Re: Starlink

[Jim Davis <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Thursday, August 26, 2021 at 12:41:58 PM UTC-4, Bob La Londe wrote:
> On 8/25/2021 6:58 PM, Jim Davis wrote:=20
> > On Tuesday, August 24, 2021 at 4:11:20 PM UTC-4, Bob La Londe wrote:=20
> >> Dear NAPCO StarLink Dealer,=20
> >>=20
> >> The NAPCO StarLink NOC is currently experiencing an intermittent issue=
=20
> >> related to outbound Verizon phone lines. This Verizon issue may delay=
=20
> >> the transmission of trouble, supervisory and in some cases alarm signa=
ls.=20
> >>=20
> >> Verizon has been notified and is currently addressing the issue.=20
> >>=20
> >> We are sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused.=20
> >>=20
> >> NAPCO StarLink Admin=20
> >>=20
> >> --- I'm still on somebody's mailing list ---=20
> >>=20
> >> --=20
> >> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.=20
> >> https://www.avg.com=20
> >=20
> > Yeah, Bob,=20
> > I got that one to.=20
> >=20
> > Here's the gist of the reply I sent to them=20
> > =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=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20
> > To whomever may be concerned.=20
> >=20
> > I presume that this notice I received refers to your outgoing lines for=
 calls being sent to central stations by your servers.=20
> >=20
> > But - - - - I would also presume that you have more than one and as a m=
atter of fact I would presume you had more than a few other carriers runnin=
g in parallel with your Verizon outgoing phone lines. RIGHT ?????? Like ATT=
, CenturyLink, Cox, Frontier, Spectrum, Xfinity?=20
> > If so, why should there be any "delay in the transmission of trouble, s=
upervisory and in some cases alarm signals" ? Why also, only "in some cases=
 alarm signals? If trouble or supervisory signals can't get through, what w=
ould allow an alarm signal to get through?=20
> >=20
> > After all, YOU are the weak link with the least liability in the chain =
of service providers involved with this alarm transmission service. However=
 in spite of that I would expect that you would have more than double the b=
ackup telephone service for any possible lapse by others in the outgoing te=
lephone line chain - - - - just because the rest of us out here are dependi=
ng upon you to provide us with a reliable service with all proper precautio=
ns being taken. AND BECAUSE WE BUY YOUR PRODUCTS !=20
> > RIGHT ??? ?=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > Jim Davis=20
> > @#$% Alarm Co=20
> >
> I interpreted it as local wireless service issues as Verizon dominates=20
> some markets and overloads their data network in some local areas. The=20
> reason I guess that is I get almost daily notices from Verizon on my=20
> phone that there are bandwidth restrictions and data usage limitations=20
> even though we never exceed our "unlimited" data plan or hit a threshold=
=20
> that should induce throttling. Well, when traveling we might, but its=20
> never been an issue.=20
>=20
> I don't know if its still true, but when I was still doing this Verizon=
=20
> used a totally different transmission format than the other cellular=20
> carriers. (Not counting resellers) This meant Verizon site radios=20
> couldn't switch to another carrier if the Verizon network was bogged=20
> down. I don't recall that any of the radios would auto switch carriers=20
> anyway. Fire radios had to hit two towers or they would show a trouble,=
=20
> but they didn't use two carriers. Has that changed?

It's been way too long since I stopped doing commercial fire systems so I d=
on't know the answer to your fire requirement question but - - - -=20
.
Re your referral to the "wireless" service,=20
.
The Napco notice specifically says " intermittent issue related to outbound=
 Verizon "phone lines" not wireless service.=20
So I presume(d) they were referring to the communication between Verizon to=
wers and Verizon servers or between Napco's servers and the central station=
s - - - both of which could be using "phone lines" =20
.
However, now days the term  "phone lines" is often used generically, so - -=
 - -