On Feb 17, 1:09pm, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
} Bruce Enders wrote:
}
} The simplest way I know of to explain these is to take the last
} letter
} (O or S) and associate that to where it will connect TO. So, an
} FXO
} connects to an Office (PBX or CO) and an FXS connects to a
}
On Feb 17, 1:19pm, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
} John Neiberger wrote:
}
} So, the FXS or FXO port on the router is labeled from the
} perspective of
} the device that connects to it?
Yes, it is.
} NO. It's labelled as what it IS.
NO! It is labelled as the opposite (i.e.
On Feb 17, 11:35am, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
}
} I learned voice from Randy Fischer, a brilliant engineer and helpful
teacher
} who works for Advanced Network Information, a Cisco training partner. Well,
} at least he used to work there. I haven't talked to him in ages.
}
} His way to help
On Feb 17, 11:30am, Chuck's Long Road wrote:
}
} The Cisco Call Manager Fundamentals book makes the rather brief assertion
} that FXS ports provide connection to loop-start or ground-start telephone
} lines, ... ( PBX ) ports, and other analogue telephone devices. FXO ports
} provide connection
On Feb 17, 10:46am, Chuck's Long Road wrote:
}
} In other words, an analog telephone set is an FXO device, and therefore
No, an analogue telephone is an FXS device (an Office is what the
telco has). The ports are named for the type of device that plugs into
them.
} Similarly, a PBX, or a
On Feb 17, 2:01pm, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
} Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
} John Neiberger wrote:
}
} So, the FXS or FXO port on the router is labeled from the
} perspective of the device that connects to it?
}
} NO. It's labelled as what it IS.
}
} In other words, a
On Feb 17, 4:46pm, Chuck's Long Road wrote:
}
} so far as I know, this will not work. Cisco's IP phones are ethernet
} devices, and must connect to a switch port. Well, you could use a hub if
Yes.
} IP phones are more akin to PC's, servers, etc, and you can't plug a PC into
} either an
iday, September 27, 2002 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: OT: FXO FXS terminology - comments? [7:54331]
[...]
Yes, you connect a phone to a router's FXS port. That's not
because
the
phone is a station, however. (That's what the NO referred to.)
It's
becaue
the phone is an FXO d
That sounds great and makes more sense now! I always like reading your posts
:-)
I always confuse which device plugs into which port. I remember it like this:
Plug phone or Station into FXS (where Station=S)
Plug PBX/CO into FXO (where Office=0)
- Jennifer
Message Posted at:
This has always been confusing to me. I think that the phone would be
considered a station and should be an FXS device, while the upstream
connection (thinking of Central OFFICE here) should be an FXO. :-) But
that would be backwards from how it really is. I think. If I were to
install Cisco
I did some quick looks into a couple of books I have to see what they say.
Scott Keagy's book Integrating Voice and Data Networks has nothing to say
about FXO and FXS in particular.
The Cisco Call Manager Fundamentals book makes the rather brief assertion
that FXS ports provide connection to
Yes, I think that's a great way to explain it. It helps with the telephony
example as well as helps newbies learning DTE/DCE. There's a discussion
about DTE/DCE going on right now in the Associates group. I was thinking
about using a telephone example to try to help.
I learned voice from Randy
: FXO FXS terminology - comments? [7:54331]
That sounds great and makes more sense now! I always like reading your posts
:-)
I always confuse which device plugs into which port. I remember it like
this:
Plug phone or Station into FXS (where Station=S)
Plug PBX/CO into FXO (where Office=0
You can also connect DTE to DTE, as well as DCE to DCE, via null-modem
cable. So, analogy with FXO/FSO is not correct.
Sasa
Chuck's Long Road wrote:
Someone smarter than I made the following statements about FXO / FXS, in
order to help me understand real world connectivity.
That person
Chuck,
check out the voice over ip, frame and atm press book..its covered in
there..
Chuck's Long Road wrote:
I did some quick looks into a couple of books I have to see what they say.
Scott Keagy's book Integrating Voice and Data Networks has nothing to say
about FXO and FXS in particular.
Sasa Milic wrote:
You can also connect DTE to DTE, as well as DCE to DCE, via
null-modem
cable. So, analogy with FXO/FSO is not correct.
I can connect two telephones together too, with a telephone line simulator.
Also, to connect two routers back-to-back, you have to configure one to be
The simplest way I know of to explain these is to take the last letter
(O or S) and associate that to where it will connect TO. So, an FXO
connects to an Office (PBX or CO) and an FXS connects to a Station device
(Telephone, Fax, or answering machine).
As Chuck suggests, if you are connecting
Bruce Enders wrote:
The simplest way I know of to explain these is to take the last
letter
(O or S) and associate that to where it will connect TO. So, an
FXO
connects to an Office (PBX or CO) and an FXS connects to a
Station device
(Telephone, Fax, or answering machine).
The problem
John Neiberger wrote:
So, the FXS or FXO port on the router is labeled from the
perspective of
the device that connects to it?
NO. It's labelled as what it IS.
In other words, a station
connects to
an FXS port? And a PBX connects to an FXO port?
NO.
This would be the opposite
So, the FXS or FXO port on the router is labeled from the perspective of
the device that connects to it? In other words, a station connects to
an FXS port? And a PBX connects to an FXO port?
This would be the opposite perspective from what they use when
labelling their cabling, which is always
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
John Neiberger wrote:
So, the FXS or FXO port on the router is labeled from the
perspective of
the device that connects to it?
NO. It's labelled as what it IS.
In other words, a station
connects to
an FXS port? And a PBX connects to an FXO
: Friday, September 27, 2002 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: OT: FXO FXS terminology - comments? [7:54331]
[...]
Yes, you connect a phone to a router's FXS port. That's not because the
phone is a station, however. (That's what the NO referred to.) It's becaue
the phone is an FXO device.
FXS goes to FXO
Checking to see if my post is being filtered due to content or if there is
some other problem...
Chuck's Long Road wrote:
Someone smarter than I made the following statements about FXO
/ FXS, in
order to help me understand real world connectivity.
That person said to think of FXO / FXS
regular phone line, is it
possible?
- Original Message -
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer
To:
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: OT: FXO FXS terminology - comments? [7:54331]
[...]
Yes, you connect a phone to a router's FXS port. That's not because the
phone is a
I used to deploy small portable satcom packages for a living. One of the
things I was routinely asked to do was to provide local Tampa dial tone to
my customers no matter where in the world they traveled. So we would
connect a device known as a Multi-Rate Voice Card (essentially just a codec
PM
Subject: Re: OT: FXO FXS terminology - comments? [7:54331]
[...]
Yes, you connect a phone to a router's FXS port. That's not because
the
phone is a station, however. (That's what the NO referred to.) It's
becaue
the phone is an FXO device.
FXS goes to FXO and vice versa.
d
for
2600 and play with it. Will I be able to have a good voice lab only
with
that? Maybe a FXO card and connect it in a regular phone line, is it
possible?
- Original Message -
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer
To:
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 3:25 PM
Subject: Re:
27 matches
Mail list logo
