[asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
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-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
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? 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-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
Jason Aarons (US) wrote: In general in the terminology for this stuff supervised just means the system its referring to not only knows when something bad is happening, it also is constantly told everything is ok, and timing out waiting for that ok is also an indication of a problem. There is nothing magic about it and there are many different ways it can be accomplished on various media that all satisfy the regulations, but in general a dialup on demand connection whether it be voip or copper does not satisfy supervised as a requirement. Contact ID is just one protocol, fsk is another that is basically modemlike. Most alarms can be configured for a handful of protocols. There is even a channel for asterisk made for receiving one of them (I forget which) and I think its nextalarm.com that is using it for their monitoring with voip boxes. 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-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
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. 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-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
I think the BAT SIGNAL is the answer. POTS lines have their issues as well - how many times did we redial to get into our ISP's in the mid nineties? I have trouble believing the fire code actually spells out that dedicated POTS lines must be used. Regradless I think another hold harmless just made it into my service contract. j On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Jon Pounder 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. 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-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
On 2/17/09 2:05 PM, Jon Pounder j...@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 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-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Don E. Wisdom wrote: 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) This depends heavily on where you are. In the Virgin Islands the most reliable Internet access is served wireless, with dedicated radios on the roof. Everyone has a diesel generator because the power goes out all the time. The phone company (that happens to be digging itself out of chapter 11 right now) has just as bad a reputation, and the last time there was a bad hurricane, the only service that was working was the Internet link. Of course when your diesel runs out you are SOL... 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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
Don E. Wisdom wrote: On 2/17/09 2:05 PM, Jon Pounder j...@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. 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. 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-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
Jeff LaCoursiere wrote: I think the BAT SIGNAL is the answer. POTS lines have their issues as well - how many times did we redial to get into our ISP's in the mid nineties? I have trouble believing the fire code actually spells out that dedicated POTS lines must be used. its the supervised that is relevent, not dedicated,. its not used as a dialup line, basically its just connected period and if it goes away for whatever reason the monitoring station knows immediately. In Canada the technology is called DVACS and its basically just modems on the ends of a dry copper pair, not sure what its called elsewhere. I think at the monitoring station the dry pairs are not really dry but aggregated into some Supermodem kind of like the t1 equivalent of pots lines, I don't really know though. The technology is definately on the way out, and being replaced with the tcp based stuff to accomplish the same thing. Regradless I think another hold harmless just made it into my service contract. j On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Jon Pounder 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. 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-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@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:
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
Jon Pounder wrote: Don E. Wisdom wrote: On 2/17/09 2:05 PM, Jon Pounder j...@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. 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. 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-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@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 -
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
In Florida some new subdivision developers have sold the phone/cable/internet rights to a provider. They run fiber to each house and then have the uplink to provider which isn't a traditional telco. You can't get another provider as satellite dishes are limited in covenants and restrictions (CCR). I guess you could get GSM or CDMA service from cell provider or WiMax/LTE. It provides an upfront funding to developer for sewer/water costs. I'd be curios what battery life they have. I know the FCC mandated cell towers have more battery life after Hurricane Katrina wiped out communications in New Orleans for months. From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Jonn Taylor Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 5:09 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP Jon Pounder wrote: Don E. Wisdom wrote: On 2/17/09 2:05 PM, Jon Pounder j...@inline.net mailto:j...@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. 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. 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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
Jonn Taylor wrote: Jon Pounder wrote: Don E. Wisdom wrote: On 2/17/09 2:05 PM, Jon Pounder j...@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. 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. 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. 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.
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
John Novack wrote: Jonn Taylor wrote: Jon Pounder wrote: Don E. Wisdom wrote: On 2/17/09 2:05 PM, Jon Pounder j...@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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
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. Remote terminals are served by T1 or higher density carrier circuits, which can be either copper or fiber, often employing statistical multiplexing. While the DT may originate in the CO, it does so only in a data sense, not an analog POTS sense. The remote terminal actually generates the POTS analog signal, and is dependent on the life of the batteries in the box. They are good for several hours, maybe even a day, but definitely not weeks. Some RTs also have a DSLAM associated with them for DSL, but that is a separate topic and involves more batteries. This is true, that is why most fire panels have to have 2 phone lines. Which only catches about half of the problems, assuming both come through the same cable from the same CO or RT (and, in the latter case, the same carrier circuit). If a card fails or the I R guy opens or shorts the loop, the other line can take over. If the CO or RT crashes, or batteries die or cable gets dug through by a backhoe, guess what goes down! For serious mission critical circuits the engineer specifies two different operating companies and requires each to provide complete circuit details so he can insure that one isn't leasing lines from the other, or other scenarios that would be vulnerable to a single incident. Time was a copper pair was supervised with a DC current from end to end, Another variation on this theme used by central alarm monitoring companies of years ago was to have the telco provide a copper loop that included a number of customer sites. Basically each site was in series. At the monitoring station was the DC power and a relay. If all was well the loop was complete and the relay operated. Each site had a mechanical interrupter--a spring wound gear mechanism that pulsed out digits by breaking the loop momentarily. When an alarm condition occurred (such as water movement in a sprinkler riser) the spring would wind down, turning the gears and pulsing opens on the loop. In some cases, this caused ink mark square waves that could be counted on paper. The pulses were similar to rotary dial pulses in groups for digits, but slower speed. They represented the ID number of the sender reporting, which identified the customer and location. Of course, if anything in the loop, any sender, any telco drop, failed, the whole set of customers was unmonitored until it was fixed--which could be a day or two in extreme cases. I was called out once to service a site that had these. The one good thing about them was the only electrical requirement was at the monitoring station. Wilton ___ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] life safety system and VOIP
In Florida some new subdivision developers have sold the phone/cable/internet rights to a provider. They run fiber to each house and then have the uplink to provider which isn't a traditional telco. You can't get another provider as satellite dishes are limited in covenants and restrictions (CCR). Those CCRs may very well be legally void and unenforceable. Some years ago, Congress passed legislation which affirms the right of individuals to install over-the-air television antennas, satellite-TV antennas, and fixed wireless antennas, in areas of their property which (1) they own, or (2) they lease or rent, and which are part of their exclusive use areas. The exclusive use phrasing covers areas like private patios, private walkways, balconies, and some roofs and exterior walls - the latter depends on the actual business arrangement). The wording which explicitly permits antennas for fixed wireless signals says specifically that it includes wireless signals for telephone service or high-speed Internet service. Local and state zoning regulations, rental agreements, and CCRs which forbid the installation of antennas under these conditions are null and void. They cannot be legally enforced. These sorts of rules cannot even be used to require installation in ways which substantially increase the cost of an installation. There are *some* situations under which such CCRs can be enforced. For example, they can prohibit installation of antennas in shared areas of a building structure (e.g. the roof of a townhome complex, if the roof is considered common property of the townhome membership association). This is sometimes a problem in practice - e.g. an apartment dweller located on the north side of a building may not have any spot in her apartment which has a clear view of the satellites in the south sky. Same problem with wireless internet service - if you don't have a clear path to the provider's antenna site you may not be able to get a usable signal. As I understand it, the whole idea behind this legislation was to prevent landlords from signing sweetheart deals with specific telco and cable providers, and thus locking their tenants into a specific provider. Congress apparently felt that competition, and consumer freedom of choice, was in the better public interest. See http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html for details. ___ -- 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
