Re: [cisco-voip] Automated PSTN ingress call regression testing?

[Anthony Holloway]

Even if you do the Free IP PBX or Twilio API, you're only calling from one
carrier.  In the scenario you described, you mentioned:

"Verizon wireless customers cannot call Sprint toll free numbers from area
code 555"

Which is very specific.  Would you imagine that you would have owned a 555
number on Verizon to have caught that scenario faster?  What if the area
code was 666?  Or the originating carrier was AT?  The different
combinations you would have to account for are very high.

If you only care about your edge service and inward, and not far end
carriers, then a Twilio API app sounds like a good plan.  Heck, you could
even just write a UCCX script to call out and back in via tromboning off
the PSTN.

I'm curious, what did you mean by "prone to issues," when referring to the
API?

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:57 PM Nick Barnett  wrote:

> A client has a need for an off site solution that will make test calls to
> their numbers and report when there are issues. I understand that this is
> very vague, but they are interested in hearing about any and all solutions.
>
> They have several SIP carriers and a nationwide presence, but the SIP
> trunking is centralized. They've had enough issues with one DID service
> failing and their customers having to report the issue. Ideally, the SIP
> providers would be able to automatically do "something" when they stop
> receiving options pings, or when a certain sip response is received... but
> it doesn't work that way with the behemoth phone companies.
>
> The way it works now is that MOST issues are able to be caught
> successfully with internal monitoring... but others such certain NPA-NXX
> can't call another NPA-NXX, or carrier interconnects such as "Verizon
> wireless customers cannot call Sprint toll free numbers from area code
> 555"  These odd scenarios are what we are looking to solve. I understand
> this is potentially huge, but I think if we could automate calls to about
> 10 different numbers, that would cover enough of the ingress and carrier
> combinations that it would make a HUGE difference.
>
> I've thought of spinning up an Asterisk and somehow automating the echo
> test feature. I've also thought about using the Twilio API to test if calls
> are successful. Both of these are complicated and prone to issues... so if
> there is a hosted or cloud solution that is already available, please let
> me know.
>
> Any suggestions or more than welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Anthony Holloway]

Oh I see.  Yeah, government ignorance aside, I would say it is.

So, Spark does support 911 calls today?

If so, what's there to change?  The law seems to be written such that, as
long as the system is configured for direct 911 access, before being
"installed,"  you're fine.  The "installed" word might be confusing for
some, but I read that as being the same as "in production."  Then of course
you have to define "in production,"  which, does that include training room
phones, pilot users, beta testers, etc.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:17 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:

> If this is to apply to multi line telephone systems at large, is the Spark
> Cloud not a MLTS?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 7, 2018, at 22:12, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Can you not call 911 from Spark?  Or did I miss what "this" is in your
> context?
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
>> I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?
>>
>>
>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Ryan Huff]

If this is to apply to multi line telephone systems at large, is the Spark 
Cloud not a MLTS?

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 7, 2018, at 22:12, Anthony Holloway 
> wrote:

Can you not call 911 from Spark?  Or did I miss what "this" is in your context?

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM Ryan Huff 
> wrote:
I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?


https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar

Sent from my iPhone
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Ryan Huff]

Legal language aside, I see this as a HUGE area for VARs to get into civil 
torts with customers.

Ideally the end customer is the true owner and stakeholder of the MLTS however; 
when levied with a government fine (presumably how it would be handled), due to 
e911 malfeasance, who was the last one to touch it?

Document everything, get sign off on everything and proceed with caution :) 
brothers and sisters.

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 7, 2018, at 22:10, Anthony Holloway 
> wrote:

I'd be cautious with this one.

1) You penalize actual emergency calls from connecting as quickly as possible.  
Do you really want to be the person responsible for that?

2) You penalize the entire cluster by changing a global parameter, for the 
occasional accidental 911 call.

I think a better solution is to solve the human problem.  Just like we wouldn't 
tolerate our children playing on land lines or cell phones calling 911 (even my 
son has done it), we shouldn't tolerate adults doing it either.

Failing that, switch your PSTN trunk access code to another digit.  8 seems to 
be a popular second choice.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:41 PM NateCCIE 
> wrote:
This might be a good time to talk about my favorite way to enable 911.

Set the interdigit timeout to a small value, like 3-5 seconds.  Then create a 
911 route pattern, and a 911! Pattern, that does not route to 911.  If the user 
dials 911 and stops, the call connects.  If they keep dialing which usually 
what happens on a miss-dial, they get whatever your 911! Pattern is configured 
to do, usually I like block this pattern.

-Nate

From: Bill Talley >
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 2:22 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch 
>
Cc: NateCCIE >; Ryan Huff 
>; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911

Seems like there's two key aspects we need to be concerned with.  1) As I think 
Matthew is pointing out, notifications are only required if notifications are a 
native feature available "without improvement", i.e. add-on components.  2)  We 
now MUST configure direct 911 access without regard to customer complaints or 
PSAP complaints about accidental 911 calls.

To answer your question Matthew, I have only ever used CER and Singlewire for 
notifications, sorry I can't provide more feedback.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
> 
wrote:
As far as I know that feature doesn’t notify anyone internally.
The part of the law I’m referring to is this:

“A person engaged in the business of installing, managing, or operating 
multi-line telephone systems shall, in installing, managing, or operating such 
a system for use in the United States, configure the system to provide a 
notification to a central location at the facility where the system is 
installed or to another person or organization regardless of location, if the 
system is able to be configured to provide the notification without an 
improvement to the hardware or software of the system.”





Matthew Loraditch

Sr. Network Engineer


p: 443.541.1518



w: www.heliontechnologies.com

 |

e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com






















From: NateCCIE [mailto:natec...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:58 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch 
>; 
'Ryan Huff' >; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] e911

Um, I thought it did.

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200452-Usage-of-Native-Emergency-Call-Routing-F.html


From: cisco-voip 
> 
On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:36 PM
To: Ryan Huff >; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911

To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications built 
in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone know of 
options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs would monitor 
up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be notified would probably 
be fewer than 50.




Matthew Loraditch

Sr. 

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Anthony Holloway]

I'd be cautious with this one.

1) You penalize actual emergency calls from connecting as quickly as
possible.  Do you really want to be the person responsible for that?

2) You penalize the entire cluster by changing a global parameter, for the
occasional accidental 911 call.

I think a better solution is to solve the human problem.  Just like we
wouldn't tolerate our children playing on land lines or cell phones calling
911 (even my son has done it), we shouldn't tolerate adults doing it either.

Failing that, switch your PSTN trunk access code to another digit.  8 seems
to be a popular second choice.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:41 PM NateCCIE  wrote:

> This might be a good time to talk about my favorite way to enable 911.
>
>
>
> Set the interdigit timeout to a small value, like 3-5 seconds.  Then
> create a 911 route pattern, and a 911! Pattern, that does not route to
> 911.  If the user dials 911 and stops, the call connects.  If they keep
> dialing which usually what happens on a miss-dial, they get whatever your
> 911! Pattern is configured to do, usually I like block this pattern.
>
>
>
> -Nate
>
>
>
> *From:* Bill Talley 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 2:22 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch 
> *Cc:* NateCCIE ; Ryan Huff ;
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> Seems like there's two key aspects we need to be concerned with.  1) As I
> think Matthew is pointing out, notifications are only required if
> notifications are a native feature available "without improvement", i.e.
> add-on components.  2)  We now MUST configure direct 911 access without
> regard to customer complaints or PSAP complaints about accidental 911 calls.
>
>
>
> To answer your question Matthew, I have only ever used CER and Singlewire
> for notifications, sorry I can't provide more feedback.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Matthew Loraditch <
> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
> As far as I know that feature doesn’t notify anyone internally.
>
> The part of the law I’m referring to is this:
>
>
>
> *“A person engaged in the business of installing, managing, or operating
> multi-line telephone systems shall, in installing, managing, or operating
> such a system for use in the United States, configure the system to provide
> a notification to a central location at the facility where the system is
> installed or to another person or organization regardless of location, if
> the system is able to be configured to provide the notification without an
> improvement to the hardware or software of the system.”*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Loraditch*
>
> *Sr. Network Engineer*
>
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com* 
>
>  |
>
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
>
> [image: image001.png]
>
> 
> [image: image002.png]
>
> 
> [image: image003.png]
>
> 
> [image: image004.png]
>
>
>
> *From:* NateCCIE [mailto:natec...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:58 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch ; 'Ryan Huff' <
> ryanh...@outlook.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* RE: [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> Um, I thought it did.
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200452-Usage-of-Native-Emergency-Call-Routing-F.html
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Matthew
> Loraditch
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:36 PM
> *To:* Ryan Huff ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications
> built in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone
> know of options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs
> would monitor up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be
> notified would probably be fewer than 50.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Loraditch*
>
> *Sr. Network Engineer*
>
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com* 
>
>  |
>
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
>
> [image: image001.png]
>
> 
> [image: image002.png]
>
> 
> [image: image003.png]
>
> 
> [image: image004.png]
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net
> ] *On Behalf Of *Ryan Huff
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:11 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> I wonder 

Re: [cisco-voip] Automated PSTN ingress call regression testing?

[Kent Roberts]

I’d have to look but rtmt might be able to report if calls fall below x value   
If so that would be a really quick step while you look at options


Kent

> On Mar 7, 2018, at 12:56, Nick Barnett  wrote:
> 
> A client has a need for an off site solution that will make test calls to 
> their numbers and report when there are issues. I understand that this is 
> very vague, but they are interested in hearing about any and all solutions.
> 
> They have several SIP carriers and a nationwide presence, but the SIP 
> trunking is centralized. They've had enough issues with one DID service 
> failing and their customers having to report the issue. Ideally, the SIP 
> providers would be able to automatically do "something" when they stop 
> receiving options pings, or when a certain sip response is received... but it 
> doesn't work that way with the behemoth phone companies.
> 
> The way it works now is that MOST issues are able to be caught successfully 
> with internal monitoring... but others such certain NPA-NXX can't call 
> another NPA-NXX, or carrier interconnects such as "Verizon wireless customers 
> cannot call Sprint toll free numbers from area code 555"  These odd scenarios 
> are what we are looking to solve. I understand this is potentially huge, but 
> I think if we could automate calls to about 10 different numbers, that would 
> cover enough of the ingress and carrier combinations that it would make a 
> HUGE difference.
> 
> I've thought of spinning up an Asterisk and somehow automating the echo test 
> feature. I've also thought about using the Twilio API to test if calls are 
> successful. Both of these are complicated and prone to issues... so if there 
> is a hosted or cloud solution that is already available, please let me know.
> 
> Any suggestions or more than welcome.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Tim Kenyon]

That's pretty close to accurate Matt. When we first started working on Kari's 
Law, the main priority was to remove the necessity of dialing any trunk access 
code in order to get to 911. That all started due to the death of Kari Hunt in 
Texas when she was being stabbed by her soon to be ex husband and Kari's 9 year 
old daughter was trying to dial 911 from the hotel phone and did not know she 
needed to dial 9 first to get out. She tried 4 times and finally grabbed her 
siblings and ran for help.


The onsite notification piece was written so that if someone in a hotel dialed 
911, the call would go directly to 911, but alert the front desk that "hey, 
room 301 just dialed 911" type of events. A lot of hotels used to tell people 
to dial something internally instead of dialing 911 and that call would go to 
theo hotel operator or the front desk instead of 911. Problem was, smaller 
hotels, middle of the night, one guy working the front desk and steps away from 
the desk. This requirement obviously extended to any MLTS system to provide on 
site notification.


And the third point of the law was basically to avoid that similar front desk 
experience. If someone dials 911, the calls should go to a fully trained and 
certified 911 call handler, not the dude at the front desk.


My company spent quite a bit of time working on and promoting Kari's law. The 
Hunt family are now very dear personal friends of ours.


Since we are on this topic of 911, if anyone would like to have a discussion 
with me on what some of the other vendors are trying to get into law that would 
end up costing every customer out there TONS of money to support, please reach 
out to me. I think it is important that everyone understand what some of these 
guys are trying to do that is only going to end up costing the customers a TON 
of money to implement.


Regards,

Tim



Tim Kenyon, ENP
President
Conveyant Systems, Inc.
Suwanee, GA 30043
770-339-1085
tken...@conveyant.com


This Email and any documents accompanying this Email contain information from 
Conveyant Systems, Inc. which is confidential and/or privileged. The 
information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named on 
this Email. If you are not the intended recipient; you are hereby notified that 
any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance 
on the contents of this Email information is strictly prohibited.




From: cisco-voip  on behalf of Matthew 
Loraditch 
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:37 PM
To: Bill Talley; Ryan Huff
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911


It refers to just subsection a which is the part that requires Cisco and other 
manufacturers and resellers to not build or sell a system unless it’s 
preconfigured to allow this when setup properly.



At least that’s how I read it.




Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer

p: 443.541.1518


w: www.heliontechnologies.com|  
e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com

[cid:image136887.png@FC71AD9B.2F65509D]

[Facebook]

[Twitter]

[LinkedIn]





 From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bill 
Talley
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:32 PM
To: Ryan Huff 
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911



Digging further, does this mean the law doesn't go into affect until Feb, 2020?



(b) Effective Date.—The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with 
respect to a multi-line telephone system that is manufactured, imported, 
offered for first sale or lease, first sold or leased, or installed after the 
date that is 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.



On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM, Ryan Huff 
> wrote:

I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?





https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar

Sent from my iPhone

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[NateCCIE]

This might be a good time to talk about my favorite way to enable 911.

 

Set the interdigit timeout to a small value, like 3-5 seconds.  Then create a 
911 route pattern, and a 911! Pattern, that does not route to 911.  If the user 
dials 911 and stops, the call connects.  If they keep dialing which usually 
what happens on a miss-dial, they get whatever your 911! Pattern is configured 
to do, usually I like block this pattern.

 

-Nate

 

From: Bill Talley  
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 2:22 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch 
Cc: NateCCIE ; Ryan Huff ; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911

 

Seems like there's two key aspects we need to be concerned with.  1) As I think 
Matthew is pointing out, notifications are only required if notifications are a 
native feature available "without improvement", i.e. add-on components.  2)  We 
now MUST configure direct 911 access without regard to customer complaints or 
PSAP complaints about accidental 911 calls.

 

To answer your question Matthew, I have only ever used CER and Singlewire for 
notifications, sorry I can't provide more feedback.

 

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
 > 
wrote:

As far as I know that feature doesn’t notify anyone internally.

The part of the law I’m referring to is this:

 

“A person engaged in the business of installing, managing, or operating 
multi-line telephone systems shall, in installing, managing, or operating such 
a system for use in the United States, configure the system to provide a 
notification to a central location at the facility where the system is 
installed or to another person or organization regardless of location, if the 
system is able to be configured to provide the notification without an 
improvement to the hardware or software of the system.”

 

 

 



 


Matthew Loraditch



Sr. Network Engineer




p:   443.541.1518



w:   www.heliontechnologies.com

 | 

e:   mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com









  


  


  

 

From: NateCCIE [mailto:natec...@gmail.com  ] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:58 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch  >; 'Ryan Huff'  >; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net 
 
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] e911

 

Um, I thought it did.

 

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200452-Usage-of-Native-Emergency-Call-Routing-F.html

 

 

From: cisco-voip  > On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:36 PM
To: Ryan Huff  >; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net  
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911

 

To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications built 
in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone know of 
options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs would monitor 
up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be notified would probably 
be fewer than 50.

 

 



 


Matthew Loraditch



Sr. Network Engineer




p:   443.541.1518



w:   www.heliontechnologies.com

 | 

e:   mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com









  


  


  

 

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan 
Huff
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:11 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net  
Subject: [cisco-voip] e911

 

I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?

 

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar

Sent from my iPhone


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net  
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

 

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Matthew Loraditch]

It refers to just subsection a which is the part that requires Cisco and other 
manufacturers and resellers to not build or sell a system unless it’s 
preconfigured to allow this when setup properly.

At least that’s how I read it.


Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bill 
Talley
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:32 PM
To: Ryan Huff 
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911

Digging further, does this mean the law doesn't go into affect until Feb, 2020?

(b) Effective Date.—The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with 
respect to a multi-line telephone system that is manufactured, imported, 
offered for first sale or lease, first sold or leased, or installed after the 
date that is 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM, Ryan Huff 
> wrote:
I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?


https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar
Sent from my iPhone

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Bill Talley]

Digging further, does this mean the law doesn't go into affect until Feb,
2020?

(b) Effective Date.—The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with
respect to a multi-line telephone system that is manufactured, imported,
offered for first sale or lease, first sold or leased, or installed after
the date that is 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM, Ryan Huff  wrote:

> I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?
>
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Matthew Loraditch]

And with Number 2, I believe that to be effective immediately, it’s also 
written fairly broadly as to who is responsible. I’d imagine there will be a 
ramp up before actual enforcement, but we are going through and verifying all 
clients and changing immediately, if need be.

Here’s the whole thing: 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/582/text For something 
legal it’s pretty plain English.

CYA!



Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
From: Bill Talley [mailto:btal...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:22 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch 
Cc: NateCCIE ; Ryan Huff ; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911

Seems like there's two key aspects we need to be concerned with.  1) As I think 
Matthew is pointing out, notifications are only required if notifications are a 
native feature available "without improvement", i.e. add-on components.  2)  We 
now MUST configure direct 911 access without regard to customer complaints or 
PSAP complaints about accidental 911 calls.

To answer your question Matthew, I have only ever used CER and Singlewire for 
notifications, sorry I can't provide more feedback.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
> 
wrote:
As far as I know that feature doesn’t notify anyone internally.
The part of the law I’m referring to is this:

“A person engaged in the business of installing, managing, or operating 
multi-line telephone systems shall, in installing, managing, or operating such 
a system for use in the United States, configure the system to provide a 
notification to a central location at the facility where the system is 
installed or to another person or organization regardless of location, if the 
system is able to be configured to provide the notification without an 
improvement to the hardware or software of the system.”





Matthew Loraditch

Sr. Network Engineer


p: 443.541.1518



w: www.heliontechnologies.com

 |

e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com


[cid:image001.png@01D3B631.5163BCE0]


[Facebook]


[Twitter]


[LinkedIn]







From: NateCCIE [mailto:natec...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:58 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch 
>; 
'Ryan Huff' >; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] e911

Um, I thought it did.

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200452-Usage-of-Native-Emergency-Call-Routing-F.html


From: cisco-voip 
> 
On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:36 PM
To: Ryan Huff >; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911

To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications built 
in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone know of 
options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs would monitor 
up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be notified would probably 
be fewer than 50.




Matthew Loraditch

Sr. Network Engineer


p: 443.541.1518



w: www.heliontechnologies.com

 |

e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com


[cid:image001.png@01D3B631.5163BCE0]


[Facebook]


[Twitter]


[LinkedIn]







From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan 
Huff
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:11 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] e911

I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?


https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar
Sent from my iPhone

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Bill Talley]

Seems like there's two key aspects we need to be concerned with.  1) As I
think Matthew is pointing out, notifications are only required if
notifications are a native feature available "without improvement", i.e.
add-on components.  2)  We now MUST configure direct 911 access without
regard to customer complaints or PSAP complaints about accidental 911 calls.

To answer your question Matthew, I have only ever used CER and Singlewire
for notifications, sorry I can't provide more feedback.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> As far as I know that feature doesn’t notify anyone internally.
>
> The part of the law I’m referring to is this:
>
>
>
> *“A person engaged in the business of installing, managing, or operating
> multi-line telephone systems shall, in installing, managing, or operating
> such a system for use in the United States, configure the system to provide
> a notification to a central location at the facility where the system is
> installed or to another person or organization regardless of location, if
> the system is able to be configured to provide the notification without an
> improvement to the hardware or software of the system.”*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
>
>
> *From:* NateCCIE [mailto:natec...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:58 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch ; 'Ryan Huff' <
> ryanh...@outlook.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* RE: [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> Um, I thought it did.
>
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-
> communications-manager-callmanager/200452-Usage-of-
> Native-Emergency-Call-Routing-F.html
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Matthew
> Loraditch
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:36 PM
> *To:* Ryan Huff ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications
> built in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone
> know of options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs
> would monitor up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be
> notified would probably be fewer than 50.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Loraditch*
>
> *Sr. Network Engineer*
>
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com* 
>
>  |
>
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
>
> [image: Facebook] 
>
> [image: Twitter] 
>
> [image: LinkedIn] 
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net
> ] *On Behalf Of *Ryan Huff
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:11 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Brian Meade]

That allows you to route calls using basic ELIN support but doesn't really
do any notifications like CER/InformaCast do.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:58 PM, NateCCIE  wrote:

> Um, I thought it did.
>
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-
> communications-manager-callmanager/200452-Usage-of-
> Native-Emergency-Call-Routing-F.html
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Matthew
> Loraditch
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:36 PM
> *To:* Ryan Huff ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications
> built in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone
> know of options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs
> would monitor up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be
> notified would probably be fewer than 50.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Loraditch*
>
> *Sr. Network Engineer*
>
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com* 
>
>  |
>
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
>
> [image: Facebook] 
>
> [image: Twitter] 
>
> [image: LinkedIn] 
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net
> ] *On Behalf Of *Ryan Huff
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:11 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Matthew Loraditch]

As far as I know that feature doesn’t notify anyone internally.
The part of the law I’m referring to is this:

“A person engaged in the business of installing, managing, or operating 
multi-line telephone systems shall, in installing, managing, or operating such 
a system for use in the United States, configure the system to provide a 
notification to a central location at the facility where the system is 
installed or to another person or organization regardless of location, if the 
system is able to be configured to provide the notification without an 
improvement to the hardware or software of the system.”




Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
From: NateCCIE [mailto:natec...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:58 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch ; 'Ryan Huff' 
; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] e911

Um, I thought it did.

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200452-Usage-of-Native-Emergency-Call-Routing-F.html


From: cisco-voip 
> 
On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:36 PM
To: Ryan Huff >; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911

To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications built 
in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone know of 
options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs would monitor 
up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be notified would probably 
be fewer than 50.




Matthew Loraditch

Sr. Network Engineer


p: 443.541.1518



w: www.heliontechnologies.com

 |

e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com


[cid:image001.png@01D3B62D.FF2B55D0]


[Facebook]


[Twitter]


[LinkedIn]







From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan 
Huff
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:11 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] e911

I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?


https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar
Sent from my iPhone
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[NateCCIE]

Um, I thought it did.

 

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200452-Usage-of-Native-Emergency-Call-Routing-F.html

 

 

From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Matthew 
Loraditch
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:36 PM
To: Ryan Huff ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] e911

 

To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications built 
in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone know of 
options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs would monitor 
up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be notified would probably 
be fewer than 50.

 

 



 


Matthew Loraditch



Sr. Network Engineer




p:   443.541.1518



w:   www.heliontechnologies.com

 | 

e:   mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com









  


  


  

 

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan 
Huff
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:11 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net  
Subject: [cisco-voip] e911

 

I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?

 

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar

Sent from my iPhone

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Brian Meade]

CER is still good for 911 notifications.

IPCelerate IPSession is another big player in the emergency notification
space.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:35 PM, Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications
> built in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone
> know of options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs
> would monitor up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be
> notified would probably be fewer than 50.
>
>
>
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Ryan Huff
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:11 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] e911
>
>
>
> I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] e911

[Matthew Loraditch]

To piggy back on this, while Cisco doesn’t have emergency notifications built 
in, as the law mentions, and thus they are not required, does anyone know of 
options beyond Singlewire that they are happy with? The installs would monitor 
up to 1000 or so handsets but the folks that would be notified would probably 
be fewer than 50.



Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan 
Huff
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 3:11 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] e911

I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?


https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar
Sent from my iPhone
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] e911

[Ryan Huff]

I wonder how cloud-based phone system like Cisco spark will answer this?


https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/karis-law-you-compliant-edgar-salazar

Sent from my iPhone
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] Automated PSTN ingress call regression testing?

[Nick Barnett]

A client has a need for an off site solution that will make test calls to
their numbers and report when there are issues. I understand that this is
very vague, but they are interested in hearing about any and all solutions.

They have several SIP carriers and a nationwide presence, but the SIP
trunking is centralized. They've had enough issues with one DID service
failing and their customers having to report the issue. Ideally, the SIP
providers would be able to automatically do "something" when they stop
receiving options pings, or when a certain sip response is received... but
it doesn't work that way with the behemoth phone companies.

The way it works now is that MOST issues are able to be caught successfully
with internal monitoring... but others such certain NPA-NXX can't call
another NPA-NXX, or carrier interconnects such as "Verizon wireless
customers cannot call Sprint toll free numbers from area code 555"  These
odd scenarios are what we are looking to solve. I understand this is
potentially huge, but I think if we could automate calls to about 10
different numbers, that would cover enough of the ingress and carrier
combinations that it would make a HUGE difference.

I've thought of spinning up an Asterisk and somehow automating the echo
test feature. I've also thought about using the Twilio API to test if calls
are successful. Both of these are complicated and prone to issues... so if
there is a hosted or cloud solution that is already available, please let
me know.

Any suggestions or more than welcome.

Thanks,
Nick
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] who's using SparkHub and Directory connector with WebEx

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

Just reaching out to see who's using WebEx with the SparkHub/CCM(?) admin 
console integration as well as using Directory Connector to administer webex 
accounts.

I'm hoping for some feedback as well as some time to review both apps with a 
screenshare to get my head around some conceptual issues.

There's a virtual beer in it for you.

Lelio


---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
Twitter and Facebook

[University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]

<>___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip