alarm signals to their
central dispatch. It was fairly elegant, but it was completely separated
from their fire alarm systems.

Robert


_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip