'Under the fibre-optic system there won't be that redundancy and backup [from the copper phone system]. So if it goes down no one will know,' ASIAL CEO Bryan de Caires said."
I work in the security industry in the US, but I'm sure the configurations are similar. Most fire and security systems here are monitored over POTS lines. The panels are programmed to call into the monitoring station at a certain time of the day to verify they are still online, and if the station doesn't receive a daily test signal within a 24 hour period, the owner of the account is contacted to let them know there is a problem with their panel, dialer, or phone lines. If a phone line itself goes down, most panels will beep, but the monitoring station won't know until it calls in for it's daily test again. So if a homeowner is not at their house to hear the beeping, they won't know their system is no longer being monitored. This process is the same whether it's using VOIP or POTS.
The new method is to hang the alarm panel on the network, and skip the phone lines altogether. Unlike a POTS or VOIP dialer which only "calls home" once in a 24 hour period, the "IP" systems can communicate much more frequently and for cheaper since the end-user isn't using up calling minutes, and the central station isn't using incoming toll-free minutes. The panels can be programmed to poll at almost any time interval without using much bandwidth. Combined incoming/outgoing traffic for a single system at 10-second polling is around 2.3 Kb, at 90 seconds polling is only.256 Kb, and even if pushed out to 5 minutes is.08 Kb. In any case, that's much better than once every 24 hours, and the homeowner will be notified as soon as the signal is lost instead of potentially hours later.
Even if a POTS line is technically more "reliable" and has better "uptime" you're more likely to get quicker notification and be able to address the issue right away with a system that talks over the internet.
In reference to your comment about the federal government not being able to make decisions as well as someone local might be able to, isn't this why we have State. County, City, etc.?
Slashdot Mirror
'Under the fibre-optic system there won't be that redundancy and backup [from the copper phone system]. So if it goes down no one will know,' ASIAL CEO Bryan de Caires said."
I work in the security industry in the US, but I'm sure the configurations are similar. Most fire and security systems here are monitored over POTS lines. The panels are programmed to call into the monitoring station at a certain time of the day to verify they are still online, and if the station doesn't receive a daily test signal within a 24 hour period, the owner of the account is contacted to let them know there is a problem with their panel, dialer, or phone lines. If a phone line itself goes down, most panels will beep, but the monitoring station won't know until it calls in for it's daily test again. So if a homeowner is not at their house to hear the beeping, they won't know their system is no longer being monitored. This process is the same whether it's using VOIP or POTS.
.256 Kb, and even if pushed out to 5 minutes is .08 Kb. In any case, that's much better than once every 24 hours, and the homeowner will be notified as soon as the signal is lost instead of potentially hours later.
The new method is to hang the alarm panel on the network, and skip the phone lines altogether. Unlike a POTS or VOIP dialer which only "calls home" once in a 24 hour period, the "IP" systems can communicate much more frequently and for cheaper since the end-user isn't using up calling minutes, and the central station isn't using incoming toll-free minutes. The panels can be programmed to poll at almost any time interval without using much bandwidth. Combined incoming/outgoing traffic for a single system at 10-second polling is around 2.3 Kb, at 90 seconds polling is only
Even if a POTS line is technically more "reliable" and has better "uptime" you're more likely to get quicker notification and be able to address the issue right away with a system that talks over the internet.
STOP! Justin is winning!
This must be a cheaper solution than what they doing now!
What's interesting is that you still clicked on the story anyway. +1 for non-targeted advertising
In reference to your comment about the federal government not being able to make decisions as well as someone local might be able to, isn't this why we have State. County, City, etc.?