Lelio,

You could do that, but you would have to split out the channels on your T1.

Thanks,

Ryan

-------- Original Message --------
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2015 10:26 AM
To: Ryan Huff <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
CC: Cisco VOIP <[email protected]>,James Andrewartha 
<[email protected]>

>p { margin: 0; }
>
>OK, so have a few FXS ports reserved for alarm outbound calling. That could 
>work, but I was hoping to capitalize on the existing PRI connection.
>
>---
>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
>Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
>Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
>University of Guelph
>
>519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
>[email protected]
>www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
>Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
>Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1
>
>
>From: "Ryan Huff" <[email protected]>
>To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <[email protected]>, "James Andrewartha" 
><[email protected]>
>Cc: "Cisco VOIP" <[email protected]>
>Sent: Monday, March 2, 2015 8:48:20 AM
>Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
>
><!-- .hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { font-size: 
>12pt; font-family:Calibri } --> 
>
>Lelio,
>
>You could remove the mgcp service from the fxs port, then create your dial 
>peers (assuming your alarm only wants tone and doesn't need inward).
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ryan
>
>
>From: [email protected]
>Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 08:21:51 -0500
>To: [email protected]
>CC: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
>
>James,
>
>
>Does this mean you have an h323 gateway? Right now, I have MGCP, which I'm 
>guessing, precludes me from doing this. 
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>On Mar 2, 2015, at 7:51 AM, James Andrewartha <[email protected]> 
>wrote:
>
>With our security systems I have to remove the call manager from the call path 
>for the system to complete due to the nonstandard tones they send. From my 
>notes on how to configure this:
>
>
>On the VG224s:
>
>
>voice class h323 1
>
>  h225 timeout tcp establish 3
>
>voice-port 2/13
>
>  no timeouts
>
>dial-peer voice 23 pots
>
>  service stcapp
>
>dial-peer voice 99 voip
>
>  description h323 direct to voip1 for alarm number
>
>  destination-pattern 13451015
>
>  session target ipv4:10.101.0.5
>
>  voice-class h323 1
>
>  codec g711ulaw
>
>  no vad
>
>dial-peer voice 98 voip
>
>  description h323 direct to voip2 for alarm number
>
>  preference 1
>
>  destination-pattern 13451015
>
>  session target ipv4:10.101.0.6
>
>  voice-class h323 1
>
>  codec g711ulaw
>
>  no vad
>
>
>On the 2921s:
>
>
>voice service voip
>
>ip address trusted list
>
>  ipv4 10.100.0.10 255.255.255.255
>
>
>The AVG is 10.100.0.10, the 2921s are 10.101.0.5 and .6, and dial-peer voice 
>23 is for voice-port 2/13. These are GE security panels I think (which their 
>MAC OUI confirms).
>
>
>-- 
>
>James Andrewartha
>
>Network & Projects Engineer
>
>Christ Church Grammar School
>
>Claremont, Western Australia
>
>Ph. (08) 9442 1757
>
>Mob. 0424 160 877
>
>
>From: Justin Steinberg <[email protected]>
>Date: Monday, 2 March 2015 2:14 am
>To: chris <[email protected]>
>Cc: Cisco VOIP <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
>
>
>Are you using local h323 or sip 'pots' dialpeers to route directly between 
>your FXS and T1 port?  Or is call manager in between the call due to MGCP or 
>VOIP dialpeers involved in the dialplan ?
>
>I doubt your issue is line voltage, since you can see the call being placed.  
>My guess is the DSP is processing the call and causing issues.  I've seem 
>alarm boxes use nonstandard DTMF transmission that isn't properly recognized 
>by the DSP.
>
>The 2800 supports DSP bypass by default when you route directly between ports 
>using POTS dialpeers.   You do need to have properly configured network clock 
>configuration.
>
>Can you send a copy of your config along with the output of 'show controller 
>t1' and 'show network-clock'
>
>Justin
>
>On Feb 28, 2015 10:33 PM, "chris" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Hey Ryan,
>
>
>We have a channelized T1 with channels split between voice/data so the voice 
>path is TDM. We have a VIC-4FXS/DID and for each of the two ports we have a 
>single copper pair with rj11 on both ends, one side going to the FXS port and 
>the other is going into alarm panel. The total distance from the 2800 to the 
>alarm panel is around 20-30 feet and its a direct run, no 66 blocks or 
>anything in between.
>
>Don't know model of the panel (this is another location) 
>
>
>From what I've read I think the problem is the default idle-voltage the 
>VIC-4FXS/DID is only -24V but based on the link I sent in the first email I 
>thought this could be reconfigured through the idle-voltage option but this 
>doesnt seem to be available when I try to enter it under the voice-port. When 
>I talked to the alarm company and told them I see the calls going through the 
>guy told me the alarm doesn't check the line state based on the dialtone and 
>he said that it uses the voltage to see when the line is idle, ringing, etc 
>and I think this is where the problem lies.
>
>
>Someone recommend this adapter offlist which looks interesting but the price 
>is a little nuts as it costs more than all the equipment we have installed at 
>this site combined. 
>
>http://www.homedepot.com/p/Viking-1-Line-Long-Loop-Adapter-VK-LLA-1/204399995
>
>
>Chris
>
>
>
>On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Ryan Huff <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Chris,
>
>Can you diagram the connections for me? 
>
>Are the copper pairs swinging off a 66 block before terminating to the alarm 
>panel or is there a direct copper path between the fxs port and the alarm? Are 
>you using an RJ-11 or RJ-14 configuration?
>
>Could you estimate the copper distance between the termination points?
>
>Is the pstn path for the VG SIP or TOM?
>
>Also, I would be curious to know if the alarm panel is a Simplex Grinnell?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ryan
>
>
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>From: chris <[email protected]>
>Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 07:52 PM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: [cisco-voip] FXS voltages / POTS compatibility
>
>Hello
>
>We have a location with a 2800 acting as a voice gateway where we have 2 FXS 
>voice ports going to an alarm system. We are using the vic-4fxs/did line card.
>
>We have the alarm company saying they are seeing the panel reporting Comm 
>trouble so we checked the call records and we also did some debugging in 
>realtime and we see the calls are going out and when we plug a test set in the 
>dial tone is good.
>
>In talking with the alarm company and researching we have come to believe the 
>issue may be due to the idle and ringing voltages. We came across this link:
>
>http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/voice/analog-signaling-e-m-did-fxs-fxo/28280-ring-idle-voltages-fxs.html
>
>This looked promising however when we are in voice port configuration node we 
>do not have the idle-voltage setting available. We tried several iOS versions 
>in 12.4 as well as 15.x hut no luck
>
>Is this line card not capable of -48 idle voltage? What cards are? Do we need 
>anything special as far iOS version?
>
>Ideally we want to have 2 voice ports that are as close to a standard pots 
>line as possible.
>
>We are a bit lost as its the first time we have hit an issue like this and we 
>are just hoping someone has been down this path before. If we have to change 
>line cards or even to another platform we are open to it as long if someone 
>has a setup that is known working in this manner 
>
>Thanks in advance 
>Chris
>
>_______________________________________________
>cisco-voip mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list 
>[email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>                                        
>
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Reply via email to