|
|
|
Telephone Question... |
|---|
| message from Alex Threlfall on 13 May 2004 |
Well, I decided it was about time I fixed up our house with an mini-pbx,
so I picked up off eBay an BT 2+8 pbx.
ATM we have 2 lines coming into the house just above the main door,
which split off and 1 goes into a box inside the house, and eventually
accross the house to the master socket, in a big star arrangement as far
as i can tell to 2 other sockets. The second line (being recently
installed) heads off and round the side of the house to my room, where
it terminates in a newer style NTE5 box.
So what i've done is run a piece of CAT5 from the cellar to the box
above the front door, and I plan on connecting both the lines directly
from here to the PBX, I assume this is the correct method of connecting
the PBX?
The extension wiring was fairly simple, and will be done over CAT5 and
all tied back to a patch panel in a little comms cab (I've done
networking on big and small scale before, so i'm confident in that
wiring!).
My question (other than the comment about the lines into the pbx!) is
that on one of the extensions there's a bell box. Ideally, i'd rather
not waste an extension on it, and instead share it with the kitchen
phone, although as I type this I realise that it probably does actually
need to be on it's own extension (due to it needing to ring for external
calls only) so erm, well, does it need to be wired into a master socket
in some way?
This is my first foray into Voice you see, and so far I think i'm doing
ok (got internal dialtones etc.) so any pointers/hints/tips you can give
would be great!
Also got a pile of secondary sockets, master sockets, rj45 sockets, rj45
and bt plugs, so i think i'm prepared for every eventuality!
|
| geoff replied to Alex Threlfall on 19 May 2004 |
It was more the WTF reaction when I first saw the bill
|
| Dave Liquorice replied to Alex Threlfall on 14 May 2004 |
Until (or if) a line is connected into an NTE box you should not be
messing with the NTE (other than the small front panel) or the wiring
leading up to it. This might give you problems as your first line
appears to be hard wired and have a bell box. The bell box may well
be a low impedance bell rather than todays high impedance.
The use of CAT5 for this would be a big indicator to BT that someone
has been messing with their wiring. If/when they find out you will be
charged to have it corrected. Also as one line appears to be hardwired
BT has records of lines that don't have NTEs fitted so even if you
fitted your own you could still get lumbered with a "regularisation of
illicit master socket" fee.
Probably best to get BT out to move/fit NTEs where you want them.
<snip>
I'd give it its own extension you can then configure assuming the
programming of the PBX allows, when it rings. For all external calls,
on either line, perhaps ring differently between the two lines.
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to Dave Liquorice on 14 May 2004 |
pah, the phone wiring in this house dates back to GPO days ;) The first
line we have doesn't even have an NTE. I might pop over to RS later and
grab a pair of CTE5's (The IDC Version of the NTE5) and extend the bt
lines to those, then to the PBX...
|
| Dave Liquorice replied to Alex Threlfall on 14 May 2004 |
And BT will have a record of this, so when you call 'em out for a
fault and the records don't match you stand a chance getting lumbered
with the =A325 + VAT fee as detailed at the bottom of:
http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/current/docs/Exch_Lines.boo/00023.h
tm
Mind you it's cheaper than getting the lines shifted by BT:
http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/current/docs/Exch_Lines.boo/12941.h
tm
Provided your work is done to standard ie BTs side of the NTE is in
CW1308 rather than CAT5 I doubt they'll notice... But don't say you
didn't know. B-)
Oh and make sure the NTEs easy to get at, the engineers that visit are
human and don't like having to work at arms length lying down in the
under stairs cupboard only just able to see the sockets...roof spaces
are a no no as well.
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to Dave Liquorice on 14 May 2004 |
At £25+vat per line, i think i'll take the risk ;) Besides, i've already
regularised the lines, by putting an NTE on one of them, and replacing
the NTE on the other...
Although i'm going to reconnect the NTE on the newer line tommorow, as I
found I actually need to keep that one working... oops! (My Tivo can't
dial out...)
I'll take some pics tommorow when i've finished. BTW, are there any
dangers in putting 2 NTE's on a line?
I might do an FAQ actually, there doesn't seem to be anything on
diyfaq.org (which I used to host actually, and would be happy to do so
again without bandwidth restrictions BTW), with a bit of specific info
on PBX's, as it's something that interests me...
Hell, i'm so bored i'm going to go off and write something for
Telephone/Data Wiring I think...
|
| Dave Liquorice replied to Alex Threlfall on 15 May 2004 |
The one with an NTE already isn't a problem, other than you messing
with BTs property/wiring. The other one now has an illicit NTE rather
than being regularised. Only BT (or other licensed operators) are
allowed to fit NTEs.
Why would you want to? Fit the NTEs next to the PBX and you only need
two pairs (in CW1308) to bring the lines to the NTEs. Your PBX might
not need the seperate ringing/anti-tinkle wire either.
There are risks of multiple NTEs or master sockets, search back in
here say the last month, maybe less.
There is an excellent site that is mentioned nearly everytime a
telephone wiring question comes up. But I can't remember the URL...
|
| Dave Liquorice replied to Jerry. on 15 May 2004 |
Nope. B-)
|
| mrcheerful replied to Alex Threlfall on 14 May 2004 |
I have the install manual for this, so if you have any particular qs, just
ask. How much was it , out of interest, I might ebay the one I have. I
only stopped using it as it did not transmit the caller id.
mrcheerful
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to mrcheerful on 14 May 2004 |
I think I have the install manual actually, so that's not the problem ;)
I'm after a SystemPhone, and this is only the standard version of the 2+
8 so if you have an enhanced i'd love to buy it. I paid £72 for this one
on ebay...
|
| mrcheerful replied to Alex Threlfall on 14 May 2004 |
Sorry, but no system phones.
I'll have a check which one mine is, I expect it is the standard one, did
enhanced have music on hold ? if so mine is standard. However at that
price I'll stick it on ebay.
mrcheerful
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to mrcheerful on 14 May 2004 |
yep, it did...
|
| geoff replied to Alex Threlfall on 19 May 2004 |
Like my phone bill which suddenly jumped from £50 / month to £250 /
month? when a certain teenager got a new girlfriend
|
| John Rumm replied to Alex Threlfall on 14 May 2004 |
Sounds ok... I think I would be tempted to fit a new style (NTE5)
master socket to both lines before they get to the PBX. That way the PBX
will be protected (a little) by the lightening arrester built into the
master sockets.
It is probably just a phone without the audio bits ;-) hence should
behave like a phone in terms of how it is connected.
Most PBXs use "PBX master" sockets at each extension. These are cut down
masters with no lightening arrester - but they still contain the
ringing capacitor. Hence they only need a single pair when wiring - so
you can connect 4 extensions to 1 cat5 if you want - each connected to a
different pair. If you have lots of normal secondary sockets you can
convert them to PBX masters simply by adding a bell capacitor. I used
2.2uF Bi-Polar electrolytics (68V working) when I did my PBX.
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to John Rumm on 14 May 2004 |
So I'd daisy chain from an NTE5 to the PBX would I?
I've still not worked out which cables i need to bring to my cellar
setup, need to open up that box tommorow and check it out... the 4 pairs
i have on the cat5 should be enough whatever though, and I picked up
some nice IDC Punchdown terminal boxes to connect it to...
Cunning, ta, any idea which of the terminals I should be connecting it
to? They're numbered 1 thru 6, and number 3 isn't connected at the pbx,
so each extension is 5 wires.
Not on this PBX (see above) it's got 5 wires to each socket, presumably
for systemphones.
|
| BigWallop replied to Alex Threlfall on 14 May 2004 |
This any help ?
The (usual) 6 core cable colours of the house wiring, are as follows:-
1. Green with White markings Unused in domestic phones.
2. Blue with White markings B wire (or A wire)
3. Orange with White markings Ring current wire (bell wire)
4. White with Orange markings Signalling earth (normally unused)
5. White with Blue markings A wire (or B wire)
6. White with Green markings Unused in domestic phones
The five wires will be for the internal extension system if the PBX is self powered I
would think. If it is powered from the external lines and only switches between them
if one line becomes engaged, then I think it would only have the three wires to the
extensions like normal domestic phones.
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to BigWallop on 14 May 2004 |
yep, loads of help, i'll take a look at the incoming box and try to find
out what they've done for our 2 lines.
the pbx is obviously internally powered, although it will switch thru to
ext 20 for line1 and ext21 for line2 in the case of power failure.
|
| Dave Plowman replied to Alex Threlfall on 14 May 2004 |
PABX 'extensions' are normally just on a two wire system, so to add an
extension to one - as your bell - use a normal master socket and slave,
using three wires to the slave.
|
| Christian McArdle replied to Dave Plowman on 14 May 2004 |
Although installing the bell on its own extension is advantageous, as it
won't ring on a internal call/transfer to the phone on the extension it
shares. I'm assuming the PABX is set to ring all extensions on an incoming
call.
Christian.
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to Christian McArdle on 14 May 2004 |
Yep, it's setup as a Key System...
|
| IMM replied to Alex Threlfall on 15 May 2004 |
Why do you want a PBX? A DECT multi-phone cordless system is one in its own
right. has all the features you want from one, and available from Argos
cheap too.
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
Being able to run multiple device types through it, such as fax,
modem, computer/telephony integration etc. is one obvious one.
A simple DECT phone in front of a PBX as an extension may be useful.
I do this in front of my ISDN one, but the latter is also supporting a
whole bunch of other capabilities such as MSNs, call routing,
forwarding and logging etc.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| IMM replied to Andy Hall on 15 May 2004 |
I know that. But most people only want the facilities that a 4 or 5 phone
DECT system can provide and no pbx box taling up space.
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
PBX box taking up space? That's a good one.
Mine's about the size of a notebook PC.
They don't have Strowger switches and Uniselectors these days you
know.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| IMM replied to Andy Hall on 15 May 2004 |
Still has to go somewhere with trailing wires, whereas a DECT phone system
takes none up at all. Each phone has a charger cradle and the base station
is integrated in the charger/cradle.
You only buy a pbx if you actually need one, otherwise go DECT.
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
Er no. You have the base unit and the phones just the same. They
take up space.
Which then involves siting it near a mains outlet
For basic facilities there is little or no difference in cost.
Efficacy of DECT depends on the RF conditions where the phone is used.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to IMM on 16 May 2004 |
what trailing wires? You man you DIDn't build your house with proper
cable ducting for structuired cables?
Amateur.
Ah. And teh charger cradles don't have trailing wires?
You only buy a DECT if soke smart slaeman with a bunch of gloosy
literature sells you one. Otherwise you get a PABX.
|
| Andy Hall replied to The Natural Philosopher on 16 May 2004 |
This would involve having about 500cc less insulation in the house and
would result in 0.000001W more energy loss.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| IMM replied to The Natural Philosopher on 16 May 2004 |
I didn't build my house.
< snip tripe >
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to IMM on 17 May 2004 |
No, you aren't capable of it.
|
| IMM replied to Andy Hall on 15 May 2004 |
You want them back?
|
| Owain replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
"IMM" wrote
| "Owain" wrote
| > "Andy Hall" wrote
| > | They don't have Strowger switches and Uniselectors these days
| > | you know.
| > Sad, isn't it.
| You want them back?
Back?
I haven't progressed that far yet, I'm still on Herbert & Procter book 1.
Owain
|
| Andy Hall replied to Andy Hall on 15 May 2004 |
Mmm.
When I was a kid, we lived across the road from a telephone exchange
that was just so equipped.
In the summer, they would have the windows open for extra ventilation
and you could hear the rata-tata-tat sounds which would of course be
greatest mid morning and afternoon and again for a while after 6pm.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| RichardS replied to IMM on 18 May 2004 |
Of course in the context of this question that whole DECT/PABX debate is a
completely useless diversion. What a surprise.
The OP _has_ a PABX.
The OP wants to connect it up and get it working.
The OP has 2 lines and presumably doesn't want to go to the expense of
buying a higher-end DECT system that is capable of handling two lines, or
installing two DECT base units, registering all the handsets with both, and
educating members of family on how to switch between them when they wish to
make calls.
The OP also wants to install the PABX as a practical means of training to
break into the small office telecoms market.
Given all that why on earth would he want to ditch the PABX and spend more
money on a DECT setup???
|
| Dave Plowman replied to RichardS on 18 May 2004 |
When did the logic of anything penetrate IMM's 'circuits'? He's programmed
to give the same answers to a few key words. Regardless.
|
| IMM replied to RichardS on 18 May 2004 |
...but didn't say for what reason. If he only wanted what a DECT system can
provide, then it may have been better to sell the pbx and buy DECT.
If someone asked: I have a 500 litre unvented cylinder, how do I connect it?
And he is only a pensioner and his wife, then I would say: sell it and get a
120 litre one or equiv heat bank. You have to find out what they "need" not
"want".
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to IMM on 19 May 2004 |
Typical bloody socialist. Ignore what people want and tell them what
they need.
Bet you drive a Trabant, too.
|
| IMM replied to The Natural Philosopher on 19 May 2004 |
< snip tripe by a snot >
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 18 May 2004 |
"diehard" springs to mind here......
I'm not sure that there is a ready market on Ebay for pensioners'
wives.
You probably would suggest such a money losing proposition as selling
what he has.
Actually knowing both makes the most sense. I know that it may not
suit your ethos of a world where what people do is subject to dictat,
but funnily enough for most people "want" is a perfectly valid reason
to do something provided that it also addresses "need".
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| IMM replied to Andy Hall on 18 May 2004 |
You are the one who wants a Stalinist planning and land owning system. I
want freedom. Also we need freedom.
If want counters need then need is supreme. Many people "want" underfloor
heating, yet what they need is a heat recovery and vent system.
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 18 May 2004 |
Uncle Joe bears zero relevance to the current discussion.
One fairly good definition of freedom is the ability to do whatever
one likes as long as a) it does not conflict with the equal right of
others and b) that one is prepared to accept the consequences of one's
actions.
Within the context of that, if someone "wants" to have something and
it does not violate the two principles above then freedom is for them
to have it.
That is a matter of choice for the individual. They can go for
something that they want even if they don't need it.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Furthermore nobody "needs" either.
It is only you who thinks that people "need" heat recovery stuff
because it's the "next thing" on eco web sites.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| IMM replied to Andy Hall on 18 May 2004 |
It is? Which ones?
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 18 May 2004 |
I'm sure you know, because undoubtedly the URLs are in your favourites
index if not in your clipboard along with the tripe from Kevin
Whatsisname and Paxo.
If it isn't, then I'm not going to tell you because we'll be hearing
it like a broken record for the next six months.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| IMM replied to Andy Hall on 18 May 2004 |
They are? None in mine mate. What are they?
You made all that up.
|
| John Rumm replied to Andy Hall on 18 May 2004 |
I would go along with that, in fact I would say for most people "want"
is almost always the key factor in a buying decision - the only time
need comes into the equation is when one is trying to justify that
decision later! When "need" takes over the decision process you have
what the sales bods call a "distress purchase" (i.e. thouse tyres will
not get through the MOT).
Personally I installed a PBX because I wanted one - I am sure I could
have coped without.
Having said that DECT never really entered into the equation - as would
be the case for most people who already have a telecoms setup. Why throw
out lots of good working handsets that are comfortable to use, just so
you can have a dinky mobile sized handset that keeps getting lost, and
runs out of battery half way though a call?
Wiring is a non issue - a PBX will not introduce any extra assuming you
already have hard wired sockets in each room.
A PBX will:
Deal with Fax and modem traffic with ease
Support multiple lines with ease
A PBX will let me transfer a call to a (predictable) location rather
than somewhere in the back of the couch!
The speaker phone on my office handset works better than any I have
found on a DECT setup, it has a headset attached with variable gain
amplifier which is ideal for doing tech support when using computers.
When my daughter gets older I can set selective call bars on her
extension, and limit max outgoing call duration ;-)
Incoming lines can ring appropriate handsets and get diverted to the
appropriate answer machines.
So other than costing more and offering less what has DECT got to offer?
|
| Andy Hall replied to John Rumm on 18 May 2004 |
<<snip>
Better yet, you can present her with an itemised bill :-)
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to Andy Hall on 19 May 2004 |
Better yet, you can call bar her number...
|
| Andy Hall replied to The Natural Philosopher on 19 May 2004 |
There's a revenue opportunity here :-)
We all know that teenager's brains are between their legs. :-)
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Dave Liquorice replied to Andy Hall on 19 May 2004 |
At least these days you can get tarrifs that offer more or less
unlimited calls for not that much increase in the basic line rental,
certainly less than your =A350/month. Indeed I don't think BT now do any=
"line rental only" tarrifs they all have some element of "free" calls.
Of course this assumes that said BF was on a landline not his mobile
but even then I think there are packages about that offer substantial
reductions on calls to mobiles. Do some reasearch on other operators
and what BT have to offer...
|
| Dave Liquorice replied to Dave Liquorice on 19 May 2004 |
Well, quite. No doubt strong words were had with said teenager. I'm
just keeping a passing eye on the options but we have a another 6
years before we have a teenager in the house so things will have
changed greatly by then. Maybe all UK call charges, mobile or fixed
will have dissappeared by then.
|
| Nick Brooks replied to Dave Liquorice on 20 May 2004 |
Pity me, as next year for 6 long days I'll be the proud father of three
teenage boys
Nick Brooks
|
| Andy Hall replied to Nick Brooks on 20 May 2004 |
You have my deepest sympathy.
BTW. There isn't a dramatic change as they become 20. There's no
stage of metamorphosing from a caterpillar to chrysalis and butterfly.
From the amount of food consumed, the caterpillar stage lasts an awful
long time.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Andy Hall replied to Dave Liquorice on 20 May 2004 |
That's wishful thinking. Keep in mind that the great thing about
teenagers is that they will never know so much again.
I think they could load all of the costs onto SMS services and still
do very well.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Andy Hall replied to Dave Liquorice on 19 May 2004 |
Probably... ;-)
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| RichardS replied to Andy Hall on 18 May 2004 |
Quite.
Added to that that none of the DECT phones (that I can find) on the argos
site has any mention of multiple-line support.....
|
| Nick Brooks replied to IMM on 18 May 2004 |
This may be true in a sales situation but not here. If I want to blow
all my cash on an Intense Spider or a Klein Q-Pro who's to say I
shouldn't, even if there's no doubt I don't NEED either?
Nick Brooks
|
| IMM replied to Nick Brooks on 18 May 2004 |
That is so. But when someone asks a question, you need to dig deeper to
make sure they are on the right track. Some people who ask questions have
little knowledge of what they are inquiring about. If they know the choices
then they can spend, spend, for no apparent reason for eternity as far as I
am concerned.
|
| Jerry. replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
So why ask the frigging question if you know the frigging answer moron, the
OP wants a PXB, he might even need a PXB - you come along thinking you are
Gods gift to the group and know all the f***ing answers when really you know
less than the local village idiot.
|
| Bob Eager replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
About teh same amount as a DECT base station.
|
| Dave Plowman replied to Bob Eager on 15 May 2004 |
And may be sited anywhere.
But you've got to remember that IMM isn't capable of doing any wiring - as
well as plastic plumbing, of course.
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to Dave Plowman on 16 May 2004 |
He IS capabale of wiring, if the wires are all taken out of their
sheaths and individually labelled :-)
|
| IMM replied to The Natural Philosopher on 16 May 2004 |
Wow...
|
| IMM replied to Bob Eager on 15 May 2004 |
Which is a cradle for charging too.
|
| Dave Plowman replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
You don't need to charge extensions on a PBX.
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
You must be very short of space in your place. Is it because of the
insulation or having two of everything?
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| IMM replied to Andy Hall on 15 May 2004 |
No one wants another piece of needless electronics to put somewhere with
masses of trailing cables. It is bad enough with the TV/DVD/Video
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
If the facilities are needed for home or small business use, then it
is not needless.
If located and wired properly (mine's in the loft), then there are no
trailing cables.
It is also possible to house and wire home entertainment equipment
quite neatly with care.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Dave Plowman replied to Andy Hall on 15 May 2004 |
Not IMM. He doesn't understand any form of electrics.
|
| Jerry. replied to Dave Plowman on 15 May 2004 |
Does he understand anything ?!...
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to Jerry. on 16 May 2004 |
No, I don't think he does.
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to IMM on 16 May 2004 |
Ah, I see that even babies and infants are not exempt from stealth taxes
in Bliars Nu Britten...
|
| IMM replied to The Natural Philosopher on 16 May 2004 |
Madness comes in many forms.
|
| John Rumm replied to IMM on 16 May 2004 |
Repeatedly doing the same thing, and yet expecting different results is
I believe one definition...
Perhaps someone should tell Gordon that his (nu) fiscal policy never
worked when all the other (old) labour chancellors tried it.
|
| Huge replied to John Rumm on 17 May 2004 |
They just didn't apply it ruthlessly enough.
|
| geoff replied to IMM on 20 May 2004 |
Very definitely
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
Strangely the cost works out about the same, and an PBX has a hell of a
lot more features like call barring, hunt groups, call holding, call
parking etc.
Also it's an training excercise for myself anyway, I want to start
offering Voice + Data solutions to clients, so it makes sense to start
off testing this sort of stuff myself.
|
| IMM replied to Alex Threlfall on 15 May 2004 |
That is different. No one bothered to ask what you wanted it for. A DECT
system offers all the same facilities as a pbx, for home and small business.
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
No it doesn't. Multi handset DECT systemss (certainly not anything
that I've seen) do not offer call barring, hunt groups, hold,
redirection, logging. CTI,......... all of which are applicable to
home and small business use.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| IMM replied to Andy Hall on 15 May 2004 |
A DECT will offer the basics most people would ever want.
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
.. depending on the application.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Andy Hall replied to Andy Hall on 15 May 2004 |
<snip tripe by Owain>
BTW. What's TRUnks? I haven't heard of that one. Does it have to
do with some of the early dialling codes being derived from the first
letters of the place name?
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Andy Hall replied to Andy Hall on 16 May 2004 |
Ah right.
I know it used to be possible to tie up all the circuits between a
town and a village exchange by repeatedly dialling the local codes
back and forth.
This was one reason why this was largely done away with when upgrades
were done in the 80s and after.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| IMM replied to Andy Hall on 16 May 2004 |
Hallelujah!! You have seen the simple light. You can have up 4 or 5 DECT
phones on one
line.
|
| Andy Hall replied to IMM on 16 May 2004 |
You're Billy Graham and I claim my £5
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Jerry. replied to IMM on 16 May 2004 |
But on a pbx you are not limited to just 5 phones !
Why do the words 'IMM' [1] and 'simple' seem to go together so well ?...
[1] yes I know 'IMM' is not a real word.
|
| Toby replied to Jerry. on 16 May 2004 |
In defence of the simple, why would anyone require more than five
independent extensions? It's not as if there are the constant moves,
changes & additions of the office environment.
DECT for the masses - PBX for the technologically curious.
Now a pbx as a learning exercise, that's entirely justified, unless you are
a dim-witted director of a telecoms company and only want one because all
the other directors are getting them; you will abandon it and use two
mobiles all the time instead, not that I have ever worked for a company that
had directors like these ;-)
If you like pbx's then check out SIP phones.
|
| Andy Hall replied to Toby on 16 May 2004 |
I have quite a few more than that.
With the PBX I can have:
- 4 or more ISDN lines with up to 10 numbers on each. (MSNs are cheap)
- separate domestic and several business numbers
- fax for each
- modems for each
- ISDN backup routers
- separate phone numbers and ring tones for the kids
- call logging, forwarding and redirection for each
- voicemail
- computer/telephony integration
- etc.
DECT for basic functionality if you don't mind the limitations
PBX for those who understand and need the facilities
The PBX equivalents are still somewhat expensive, however.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| John Rumm replied to Andy Hall on 16 May 2004 |
If you have a spare external line on the PBX, and a suitable ADSL router
then you can add a VoIP gateway for under 70 quid these days...
e.g.
http://www.solwise.co.uk/voip-gateways-fxs.htm
|
| Andy Hall replied to John Rumm on 17 May 2004 |
Hmm.
This looks like a means to connect a standard phone or a PBX exchange
side line to IP - presumably to another one of these devices on the
other side of a "broadband" connection.
I was thinking more in terms of SIP or H323 phones plus PBX equivalent
to go to either analogue PSTN, ISDN or IP trunks.
That seems to be a more expensive hobby.....
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| John Rumm replied to Andy Hall on 17 May 2004 |
I think the chepest one there is H323 rather than SIP (although they do
a firmware update to support SIP as a free download). You can use them
peer to peer, or more commonly you use an external VoIP terminating
service to get you back to PSTN. That way you eliminate the origination
section of the call charge - handy for international calls.
The gateways accept a connection to a single POTS handset (or several on
the bigger ones) and have a RJ45 for connecting to your ethernet and
thence the ADSL/Broadband router. You should be able to support at least
4 concurrent calls over a standard 512/256K ADSL line (you can trade
quality against bandwidth if required).
The typical setup with a PBX would be to use the gateway to provide
additional "external" lines to the PBX. That way you don't incure any
additional cost for IP aware phones or PBXs etc.
|
| Andy Hall replied to John Rumm on 17 May 2004 |
Sure. Understood. I was thinking of an alternate to a PBX using IP
phones and a gateway. This is not yet that cheap, although the
phones are now < £100.
The solution of the type of gateway you mention is rather like the
Mercury box concept although over over IP of course. Benefit is
hopefully of reduced call charges.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| John Rumm replied to Andy Hall on 17 May 2004 |
I suppose there is scope there for using dedicated IP handsets, but
doing away with the IP PBX (or most of it) altogether and using software
only on a dedicated PC. That would circumvent many of the performance
issues that dog complete end to end software VoIP setups. Having said
that you may well find that a suitable PC + software is not going to be
much cheaper than a IP PBX.
Yup - the only other benefit might be for comms to a branch office. If
you already have VPN up and running then you can have inter office voice
for "free"
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to Andy Hall on 16 May 2004 |
asterisk is a cheap choice actually...
|
| Dave Plowman replied to Toby on 16 May 2004 |
Err, a phone in every room that can't be lost or left in the wrong place,
like a DECT handset?
DECT for those who can't be bothered doing the job properly. It has its
uses, but like all these 'wireless' things has many disadvantages.
I'd like to hear from someone who's replaced a household PABX with a DECT
system before believing it truly is as good.
|
| Huge replied to Toby on 16 May 2004 |
5 bedrooms
3 bathrooms
3 reception rooms
2 halls
garage
shed
outside the front door
That makes 16.
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to Toby on 16 May 2004 |
I do, for a start. Ive got two in this office here, one voice one modem.
Then there is the hall, the kitchen, two doorphones and three bedrooms
to date. Plus the annex bedroom for guests.
With 8 telephone ports I am stuck with switching the phones around a
little. 12 would have been ideal. Might by an extension card one day.
Lets not forget the one in the garage, and the one down the garden :-)
Although here, I agree a DECT is *almost* useful.
Quite simply, if you have enough rooms, you need something. PABX suits
me reasonably well. It doesn't go flat, the phones are cheap and very
replaceable. It handles two incoming lines easily and I could vector
incoming calls wherever I want them to go if I had a need.
It's not as if there are the constant moves,
|
| John Rumm replied to Andy Hall on 16 May 2004 |
But you must always wire each handset directly back to the exchange
using 45mm sq SWA cable. ;-)
|
| John Rumm replied to John Rumm on 18 May 2004 |
What even IMM? ;-)
|
| IMM replied to John Rumm on 18 May 2004 |
ton/mile thank you.
|
| Jerry. replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
But not everything people might need, if a PXB and a DECT system cost the
same (and for the little wiring required) it seems pointless to go for a
DECT system as you will have to replace it if and when your needs grow.
There is also the security issues involved in wireless systems, it's far to
easy for others to listen in to wireless coms....
|
| Dave Liquorice replied to Jerry. on 15 May 2004 |
In relation to DECT you can't just walk into Maplin and buy a receiver
that will pick up and decode any DECT transmission within range. The
link is digital, all an ordinary scanner will get is noise.
DECT is far better security wise than the old analogue cordless phones
where tuning up to the top of the MW band on almost any radio with MW
would do.
|
| Alex Threlfall replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
No, it doesn't.
A DECT system is severly limited in what it can and cannot do, an PBX
system (such as the one i'm putting in) can be easily and quickly
upgraded to future technologies thanks to the structured cabling. I've
run CAT5 to each socket, and although atm they are BT sockets, i can
easily pop those off and punch on an RJ45 socket. At the other end the
lead's an RJ45 Plug.
The PBX extensions are neatly bundled up into a trunk of 8 cables, and
are punched down to the patch panel. That allows me to quickly and
easily renumber the extensions.
Conventional off the shelf DECT phones can't cope with multiple lines,
only expensive high end ones can do this, and these typically interact
with an PBX anyway to give you stuff like CTI and LCR, as well as
VoiceMail etc.
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
Because they are cheap, and they work, and have other facilities like
door phones.
And the Mirror doesn't listen in to your private converstaions.
And the wirees work through foil lined plasterboard.
And you can drive modems through them.
And they are not recommended by IMM, and are therefore provbably good
technology.
|
| IMM replied to The Natural Philosopher on 15 May 2004 |
You obviously mean the Torygraph.
|
| Dave Plowman replied to IMM on 15 May 2004 |
Tiny handsets and buttons. Loads of features and menus you'll never need
but have to use a magnifying glass to check. Give me a nice simple corded
phone any day - unless you really need a cordless.
|
| Dave Liquorice replied to Dave Plowman on 15 May 2004 |
It all started going down hill when they fitted dials. B-)
|
|
