Voice over IP Cisco - Alarm lines and CCM?

Author

Alarm lines and CCM?

Madziarczyk, Jonathan

2007-11-02, 7:11 pm

Hey all,

I don't think I've seen this addressed so I thought I'd ask.

Is there any precedent for running things like Fire and Burglar alarms
and Elevator phones through CCM instead of using things like leased
lines and pots lines? Has anyone done this, and have they researched
the codes regarding such things?

Thanks,

Jon

Carter, Bill

2007-11-03, 1:11 am

We tell our clients to keeps these on POTS lines. This is standard
practice with other PBX systems as well.

________________________________

From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Madziarczyk,
Jonathan
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 4:08 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Alarm lines and CCM?

Hey all,

I don't think I've seen this addressed so I thought I'd ask.

Is there any precedent for running things like Fire and Burglar alarms
and Elevator phones through CCM instead of using things like leased
lines and pots lines? Has anyone done this, and have they researched
the codes regarding such things?

Thanks,

Jon

Toby Sauer

2007-11-03, 1:11 am

Hello,

In the upper mid-west, alarm companies will not allow their systems to be
connected to PBXs as their primary connection to the outside world. Some
companies will allow the backup circuit to go thru a PBX.

This is the case with ANY PBX, not just VoIP.

I suggest checking with the alarm company to see what their requirements
are.

Toby

_____

From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Madziarczyk,
Jonathan
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 5:08 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Alarm lines and CCM?

Hey all,

I don't think I've seen this addressed so I thought I'd ask.

Is there any precedent for running things like Fire and Burglar alarms and
Elevator phones through CCM instead of using things like leased lines and
pots lines? Has anyone done this, and have they researched the codes
regarding such things?

Thanks,

Jon

Jason Aarons $US$

2007-11-03, 1:11 pm

It's a general best practice not to have any dependencies on a PBX
during a emergency.

From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On BehalfOf Toby Sauer
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 10:37 PM
To: 'Madziarczyk, Jonathan'; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Alarm lines and CCM?

Hello,

In the upper mid-west, alarm companies will not allow their systems to
be connected to PBXs as their primary connection to the outside world.
Some companies will allow the backup circuit to go thru a PBX.

This is the case with ANY PBX, not just VoIP.

I suggest checking with the alarm company to see what their requirements
are.

Toby

________________________________

From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Madziarczyk,
Jonathan
Sent: Friday, November02, 2007 5:08 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Alarm lines and CCM?

Hey all,

I don't think I've seen this addressed so I thought I'd ask.

Is there any precedent for running things like Fire and Burglar alarms
and Elevator phones through CCM instead of using things like leased
lines and pots lines? Has anyone done this, and have they researched
the codes regarding such things?

Thanks,

Jon

-----------------------------------------
Disclaimer:

This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
from your computer. Thank you.

Robert

2007-11-05, 1:12 pm

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 16:08 -0500, Madziarczyk, Jonathan wrote:

> Is there any precedent for running things like Fire and Burglar alarms
> and Elevator phones through CCM instead of using things like leased
> lines and pots lines? Has anyone done this, and have they researched
> the codes regarding such things?

Electrically, they work pretty well, especially elevator phones.
Fire/burglar alarms can have similar communication problems as fax
machines do over VoIP channels, but generally I have had them work well
also.

The bigger issue is compliance with NFPA 72, the standards document
governing many things fire-alarm wise. You can get a copy of the
document at
http://www.nfpa.org/aboutthecodes/A...s.asp?DocNum=72

The concern is that LEC provided POTS lines are, generally speaking,
extremely reliable. They are unaffected by power or data circuit
outages. A VoIP system can deny communications due to a failure at a
distant facility and where life safety is involved, it's not worth the
risk. If the victims don't sue, their insurance companies probably will.

I have been out of the alarm business for about 5 years now and my
experience is in Texas, but at that time, the state fire marshal's
standards required two "channels" of communications on any fire alarm
system and at least one of them was required to be a dedicated POTS
line, specifically prohibited from being on a PBX or other telephone
system. Most of the time, it was easiest to just use two dedicated POTS
lines, but we have used one POTS and one PBX line and still received
certification.

On the other hand, we had a huge bank chain customer that connected
their security systems to the aux port of the cisco routers and sent all
security system communications over their own network, completely
eliminating any POTS lines, dialing, modems, etc and giving pretty much
instant notification of opening, closing and alarm signals to their
central dispatch. It was fairly elegant, but it was completely separated
from their fire alarm systems.

Robert

Madziarczyk, Jonathan

2007-11-05, 7:11 pm

Thanks for the heads up Robert, I did find the document you're referring
to, and it makes sense.

I haven't found a national or state/county code on burglar alarms, but I
hear there is an ASME A17 document on Elevators, but I can't seem to
find anywhere that doesn't want to charge $200+ for me to look at it.

So if anyone's already been through the code on elevators and knows what
it says about the phone lines

feel free to pass on the info.

Unfortunately the alarm company here does not have pots lines and uses a
polarity line (leased copper at about $55-$80/mo) to send it's signal to
the police, so I'm working with them to try and at least get the pots
option.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Robert
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 9:34 AM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Alarm lines and CCM?

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 16:08 -0500, Madziarczyk, Jonathan wrote:

> Is there any precedent for running things like Fire and Burglar alarms
> and Elevator phones through CCM instead of using things like leased
> lines and pots lines? Has anyone done this, and have they researched
> the codes regarding such things?

Electrically, they work pretty well, especially elevator phones.
Fire/burglar alarms can have similar communication problems as fax
machines do over VoIP channels, but generally I have had them work well
also.

The bigger issue is compliance with NFPA 72, the standards document
governing many things fire-alarm wise. You can get a copy of the
document at
http://www.nfpa.org/aboutthecodes/A...s.asp?DocNum=72

The concern is that LEC provided POTS lines are, generally speaking,
extremely reliable. They are unaffected by power or data circuit
outages. A VoIP system can deny communications due to a failure at a
distant facility and where life safety is involved, it's not worth the
risk. If the victims don't sue, their insurance companies probably will.

I have been out of the alarm business for about 5 years now and my
experience is in Texas, but at that time, the state fire marshal's
standards required two "channels" of communications on any fire alarm
system and at least one of them was required to be a dedicated POTS
line, specifically prohibited from being on a PBX or other telephone
system. Most of the time, it was easiest to just use two dedicated POTS
lines, but we have used one POTS and one PBX line and still received
certification.

On the other hand, we had a huge bank chain customer that connected
their security systems to the aux port of the cisco routers and sent all
security system communications over their own network, completely
eliminating any POTS lines, dialing, modems, etc and giving pretty much
instant notification of opening, closing and alarm signals to their
central dispatch. It was fairly elegant, but it was completely separated
from their fire alarm systems.

Robert

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