<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:odc="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:odc" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:rtc="http://microsoft.com/officenet/conferencing" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:Repl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/repl/" xmlns:mt="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/meetings/" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ppda="http://www.passport.com/NameSpace.xsd" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcs="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/soap" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:udcp2p="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/parttopart" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:dsss="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig-setup" xmlns:dssi="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig" xmlns:mdssi="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/digital-signature" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:spwp="http://microsoft.com/sharepoint/webpartpages" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:pptsl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/SlideLibrary/" xmlns:spsl="http://microsoft.com/webservices/SharePointPortalServer/PublishedLinksService" xmlns:Z="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Most alarm guys don’t like 4+2 because it doesn’t give the
activating zone (contact ID does, as well as the IP DACs). The DTMF in 4+2 is
very lenient on timing since it is only giving a unit ID (we did test for that).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Lelio Fulgenzi
[mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, November 04, 2009 3:07 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nick Matthews<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Tim Reimers; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net; Fuermann, Jason<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco VOIP and fire alarm phone lines<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
color:black'>Excellent summary Nick. Thanks!<br>
<br>
---<br>
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)<br>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>
"Bad grammar makes me [sic]" - Tshirt<br>
<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "Nick Matthews" <matthnick@gmail.com><br>
To: "Jason Fuermann" <JBF005@shsu.edu><br>
Cc: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio@uoguelph.ca>, "Tim
Reimers" <treimers@ashevillenc.gov>, cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>
Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2009 3:58:43 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern<br>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco VOIP and fire alarm phone lines<br>
<br>
The three most common problems with fire alarms are this:<br>
<br>
1) DTMF. A few of the signaling methods use very precise and rapid<br>
DTMF to communicate. This rapid method requires timing between the<br>
digits and for the length of the DTMF must be preserved. This means<br>
you can't use DTMF relay. This means you need to use SIP or H323 with<br>
no dtmf-relay configured. MGCP/SCCP does not have the option to<br>
disable dtmf-relay, and they're generally the protocol in use when<br>
these problems arise.<br>
<br>
2. Modems. Some of them do modem communication to communicate, and<br>
you need to treat them like fax ports, and make sure modem passthrough<br>
is configured correctly.<br>
<br>
3. Voltage problems. A lot of these devices were designed a long<br>
time ago when the average voltage supplied by an FXS port was much<br>
higher. Voltage has been reduced around the board, especially with<br>
VOIP devices that are on the FXS side. The VIC3-FXS has some<br>
sub-models that allow for higher voltage and interop with older<br>
devices. As well, there are 3rd party devices (like Viking I believe)<br>
that offer some voltage assistance on these devices.<br>
<br>
<br>
-nick<br>
<br>
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Fuermann, Jason <JBF005@shsu.edu> wrote:<br>
> The common two modes,<br>
><br>
> Contact ID: uses hook switching to communicate<br>
><br>
> 4+2 or 4x2: uses touch tone to communicate<br>
><br>
> Had to put a butt set on it to figure out why it wasn’t working<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> We have 4+2 working on our campus using VG224’s running SCCP. The fire
alarm<br>
> guys get comm. failures and blame voip, but it has always been a pair<br>
> problem on the copper. That being said, we are switching over to IP DACs<br>
> because they are more reliable (monitored every 60 seconds for
availability,<br>
> and redundant from the closet instead of a copper pairs across campus on
the<br>
> same cable, through the same splices).<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net<br>
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi<br>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 1:55 PM<br>
> To: Tim Reimers<br>
> Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco VOIP and fire alarm phone lines<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> There was some talk about this a while back and my research (mainly from
the<br>
> archives and contacting individuals) shows two things:<br>
><br>
> it depends on the protocol you are using (SCCP, MGCP, H323), and<br>
> it depends on the protocol/functions of the alarms<br>
><br>
> If you are using simple alarms, that simply call home with no active data,<br>
> then SCCP should be fine.<br>
><br>
> If you are using intelligent alarms, those that supply contact info for<br>
> example, then I believe you have to go with H323.<br>
><br>
> If you do some searching on the archives, you'll get some threads you can<br>
> look through.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)<br>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>
> "Bad grammar makes me [sic]" - Tshirt<br>
><br>
><br>
> ----- Original Message -----<br>
> From: "Tim Reimers" <treimers@ashevillenc.gov><br>
> To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2009 2:51:54 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern<br>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Cisco VOIP and fire alarm phone lines<br>
><br>
> Does anyone know if Cisco has any recommendations they officially make on<br>
> supporting analog telephony devices like fire alarm panels?<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> We use ATAs for supplying dialtone to fire alarm dialers, and we're
getting<br>
> issues with some panels getting "comm trouble" issues, and data
not getting<br>
> to the monitoring company correctly.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> The security vendors and the OEM manufacturers are saying "we don't<br>
> recommend VOIP for alarm lines"<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Our management is saying that surely Cisco supports this, and with the<br>
> correct configuration, they can make this happen.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> I'm looking for some official Cisco guidance (links to design guide<br>
> statements, etc)<br>
><br>
> that might break the deadlock, and either allow me to prove to the vendors<br>
> and OEMs that VOIP is indeed a stable technology<br>
><br>
> or, allow Cisco the graceful way of saying "it's best not to do
that"<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Anyone got anything to offer?<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> I'd imagine that there's a fair number of folks who've just decided not to<br>
> use VOIP for this purpose-<br>
><br>
> That's just not the decision here though..and I'm not the policymaker on<br>
> that level.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Tim<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list<br>
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> cisco-voip mailing list<br>
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<br>
><br>
><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>