ROT - Multi-Input VoIP Autodialler, Where To Buy in UK?

On 22/06/2018 10:48, Bob Eager wrote:

There's this:

http://cpc.farnell.com/unbranded/adq...way-rj45-rj11/
dp/CS18887

Thanks Bob, that looks ideal!

I'm now coming round to this idea because further exploration of the BT
CloudPhone system suggests that we can only connect stuff supplied by BT
- surprise, surprise - and their Cisco ATA with a slightly
different model number is £60 more than the Cisco model I'd earmarked
from Amazon, which itself was £10 more than a GrandStream model, and
further there'd be an ongoing monthly charge for using it, which rather
nullifies the whole point of the exercise.

I know there's been some light building work since we buried the Cat
5e/Cat 6 cables, so I'll ask my client whether he thinks the cabling is
still easily accessible. If it is, I'll suggest burying a phone
extension alongside it, if not, then I think the above is the solution.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 13:05:55 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

On 22/06/2018 10:48, Bob Eager wrote:

There's this:

http://cpc.farnell.com/unbranded/adq...way-rj45-rj11/
dp/CS18887

Thanks Bob, that looks ideal!

I'm now coming round to this idea because further exploration of the BT
CloudPhone system suggests that we can only connect stuff supplied by BT
- surprise, surprise - and their Cisco ATA with a slightly
different model number is £60 more than the Cisco model I'd earmarked
from Amazon, which itself was £10 more than a GrandStream model, and
further there'd be an ongoing monthly charge for using it, which rather
nullifies the whole point of the exercise.

Maybe I am missing something about why this has to end up on the BT
voice service.

have you checked with the alarm suppliers if they have an IP interface
or a compatible adaptor you can add to the current system?
- after all they dont "want" voice - it is just a transport for their
signal. they need some indication of an alarm into what is pretty much
guaranteed to be a computer / server at their end...

BT voice uses the IP network as "transit" to get to their SIP phone
switches
- if the supplier can take IP then the BT bit is may be irrelevant
- but you only need to use an ATA if you have to simulate plain old
telephony to get the signal to the supplier?


I know there's been some light building work since we buried the Cat
5e/Cat 6 cables, so I'll ask my client whether he thinks the cabling is
still easily accessible. If it is, I'll suggest burying a phone
extension alongside it, if not, then I think the above is the solution.

Cat5 or 6 between buildings would also be susceptible to earth
difference and lightning induced spikes.....

if there is an internal network which can get out to the Internet then
can you use that?

Final issue - any of this stuff have to carry on working when the
mains is off?

--
Stephen

[snip]
Cat5 or 6 between buildings would also be susceptible to earth
difference and lightning induced spikes.....
[snip]

Didn't Charles say early on that the two buildings concerned are about
four feet apart and that the cable duct between them is underground?

As Cat5e or Cat6 are differential circuits ground differences should
have no effect. You can run cat5e up to 100m which one would expect
would be subject to far more noise pickup and ground differentials
than 4ft underground between two buildings?



--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

On 23/06/2018 20:07, Stephen wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 13:05:55 +0100, Java Jive
wrote:

I'm now coming round to this idea because further exploration of the BT
CloudPhone system suggests that we can only connect stuff supplied by BT
- surprise, surprise - and their Cisco ATA with a slightly
different model number is £60 more than the Cisco model I'd earmarked
from Amazon, which itself was £10 more than a GrandStream model, and
further there'd be an ongoing monthly charge for using it, which rather
nullifies the whole point of the exercise.

Maybe I am missing something about why this has to end up on the BT
voice service.

Becaue the autodialler sends a pre-recorded voice message to a mobile-phone.

I know there's been some light building work since we buried the Cat
5e/Cat 6 cables, so I'll ask my client whether he thinks the cabling is
still easily accessible. If it is, I'll suggest burying a phone
extension alongside it, if not, then I think the above is the solution.

Cat5 or 6 between buildings would also be susceptible to earth
difference and lightning induced spikes.....

I wanted him to get proper cabling experts to install structured
cabling, at least for the part linking the buildings, but he wouldn't
stump up the cash for it, so instead I and a member of his staff buried
the cables between the buildings.

if there is an internal network which can get out to the Internet then
can you use that?

There is only going to be one reserve voice/ADSL line besides FTTP, the
one being a failover backup for the other, and all in the other building
- that's why we needed multiple cables between the buildings, to
connect the public WiFi, bar tills and credit card machines, etc, while
keeping them physically separate right back to the router.

Final issue - any of this stuff have to carry on working when the
mains is off?

The phone line will still work, which is why it's being kept. Also they
have a back-up generator, though I'm not sure what is connected to it.

I have suggested a UPS in the past, but the client is happy to talk
about such things right up to the point of discussing their prices, but
not further!

On 23/06/2018 21:46, Java Jive wrote:

we needed multiple cables between the buildings, to connect the public
WiFi, bar tills and credit card machines, etc, while keeping them
physically separate right back to the router.

VLANs?

On 23/06/2018 21:57, Andy Burns wrote:

On 23/06/2018 21:46, Java Jive wrote:

we needed multiple cables between the buildings, to connect the public
WiFi, bar tills and credit card machines, etc, while keeping them
physically separate right back to the router.

VLANs?

Yes.

On 23/06/2018 23:07, Java Jive wrote:

On 23/06/2018 21:57, Andy Burns wrote:

On 23/06/2018 21:46, Java Jive wrote:

we needed multiple cables between the buildings, to connect the
public WiFi, bar tills and credit card machines, etc, while keeping
them physically separate right back to the router.

VLANs?

Yes.

So it should be do-able on a single cable?

On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 21:33:30 +0100, "Woody"
wrote:


[snip]
Cat5 or 6 between buildings would also be susceptible to earth
difference and lightning induced spikes.....
[snip]

Didn't Charles say early on that the two buildings concerned are about
four feet apart and that the cable duct between them is underground?

Different building dont usually share the same ground, and that makes
"stuff" connected between them susceptible to big spikes during a
lightning hit on 1 or other or nearby.

As Cat5e or Cat6 are differential circuits ground differences should
have no effect. You can run cat5e up to 100m which one would expect
would be subject to far more noise pickup and ground differentials
than 4ft underground between two buildings?

I agree Ethernet can cope with some differences in voltages - the
isolating transformers are rated 1 kV (although the UTP insulation
isnt).

But you can get a lot more as a transient with a nearby strike.

--
Stephen

Stephen wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 21:33:30 +0100, "Woody"
wrote:


[snip]
Cat5 or 6 between buildings would also be susceptible to earth
difference and lightning induced spikes.....
[snip]

Didn't Charles say early on that the two buildings concerned are about
four feet apart and that the cable duct between them is underground?

Different building dont usually share the same ground, and that makes
"stuff" connected between them susceptible to big spikes during a
lightning hit on 1 or other or nearby.

As Cat5e or Cat6 are differential circuits ground differences should
have no effect. You can run cat5e up to 100m which one would expect
would be subject to far more noise pickup and ground differentials
than 4ft underground between two buildings?

I agree Ethernet can cope with some differences in voltages - the
isolating transformers are rated 1 kV (although the UTP insulation
isnt).

But you can get a lot more as a transient with a nearby strike.


Lightning can break almost anything

For the OP, a cheap network switch at each end of the cable connecting
the buildings could be regarded as sacrificial. Clearly more
sophisticated devices are also required to establish the VLANs.

--
Graham J

On 25/06/2018 08:58, Graham J wrote:

Lightning can break almost anything

For the OP, a cheap network switch at each end of the cable connecting
the buildings could be regarded as sacrificial.Â* Clearly more
sophisticated devices are also required to establish the VLANs.

Trouble is, we'd need three at each end, and my client wouldn't see the
cost as being justified, even with the current price of an 8-port
gigabit switch at less than £20. I'm having trouble enough persuading
him to buy the goddamn mains power extension cables that we've discussed
up thread, which really *are* needed.

Currently, two of the four gigabit cables come straight out of the
router, the third into a switch that is then connected to the router.
The reason for the number of cables is that we needed at least two -
one for the access points supplying the public WiFi, the other to link
reception to the old office and thence to the bar - and as a
precautionary principle I suggested that we bury double the number we
actually needed at the time, hence four. That foresight has already
paid off, because it was decided it would be best to seperate the office
and the bar onto different LANs, and now we need the fourth cable for
the alarm phone lines.

My own feeling is that lightning is so unpredictable in both its precise
incidence and its effects that I wouldn't try to do more than a minimal
amount of catering for it. When storms are happening here at my home,
if they seem bad enough I switch off everything, pull the plugs from the
walls and the ADSL and phone leads from the master socket, and hope for
the best, but I don't think most businesses could or would to that!