|
|
 | | From: | Tim | | Subject: | Burglar Alarm vs. DSL | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 02:12:55 -0700 |
|
|
 | I bought the ADSL Netscreens and got the VPN up and running...
To make a long story short: Everyday at 3:30pm our burglar alarm, which was
located before any of the phones or modems, would hijack the phone line for
a minute to call in and confirm the line was still good. This would
necessitate a recycling of the dsl modem/router for the internet to work
again. So this morning I had my alarm-guy set up a line to be used
exclusively for dsl which came from "before the alarm." The phones used the
line "after the alarm," so someone couldn't just take the phone off the hook
to disable our burglar alarm. We only have one phone line.
At 3:30pm, today, the moment of truth... But instead of the expected
solution, a variety of new symptoms occurred: e.g. the alarm was unable to
"phone home," causing the line to be busy for an extended period of time;
the VPN was up, then down, then up, and then down for good; the internet was
sporadic as well.
Once I got to the store with the alarm and disabled its continued attempts
to call, we were able to get things back to normal. Why would this setup be
worse??? Wouldn't the alarm use the audio (analogue) portion of the phone
line, thus not interrupting the DSL portion? Over the last year, the alarm
did not require a dsl filter to work, but I suspect that may be what's
needed. Would you agree? If so, would any dsl filter work just as well, or
would a "special burglar alarm dsl filter" (as seen on the web) work better?
Or, is a second phone line (which I have no other use for) the only thing
that will work? My alarm guy will check tomorrow to see if he wired it
right...
In case you're wondering, the problem was not that noticeable or urgent in
the past because we didn't used to need the internet very much. Also, it
didn't seem to happen everyday, perhaps my old modem/router reset itself
after some time had past...? Now, though, running our POS over a VPN, it
needs to *really* be 'always on.'
As always, thank you for your input
Tim
|
|
| | From: | Leythos | | Subject: | Re: Burglar Alarm vs. DSL | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 14:21:30 GMT |
|
|
| In article , Tim@mycomputer.com
says...
> To make a long story short: Everyday at 3:30pm our burglar alarm, which was
> located before any of the phones or modems, would hijack the phone line for
> a minute to call in and confirm the line was still good. This would
> necessitate a recycling of the dsl modem/router for the internet to work
> again. So this morning I had my alarm-guy set up a line to be used
> exclusively for dsl which came from "before the alarm." The phones used the
> line "after the alarm," so someone couldn't just take the phone off the hook
> to disable our burglar alarm. We only have one phone line.
My guess is that the alarm system interrupts the rest of the down-stream
phone service - meaning it actually disconnects anything beyond it so
that nothing can interfere with it.
I've seen relay devices that pickup on a fax cause the link to drop,
etc...
Have the DSL and the Alarm on the same connection - meaning use a
T/branch where both are connected to the phone line at the same point
and the phones daisy chain off of the alarm side, not the DSL side. You
will still need to filters at each point.
--
--
spamfree999@rrohio.com
(Remove 999 to reply to me)
|
|
| | From: | Wolfgang Kueter | | Subject: | Re: Burglar Alarm vs. DSL | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 13:05:04 +0100 |
|
|
| Tim wrote:
> [Burglar alarm, phone and a DSL line not functioning properly]
Normally burglars alarms require a separate phone line for exclusive use.
Apart from that these topics should be discussed with the company, who
installed the burglar alarm and the technicians from the phone company.
They are the ones to sort that out.
Wolfgang
|
|
| | From: | Tim | | Subject: | Re: Burglar Alarm vs. DSL | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 10:09:05 -0700 |
|
|
|
"Wolfgang Kueter" wrote in message
news:ct03sh$gh7$1@news.shlink.de...
> Tim wrote:
>
> > [Burglar alarm, phone and a DSL line not functioning properly]
>
> Normally burglars alarms require a separate phone line for exclusive use.
> Apart from that these topics should be discussed with the company, who
> installed the burglar alarm and the technicians from the phone company.
> They are the ones to sort that out.
It's a pretty small family retail business, soon to have two locations, that
we own. If we need to get a second phone line then, of course, we will -
though I'd hate to spend money unnecessarily. I will likely be calling the
phone company with questions, the "alarm company" ;) is one guy who's been
doing this for many years, but seems to have never dealt with this issue.
Also, I thought it would be a good ng topic since I found nothing on this
problem from either the web or google groups.
Tim
|
|
| | From: | Peter Georgeu | | Subject: | Re: Burglar Alarm vs. DSL | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:27:20 GMT |
|
|
| In article , Tim@mycomputer.com
wrote...
> I bought the ADSL Netscreens and got the VPN up and running...
>
> To make a long story short: Everyday at 3:30pm our burglar alarm, which was
> located before any of the phones or modems, would hijack the phone line for
> a minute to call in and confirm the line was still good. This would
> necessitate a recycling of the dsl modem/router for the internet to work
> again. So this morning I had my alarm-guy set up a line to be used
> exclusively for dsl which came from "before the alarm." The phones used the
> line "after the alarm," so someone couldn't just take the phone off the hook
> to disable our burglar alarm. We only have one phone line.
>
> At 3:30pm, today, the moment of truth... But instead of the expected
> solution, a variety of new symptoms occurred: e.g. the alarm was unable to
> "phone home," causing the line to be busy for an extended period of time;
> the VPN was up, then down, then up, and then down for good; the internet was
> sporadic as well.
>
> Once I got to the store with the alarm and disabled its continued attempts
> to call, we were able to get things back to normal. Why would this setup be
> worse??? Wouldn't the alarm use the audio (analogue) portion of the phone
> line, thus not interrupting the DSL portion? Over the last year, the alarm
> did not require a dsl filter to work, but I suspect that may be what's
> needed. Would you agree? If so, would any dsl filter work just as well, or
> would a "special burglar alarm dsl filter" (as seen on the web) work better?
> Or, is a second phone line (which I have no other use for) the only thing
> that will work? My alarm guy will check tomorrow to see if he wired it
> right...
>
> In case you're wondering, the problem was not that noticeable or urgent in
> the past because we didn't used to need the internet very much. Also, it
> didn't seem to happen everyday, perhaps my old modem/router reset itself
> after some time had past...? Now, though, running our POS over a VPN, it
> needs to *really* be 'always on.'
>
> As always, thank you for your input
> Tim
Have a look at this post in alt.security.alarms and also the link at
dslreports. You may get some information from this:
http://tinyurl.com/4jskz
Peter
|
|
| | From: | Tim | | Subject: | Re: Burglar Alarm vs. DSL | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:00:53 -0700 |
|
|
| >
> Have a look at this post in alt.security.alarms and also the link at
> dslreports. You may get some information from this:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4jskz
>
> Peter
Thanks for the link! Great info! I'm passing it on to my alarm guy.
What exactly is the difference between a splitter and a filter? I mean, are
they just used differently with different chases & connectors, or is the
circuitry significantly different? I ask because today, in contrast to what
I read at that link, my alarm guy jerry-rigged a plane, typical dsl filter
*inside the alarm box*! Now the alarm gets the signal about 2 inches after
it travels through the filter, while the phones get it about 90 feet after
it travels through this same filter. Filters that used to be at the phones
have been removed and the phones work fine. The internet wire comes out of
the alarm box, from an inch before the line reaches the filter, then travels
90 feet to the computers. After this work, he set the alarm off as a test,
the phones stopped working (as they should) and the internet continued to
work (as it should).
Possible problems (though it's early) 1) the alarm seized the phone line for
much longer than usual (about 8 minutes), 2) my dsl used to get 1.2 megs,
now it's getting 950k. The important thing right now is getting that second
store opened, so if this will work for now I may just leave it as is. I'm
not thrilled with it though...
Does anyone here think that it is urgent to have this done right?
Tim
Main points I'm referring to from the above link:
"[From an alarm company trade magazine]
Do not run alarm system wiring in close proximity or parallel with any Telco
wiring carrying an ADSL signal, as many alarm systems produce signals that
can interfere with the ADSL signal.
Do not run any Telco wiring carrying an ADSL signal through an alarm panel
or enclosure containing an alarm system dialer.
Before starting work, have the subscriber check their ADSL service to
determine that it is working properly and always check with the subscriber
after the installation is complete to ensure that the installation has not
affected the subscriber's ADSL service."
|
|
|
