Re: DSC 832 on Cable VoIP

[mleuck <m.leuck@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 3, 2:26=A0pm, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 2:21=A0pm, mleuck <m.le...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 2, 11:04=A0pm, Jim <alarmi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 2, 7:33 pm, tourman <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 2, 6:09 pm, "Robert L Bass" <nore...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > > "Effenpig1" wrote:
>
> > > > > > I won't use anything but a POTS line for sending signals with t=
he built in
> > > > > > communicator...
>
> > > > > I understand the concern with all the problems that have come up =
so far.
> > > > > However, it appears as though all of the major carriers are going=
 to switch to
> > > > > some version of VoIP, even for what we now know as POTS lines. Ma=
ny of the
> > > > > inter-city trunks are already digitized and the rest are going th=
at way. Only
> > > > > time will tell what kind of hoops the alarm industry will have to=
 jump through
> > > > > just to get a signal down the line.
>
> > > > > > Any other phone service gets IP monitoring or cellular...
>
> > > > > We're getting a lot more calls for cellular backup and even for c=
ellular as
> > > > > primary these days. Most are not yet coming from residences thoug=
h. A couple
> > > > > of our regular clients operate remote pumping stations that have =
to be monitored
> > > > > 24/7 for pressure, water level, etc. These are for both fresh and=
 waste water
> > > > > facilities. It's surprizing some of the niches that alarm gear fi=
nds its way
> > > > > into.
>
> > > > > > Sending signals over anything other than a standard phone line =
with the panels
> > > > > > digital communicator opens you up to serious liability should t=
here be a
> > > > > > communications failure resulting in loss...
>
> > > > > A lot of that depends on how well you've worded your contract, bu=
t certainly
> > > > > it's better to avoid the loss than deal with the jury. :^)
>
> > > > > --
>
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Robert L Bass
>
> > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D>
> > > > > Bass Home Electronics
> > > > > DIY Alarm and Home Automation Storehttp://www.bassburglaralarms.c=
om
> > > > > Sales & Service 941-870-2310
> > > > > Fax 941-870-3252
> > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D>
>
> > > > RHC: I guess I'll try the 4/2 format as Nick suggested before I swa=
p
> > > > out the board. It just doesn't seem logical that the panel should
> > > > seize the line and dial out only under some conditions but not
> > > > others...you'd think it would work totally or not at all.....?????
>
> > > > I've sold quite a few of the Uplink 2530 cellular devices as a prim=
ary
> > > > means of communication, where the client didn't have a home phone a=
nd
> > > > had no intention of ever getting one. But at nearly $300 my cost
> > > > (including the 3 amp power supply, battery and transformer needed),
> > > > and extra monitoring costs, they aren't a big seller. Those that ha=
ve
> > > > bought, have looked at their ongoing home phone line costs, and fig=
ure
> > > > it costs about 6 or 7 months to pay off the unit; then figure the
> > > > extra ongoing $10 is still cheaper than a phone line.
>
> > > > I sell a lot of high end panels in homes where the cable phone serv=
ice
> > > > is the only service wired in there. It's going to start making me v=
ery
> > > > nervous if I have to wait until the job is done and only find out w=
hen
> > > > I go to put it on line, that it doesn't work. This is the first pan=
el
> > > > I've run up against that has exhibited this problem. I normally put=
 in
> > > > the SP6000 / 7000 / 5050 Magellan panels from Paradox and have neve=
r
> > > > had a problem....(yet). Their board technology is a lot newer than
> > > > DSC's so maybe that has something to do with it....(fingers crossed=
)-
>
> > > Since the beginning of this switch over to VoIP (in spite of all the
> > > warnings and trepidation) I haven't heard of anyone having a constant
> > > major problem with the cable company telephone service here. Just a
> > > note, those that have had problems were not using Napco. I haven't ha=
d
> > > any problems except for the following, =A0which have nothing to do wi=
th
> > > quality of signal. 1/ Cable techs back feed the telephone service to
> > > the alarm system and the alarm panel still senses telephone service
> > > but can't call out. I tell my clients to test their system before the
> > > cable guy leaves but sometimes they don't. 2/ In some areas, the cabl=
e
> > > service goes out in the middle of the night causing the line fault
> > > monitor to sound the alarm. Some clients I've had to remove the line
> > > fault monitoring option. 3/ At the beginning I had a few instances of
> > > not being able to sustain communication during a download. But that
> > > doesn't seem to be a problem anymore. No reports of alarm signals not
> > > going through.
>
> > > Bob, with regard to your problem, since you said =A0your problem was
> > > only on some specific signals, the following comes to mind: Why do yo=
u
> > > and DSC not think that Contact ID would work where SIA wouldn't? That
> > > is ... why wouldn't DSC recommend Contact ID first, before
> > > recommending 4/2?
>
> > I've had better luck with 4/2, it =A0works far more often than CID and
> > SIA although you'd think CID wouldn't have problems. And brand doesn't
> > matter, I've seen the same problems with Honeywell, Napco and GE
>
> RHC: Thanks ! Have you seen this phenomenon where a panel will send
> some signals and not others...that just doesn't seem logical to me.

It isn't, I've seen panels retry a number of times because they
couldn't complete a set of signals but not send a particular signal