[cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility

Mon Mar 2 10:44:23 EST 2015

Lelio,

You could do that, but you would have to split out the channels on your T1.

Thanks,

Ryan

-------- Original Message --------
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2015 10:26 AM
To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
CC: Cisco VOIP <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>,James Andrewartha <jandrewartha at ccgs.wa.edu.au>

>p { margin: 0; }
>
>OK, so have a few FXS ports reserved for alarm outbound calling. That could work, but I was hoping to capitalize on the existing PRI connection.
>
>---
>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
>Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
>Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
>University of Guelph
>
>519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
>lelio at uoguelph.ca
>www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
>Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
>Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1
>
>
>From: "Ryan Huff" <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
>To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>, "James Andrewartha" <jandrewartha at ccgs.wa.edu.au>
>Cc: "Cisco VOIP" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>Sent: Monday, March 2, 2015 8:48:20 AM
>Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
>
><!-- .hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { font-size: 12pt; font-family:Calibri } --> 
>
>Lelio,
>
>You could remove the mgcp service from the fxs port, then create your dial peers (assuming your alarm only wants tone and doesn't need inward).
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ryan
>
>
>From: lelio at uoguelph.ca
>Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 08:21:51 -0500
>To: jandrewartha at ccgs.wa.edu.au
>CC: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
>
>James,
>
>
>Does this mean you have an h323 gateway? Right now, I have MGCP, which I'm guessing, precludes me from doing this. 
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>On Mar 2, 2015, at 7:51 AM, James Andrewartha <jandrewartha at ccgs.wa.edu.au> wrote:
>
>With our security systems I have to remove the call manager from the call path for the system to complete due to the nonstandard tones they send. From my notes on how to configure this:
>
>
>On the VG224s:
>
>
>voice class h323 1
>
>  h225 timeout tcp establish 3
>
>voice-port 2/13
>
>  no timeouts
>
>dial-peer voice 23 pots
>
>  service stcapp
>
>dial-peer voice 99 voip
>
>  description h323 direct to voip1 for alarm number
>
>  destination-pattern 13451015
>
>  session target ipv4:10.101.0.5
>
>  voice-class h323 1
>
>  codec g711ulaw
>
>  no vad
>
>dial-peer voice 98 voip
>
>  description h323 direct to voip2 for alarm number
>
>  preference 1
>
>  destination-pattern 13451015
>
>  session target ipv4:10.101.0.6
>
>  voice-class h323 1
>
>  codec g711ulaw
>
>  no vad
>
>
>On the 2921s:
>
>
>voice service voip
>
>ip address trusted list
>
>  ipv4 10.100.0.10 255.255.255.255
>
>
>The AVG is 10.100.0.10, the 2921s are 10.101.0.5 and .6, and dial-peer voice 23 is for voice-port 2/13. These are GE security panels I think (which their MAC OUI confirms).
>
>
>-- 
>
>James Andrewartha
>
>Network & Projects Engineer
>
>Christ Church Grammar School
>
>Claremont, Western Australia
>
>Ph. (08) 9442 1757
>
>Mob. 0424 160 877
>
>
>From: Justin Steinberg <jsteinberg at gmail.com>
>Date: Monday, 2 March 2015 2:14 am
>To: chris <tknchris at gmail.com>
>Cc: Cisco VOIP <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
>
>
>Are you using local h323 or sip 'pots' dialpeers to route directly between your FXS and T1 port?  Or is call manager in between the call due to MGCP or VOIP dialpeers involved in the dialplan ?
>
>I doubt your issue is line voltage, since you can see the call being placed.  My guess is the DSP is processing the call and causing issues.  I've seem alarm boxes use nonstandard DTMF transmission that isn't properly recognized by the DSP.
>
>The 2800 supports DSP bypass by default when you route directly between ports using POTS dialpeers.   You do need to have properly configured network clock configuration.
>
>Can you send a copy of your config along with the output of 'show controller t1' and 'show network-clock'
>
>Justin
>
>On Feb 28, 2015 10:33 PM, "chris" <tknchris at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Hey Ryan,
>
>
>We have a channelized T1 with channels split between voice/data so the voice path is TDM. We have a VIC-4FXS/DID and for each of the two ports we have a single copper pair with rj11 on both ends, one side going to the FXS port and the other is going into alarm panel. The total distance from the 2800 to the alarm panel is around 20-30 feet and its a direct run, no 66 blocks or anything in between.
>
>Don't know model of the panel (this is another location) 
>
>
>From what I've read I think the problem is the default idle-voltage the VIC-4FXS/DID is only -24V but based on the link I sent in the first email I thought this could be reconfigured through the idle-voltage option but this doesnt seem to be available when I try to enter it under the voice-port. When I talked to the alarm company and told them I see the calls going through the guy told me the alarm doesn't check the line state based on the dialtone and he said that it uses the voltage to see when the line is idle, ringing, etc and I think this is where the problem lies.
>
>
>Someone recommend this adapter offlist which looks interesting but the price is a little nuts as it costs more than all the equipment we have installed at this site combined. 
>
>http://www.homedepot.com/p/Viking-1-Line-Long-Loop-Adapter-VK-LLA-1/204399995
>
>
>Chris
>
>
>
>On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com> wrote:
>
>Chris,
>
>Can you diagram the connections for me? 
>
>Are the copper pairs swinging off a 66 block before terminating to the alarm panel or is there a direct copper path between the fxs port and the alarm? Are you using an RJ-11 or RJ-14 configuration?
>
>Could you estimate the copper distance between the termination points?
>
>Is the pstn path for the VG SIP or TOM?
>
>Also, I would be curious to know if the alarm panel is a Simplex Grinnell?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ryan
>
>
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>From: chris <tknchris at gmail.com>
>Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 07:52 PM
>To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>Subject: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
>
>Hello
>
>We have a location with a 2800 acting as a voice gateway where we have 2 FXS voice ports going to an alarm system. We are using the vic-4fxs/did line card.
>
>We have the alarm company saying they are seeing the panel reporting Comm trouble so we checked the call records and we also did some debugging in realtime and we see the calls are going out and when we plug a test set in the dial tone is good.
>
>In talking with the alarm company and researching we have come to believe the issue may be due to the idle and ringing voltages. We came across this link:
>
>http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/voice/analog-signaling-e-m-did-fxs-fxo/28280-ring-idle-voltages-fxs.html
>
>This looked promising however when we are in voice port configuration node we do not have the idle-voltage setting available. We tried several iOS versions in 12.4 as well as 15.x hut no luck
>
>Is this line card not capable of -48 idle voltage? What cards are? Do we need anything special as far iOS version?
>
>Ideally we want to have 2 voice ports that are as close to a standard pots line as possible.
>
>We are a bit lost as its the first time we have hit an issue like this and we are just hoping someone has been down this path before. If we have to change line cards or even to another platform we are open to it as long if someone has a setup that is known working in this manner 
>
>Thanks in advance 
>Chris
>
>_______________________________________________
>cisco-voip mailing list
>cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip at puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>		 	 		 
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20150302/b29dfae3/attachment.html>