My personal thoughts are that any traditional alarm vendors that don't come out with a completely IP-based product are just going to end up getting smoked in the market. ADT is not "too big to fail" if they don't keep up with what the rest of the industry is doing. If they insist that potential and current customers of theirs maintain a POTS line just to receive service, with POTS (especially in residential) going the way of the Dodo, I think it inevitable that they will have their client base chipped away at by somebody else (or multiple somebody elses) that can deliver monitoring service over the internet, with customer premise equipment that has native Ethernet connectivity and an IP stack, etc. Such companies already exist.
I don't think that ADT (yet) has such a product, although I am pretty sure that they do at least have a wireless/cellular module you can buy that replaces the POTS interface at the customer prem. So people who don't want to pay to maintain a POTS line for monitoring could go that route, but then you are paying for a dedicated wireless subscription that is monopolized by the monitoring system...at least with POTS you can share the line with the monitoring system and get more value out of it that way. -- Nathan From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Alcantar Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 10:33 PM To: voiceops@voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] ADT Alarms Special Dialing? Has anyone had an in depth conversation with any of these alarm vendors with what there move is going to be with everyone moving towards packet based voice switching which you can pretty much guarantee will break modems in general somewhere down the line. I just recently ran into an issue with an alarm line, where yes we do have some lines running on calix h.248 back to a meta switch and routed out to our tdm tandem trunks. Our first thought was to look into the QOS make sure things are set correctly ect, after days of testing we found that the call being terminated on the other side of the tandem had qos issues. I can only see these type of issue increasing as time passes. Thoughts? Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / car...@race.com<mailto:car...@race.com> / http://www.race.com<http://www.race.com/> ________________________________ From: VoiceOps <voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org<mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org>> on behalf of Paul Timmins <p...@timmins.net<mailto:p...@timmins.net>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 9:42 PM To: Nathan Anderson Cc: voiceops@voiceops.org<mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] ADT Alarms Special Dialing? Especially curious if that Broadsoft by chance is hooking to a Taqua T7000 running RFC2833 DTMF. I know of some bugs if so. -Paul On Aug 27, 2015, at 00:22, Nathan Anderson <nath...@fsr.com<mailto:nath...@fsr.com>> wrote: Wait, weren't we talking about turning *off* both OOB DTMF (RFC2833) as well as T.38, because both protocol could potentially mess with either of the modulation schemes (DTMF and FSK, respecitvely) that ADT might use? If the Adtran 5000 does everything inband and you are doing PCM/uLaw audio end-to-end, it seems to me that looking to your MSAN for potential problems is a red herring. You said the TA5K is getting fed by a Broadsoft switch. How does the Broadsoft tie into the PSTN? If it's SIP trunks all the way down, how do you know that the Broadsoft (or even something upstream of it...whatever sits between it and something TDM) isn't trying to be clever and decode the in-band DTMF it gets from the TA5K and re-encode them as RFC2833 signals before passing them on? -- Nathan Anderson First Step Internet, LLC nath...@fsr.com<mailto:nath...@fsr.com> From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Colton Conor Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 7:27 PM To: Paul Timmins Cc: voiceops@voiceops.org<mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] ADT Alarms Special Dialing? Know anything about other vendors besides Adtran and Zhone? What about Calix and ALU? Do their POTs/Combo cards support T.38 and RFC-2833? On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Paul Timmins <p...@timmins.net<mailto:p...@timmins.net>> wrote: On 08/10/2015 06:36 PM, Colton Conor wrote: Paul, So is this just a limitation of Adtran's implementation of SIP on the 5000, or are all MSAN's from Vendors like Calix, Zhone, and ALU the same way? Specific to the 5k. We have some older Zhone equipment that does T.38 and RFC-2833 and mid call re-invites just fine. It crashes the web interface hard when we try an MLT, but such is life. -Paul _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org<mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
