Re: AlarmNet reliability how can it go down with no notice?

[motley me <tommy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"alarman" <nospam@xxxxxxxx> wrote in news:47a65534$0$26085$88260bb3
@free.teranews.com:

> motley me wrote:
>> J.           <jsloud2001<removeme>@netscape.net> wrote in
>> news:dhfcq31d9rt4k3c49snviatbf7g4gd35fd@xxxxxxx:
>>
>>> On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 17:37:13 -0800 (PST), Roger W <allucan8@xxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Feb 2, 4:42 pm, Jerry <je...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> I use AlarmNet as my primary method of protection.
>>>>
>>>> Cellular and Radio were not intended for primary alarm
>>>> transmissions. If you are serious about your security, get an old
>>>> fashioned POTS landline and back it up with Alarmnet. Its still the
>>>> most reliable combination. I would not use voip if I didn't have
to.
>>>
>>> POTS is no where near the most reliable method of communication
>>> regardless of the backup used.  It is impossible to provide line
>>> security with POTS as required by DCID 6/9, UL2050, the NISPOM, etc.
>>> The most reliable means of alarm transmission are encrypted direct
>>> connections, two-way long range radio, and NIST approved IP
>>> communicators such as DMP's ICOM-E and Alarmnet's 7845i.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe, but he's responding to a home owner. Not many homeowners are
>> going to put in an encrypted dedicated line hust for their alarms.
>
> He knows that. He was flexing.
>

What? His ego?

--
Tommy Lee

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com