Monitored Alarm with FritzBox 7490 - alarm unable to call out

Forums › 2degrees (including Slingshot, Orcon, Flip, Stuff Fibre, MyRepublic, 2talk and Vocus) › Monitored Alarm with FritzBox 7490 - alarm unable to call out

meowsqueak

37 posts

Geek

#200258 10-Aug-2016 14:50

I have a fibre-only installation, with a 2degrees Fritzbox 7490. I have no problems with making and receiving calls from my telephone handsets via the Fritzbox's analogue phone line input.

Recently an alarm technician connected the house alarm to this analogue line (as if it were just another handset) for the purposes of monitoring. Although it "hears" a dial tone and attempts to make calls out to the security company approximately twice a minute, the calls are terminated before they even "leave" the house. The alarm dials out but is cut off within less than a second - either by itself or by the FritzBox, I can't tell. The FritzBox logs an outgoing call attempt each time, but shows the duration to be only a few milliseconds.

Strangely the alarm tries to dial out when there's a call currently underway - I would have thought it would test the line for a dial tone first before trying to dial? Could this indicate that the alarm isn't able to "listen" on the line - maybe it is not wired correctly? I believe it's just using the two wire telephony standard though, so that would be difficult to mess up.

The alarm company seem to be entirely unfamiliar with this situation and would prefer to install an IP module. I'd like to find out if I can get the analogue phone line method working though, as that module is almost $300, and it seems like it should work as there's definitely a dial-out attempt being made.

Has anyone had any experience with this and can give me some pointers please?

1 | 2

3712 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1608642 10-Aug-2016 14:55

Not that I've had any experience with this, but I think in general the recommendation around here is basically don't try and connect an alarm to ATA.

"I was born not knowing and have had only a little time to change that here and there." | Octopus Energy | Sharesies
- Richard Feynman

timmmay

20580 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1608646 10-Aug-2016 14:58

I had an IP module in my alarm, alongside a cellular module. It was awful, constant communication failures. Suggest cellular as being a better option, a physical line can be more easily cut.

As to the current problem, it's really for the alarm company to solve. Their alarm isn't using a phone line properly, or there's some difference between UFB lines and old style ones. Probably take ages to work out why unless someone has done it before.

meowsqueak

37 posts

Geek

#1608649 10-Aug-2016 14:59

> ... the recommendation around here is basically don't try and connect an alarm to ATA.

If this is the answer, and someone can corroborate, then I'll accept this and look at the IP module instead, but do you know why this is the recommendation?

richms

28177 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1608651 10-Aug-2016 15:01

meowsqueak:

> ... the recommendation around here is basically don't try and connect an alarm to ATA.

If this is the answer, and someone can corroborate, then I'll accept this and look at the IP module instead, but do you know why this is the recommendation?

They dial really quickly for the codes they send and the DTMF recognition on most IP gear cant handle that and will miss digits. Setting the DTMF to inband and using a non compressed codec will work better but it is still not 100% as the protocol that alarms use was not made for the chance that there could be a missed digit and similar.

There are many better ways to do it, it is just the alarm industry seems to have about a 20-30 year lag for technology to reach the market. See the fact that they are still making and selling GPRS gear

Richard rich.ms

meowsqueak

37 posts

Geek

#1608661 10-Aug-2016 15:17

Thanks everyone for the responses.

richms:

They dial really quickly for the codes they send and the DTMF recognition on most IP gear cant handle that and will miss digits. Setting the DTMF to inband and using a non compressed codec will work better but it is still not 100% as the protocol that alarms use was not made for the chance that there could be a missed digit and similar.

Hmm, I wasn't able to find a DTMF or codec setting in my FritzBox configuration. Either I missed it (repeatedly) or it's not there.

It does sound like an IP module, or cellular-based system might be a better option. It wouldn't take much for an intruder to disconnect the fibre before entry, although I'm interested in the monitoring mainly for the integrated smoke/fire alarms.

meowsqueak

37 posts

Geek

#1608666 10-Aug-2016 15:21

Quick related question - those IP modules - I assume they need a connection to my Internet router, is that likely to be wired or wireless? Do they just need routing to the 'net? Can I put them in a DMZ to avoid reverse access to my LAN?

richms

28177 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1608668 10-Aug-2016 15:22

Are you self monitoring or using a security service?

Richard rich.ms

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

meowsqueak

37 posts

Geek

#1608673 10-Aug-2016 15:31

richms:

Are you self monitoring or using a security service?

I was planning to use a security service.

Clima

130 posts

Master Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1608690 10-Aug-2016 15:37

It would appear that the alarm is incorrectly connected. It should treat the phone line from the Fritzbox exactly the same as an incoming POTS line. A relay should be fitted between the Fritzbox and any phone points. When an alarm occurs the alarm unit should operate the relay, disconnecting any phones and connecting the line from the Fritzbox to the alarm box allowing exclusive use of the line.

timmmay

20580 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1608754 10-Aug-2016 16:52

meowsqueak:

Quick related question - those IP modules - I assume they need a connection to my Internet router, is that likely to be wired or wireless? Do they just need routing to the 'net? Can I put them in a DMZ to avoid reverse access to my LAN?

Ethernet cable. DMZ sounds fine.

Like I said, cellular is probably going to be more reliable, and mine uses so little data it actually expires before it runs out.

meowsqueak

37 posts

Geek

#1608756 10-Aug-2016 16:55

timmmay:

cellular is probably going to be more reliable, and mine uses so little data it actually expires before it runs out.

Do you know if there's a "standard" interface in play here, that would allow me to set up my own cellular (or even IP) "bridge", and then engage any security company to do the monitoring using my own choice of bridge? Or does the bridge need to be supplied and installed by each security company, to comply with their proprietary configuration?

Just trying to work out where the ownership/configuration "boundary" is between property owner and security company.

richms

28177 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1608758 10-Aug-2016 17:00

They supplied the bridge thing for ours. They say it can operate alongside other interfaces and that many people have the Cellular for the security service and the IP one for their automation and self monitoring via apps without problems.

The sim is taken care of by the security company normally.

Richard rich.ms

Yabanize

2350 posts

Uber Geek

#1608770 10-Aug-2016 17:17

A mate here in Christchurch uses cellular for his

timmmay

20580 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1608782 10-Aug-2016 17:52

meowsqueak:

Do you know if there's a "standard" interface in play here, that would allow me to set up my own cellular (or even IP) "bridge", and then engage any security company to do the monitoring using my own choice of bridge? Or does the bridge need to be supplied and installed by each security company, to comply with their proprietary configuration?

Just trying to work out where the ownership/configuration "boundary" is between property owner and security company.

I just had the alarm company do it, it wasn't worth the hassle and risk of alarms not going doing it myself.

Manormachine

2 posts

Wannabe Geek

#1609849 10-Aug-2016 21:21

meowsqueak:
Thanks everyone for the responses.

richms:

They dial really quickly for the codes they send and the DTMF recognition on most IP gear cant handle that and will miss digits. Setting the DTMF to inband and using a non compressed codec will work better but it is still not 100% as the protocol that alarms use was not made for the chance that there could be a missed digit and similar.

Hmm, I wasn't able to find a DTMF or codec setting in my FritzBox configuration. Either I missed it (repeatedly) or it's not there.

It does sound like an IP module, or cellular-based system might be a better option. It wouldn't take much for an intruder to disconnect the fibre before entry, although I'm interested in the monitoring mainly for the integrated smoke/fire alarms.

You can find the DTMF settings in the setup of the individual phonenumbers. Maybe you need to activate the 'advanced mode' to get to see all menu items though. As for the codec I think the FRITZ box usually uses whatever you configure in your SIP provider setup. I specify the codecs in my 2talk setup and when I check the transmission details the codecs used match.

Let me know if you still cannot find the DTMF setup.

1 | 2