Re: Can a Napco system & DSL connection co-exist?

Splitting hairs even further, why take the chance on a single phone line for
your alarm system? "Seems like a no brainer" to include cellular or
wireless backup for every installation but how often is it done? Mr. Bass
was correct in his response. In reviewing the OP's diagram (however crude
it was), you don't need a filter for the alarm panel to communicate with the
monitoring facility.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not taking sides here. I agree with "Petem" that
there is a risk (however small) of a problem developing in the DSL line and
that the correct way to wire any single line communicator would be to use
the Excelsus Filter to eliminate even that small chance.

Before this particular filter was on the market, the only way to ensure
uniterrupted DSL and alarm communication was to wire the PROT exactly as the
OP describes. I'm certain there are still many installations out there that
retain this type of wired connection. What are you (the industry) doing to
address these?

Regards,

Frank

"grabbitt" <sn@xxxxx> wrote in message
news:JZRUf.891$yn4.28@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
so then why take the chance just use the Excelsus filter and you have no
worries mate. Many alarm panels need this filter to comm anyway, and you
don't have to rewire the house. Seems like a no brainer.

"FIRETEK" <firetech(change-the-ch-to-k)@telus.net> wrote in message
news:CQKUf.6103$%H.4752@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sir:

You are incorrect. If you look at the diagram supplied by the OP, the
alarm
panel is ahead of every other phone in the house. The DSL modem is the
only
device in the home that is wired directly from the Prot (other than the
alarm). The only caution I would provide the OP is to ensure that he
doesn't wire additional phones to the DSL side of the connection (which
he
can do if he uses the "quick connect kit" filters most telco providers
send
you when you order DSL on a self install).

Regards,

Frank

"jewellfish" <jewellfish@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1142989479.912311.240500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Just to state the obvious,

In this setup the panel will not seize the line, thus if the phone line
is busy, the panel cannot dial out in an emergency/break in, etc.

Jewellfish

news.vif.com wrote:
Hi,

I am looking at having a DSL line installed at my house that would be
using
the same telephone line as my Napco Magnum 1000. The Napco currently
does
nightly self-tests which "seizes" the phone line in the house when it
is
performing these tests. My concern with the DSL line is that the DSL
link
will be dropped every night as well when the Napco does its self
tests.

My question is the following. If I split the phone line at the
demarkation
point where one branch goes only to my DSL modem and the other branch
goes
through a DSL filter and then to the Napco and the rest of the house,
will
the Napco still be able to make its nightly self-tests where it
seizes
the
phone line, but doesn't drop my DSL connection?

ie:

Demarkation pt
==============[ Splitter ]
phone line |=====[DSL Modem]
|
|=====[ DSL Filter ] -------
[Napco
Magnum 1000] ----------[ rest of house ]


A friend of mine currently has a DSL connection on a regular line (no
Napco), and sometimes uses a 56k modem on his computer to dial up to
other
servers. If a 56K Modem is able to dial up over the DSL line, does
this
imply that the Napco should be able to as well? I am assuming that
Magnum
1000 just uses a regular modem to communicate with the centrale - is
this a
valid assumption?


Thanks for the help.

Eric







.

Relevant Pages
Loading