Monitoring via IP or GPRS

[admin]

Keep it civil please and remember that acting like an idiot in public by trading childish insults hurts your entire industry , not the person you are abusing.

By all means , there is nothing wrong with a bit of animated conversation but please knock off the personal insults.

Thanks for your co-operation

[Jtek]

It has gone very quiet in here all of a sudden.....

I guess all the manufacturers are reading the final version of AS/NZS 2201.5:2008 which was published today, to see where their products will fit.

I wonder if the banks, insurers and others will again review the product offerings now that the standard has been finalised.
I dont think any of the bolt on dialler capture systems will get a look in on class 5.

[IPAlarms]

I guess all the manufacturers are reading the final version of AS/NZS 2201.5:2008 which was published today, to see where their products will fit.

Where would one get hold of this document ?

[kiwitech]

Where would one get hold of this document ?

[No Brainer]

Minstral I attempted to answer your question in relation to costs from the DW perspective. No others appear to have contributed to that discussion.

Jtek
Some interesting reading concerning the new standards. From where I sit im quite happy. Time to find a competent independent body to conduct the test proceedures and issue the relevant certificate of compliance.

Im not convinced that Class 5 will bother too many people since the widely accepted Securitel was at best, compliant with Class 3 of AS2201.5

Nevertheless, there are some defining points which will no doubt leave avenues open to much debate. Maybe a new thread ???

[No Brainer]

Manufacturer update
No Brainer = DW
Webtech = DW
Kiwitech = Ex DW

All people who logged back in under their old nick names with nothing to hide and unashamably make it clear who they support. Im not entirely convinced that the same can be said for the new generation of posters....or should that be baiters.

We know that IPAlarms is the old SNutt...who also has nothing to hide, supports his own product and contibutes with logical discussion.

That little birdie also told me that maybe previously banned people have sneaked back in.

[IPAlarms]

Im not convinced that Class 5 will bother too many people since the widely accepted Securitel was at best, compliant with Class 3 of AS2201.5

Nevertheless, there are some defining points which will no doubt leave avenues open to much debate. Maybe a new thread ???

Would you like to do the honours ?

This is a new area for me - so I have a lot to learn.

[intelliGEORGE]

Alarm events delivered to the CMS Server and acknowledged back to site with a round trip in under 250 milliseconds.

Remote “kiss-off” of alarm signals from the monitoring station server to alarm control panel dialer. (Avoids inbuilt delays of “store & forward” technology)

90 second, 60 minute or 24hr polling supervision from monitored premises to monitoring station.

Up to 4 independent reporting paths from the monitored premises to the monitoring station.

1. GPRS IP
2. GPRS IP
3. GSM
4. PSTN

Duplicated redundant and fully managed PRIVATE IP NETWORK dedicated for alarm monitoring only. - No public access.

Designed to fully comply with Class 2,3 and 4 service As per AS2201.5 - 1992
Fixed monthly running costs.

5 year hardware warranty.

Designed and manufactured in Australia to ISO 9001.

[kiwitech]

Thats a pretty picture George. Now if Inner Range, Suretek and Permaconn would release some pretty pictures it might make things clear for everyone.

[IPAlarms]

DW looks like a great system - as do the Suretek and Inner Range systems. Don't know anything about Permaconn. Anyway, I would like to clarify my views on a couple of things...

Alarm events delivered to the CMS Server and acknowledged back to site with a round trip in under 250 milliseconds.
Remote “kiss-off” of alarm signals from the monitoring station server to alarm control panel dialer. (Avoids inbuilt delays of “store & forward” technology)

That's exactly how we started out with both our devices, but I realised that it wasn't such a big deal after all. Store and forward makes a lot of sense in many cases unless you can absolutley gaurantee that there is no risk of network delay. Even then - I just don't see the problem with store and forward when you consider that if the bureau does not change how the panel behaves, it will waste many seconds going thru its usual dialing routine. See this article for an explanation of what I mean....



DW may have the luxury of a private network, but I'm just wondering if that round trip of 250ms is gauranteed for every signal under all network conditions ?

Up to 4 independent reporting paths from the monitored premises to the monitoring station.

Mmmm... not too sure about that one. I don't see the point of your two GPRS paths. The fact that you don't have a single GPRS path tells me that you acknowledge that it IS possible for your first GPRS path to go down - is that correct?

Please explain why you have the second GPRS path.

If the GSM path is with a network other than Optus, then yes - that would make sense. If not, and the whole of Optus go down, then you are left with just PSTN.

[minstral]

Well asking question can yield no answers and a lot of other stuff. great cheers to those that tried

[AusSecTec]

DW may have the luxury of a private network, but I'm just wondering if that round trip of 250ms is gauranteed for every signal under all network conditions ?


Mmmm... not too sure about that one. I don't see the point of your two GPRS paths. The fact that you don't have a single GPRS path tells me that you acknowledge that it IS possible for your first GPRS path to go down - is that correct?

Please explain why you have the second GPRS path.

If the GSM path is with a network other than Optus, then yes - that would make sense. If not, and the whole of Optus go down, then you are left with just PSTN.

Ray, finally some sense from all the innuendo. Lets see if the questions are answered honestly.

[jammedit]

Thats a pretty picture George. Now if Inner Range, Suretek and Permaconn would release some pretty pictures it might make things clear for everyone.

This comes from the IR website -

[jammedit]

I think No Brainer had a post on the old Austech where he mentioned signature had adopted the permaconn system over his own and how disgruntled he was that he lost that deal.

The fact of the matter seems to be that even though permaconn is seen as the lowest level of security of all the gprs systems available it is far superior to securitel. Given that securitel was accepted as the bees knees of communications by the insurance industry it would be justified to presume that permaconn is in the same league.

I am not realy sure if anyone realy cares about class 5 or 4 or the new standards. From the stuff I have read on here (old here) and other places a lot of technicians are happy enough with GSM as the backup to dialler.

Permaconn is promoted by CMS operators simply because it was there first and its the easiest for them. I have done a survey of my own talking to operators in centres with various gprs systems installed Typically these CMS had at least permaconn and DW with the occasional having either suretek or fratech as well. Most would not comment on reliability of any system because they simply do not understand any of it.

[No Brainer]

DW looks like a great system.

DW may have the luxury of a private network, but I'm just wondering if that round trip of 250ms is gauranteed for every signal under all network conditions ?

Yes..if not it would not be advertised. Remember Frame Relay is as Jammedit says very expensive and is only selected by companies who require a mission critical service. No contention issues with Frame Relay.

I don't see the point of your two GPRS paths. The fact that you don't have a single GPRS path tells me that you acknowledge that it IS possible for your first GPRS path to go down - is that correct?

Please explain why you have the second GPRS path.

The above goes some way to answering...mission critical service..Meaning Network Redundancy and piece of mind.

If the GSM path is with a network other than Optus, then yes - that would make sense. If not, and the whole of Optus go down, then you are left with just PSTN.

Keep in mind GSM voice is different technology to GPRS.

I guess if Optus goes totally Kaput then we are in trouble and fall back on PSTN...but so will a lot of others if Telstra goes kaput.

I here of internet providers going off air too.

Under the new Australian Standards GSM will not be claimed as a redundant path meeting standards...GSM is not a path that is polled within the definition of the standard. It is however a feature which provides unlimited GSM voice calls at no charge as piece of mind. Which in itself gets back to Minstrals original question on costs.

With relevance to the new standard just the definition of a poll will I imagine have a few sratching their heads.

"POLL"

A signal using the path which carries an alarm transmission sent from a known source (alarm at customers premises) with a returned acknowledgement sent from the intended recipient (Central Monitoring Station)

Not sure where exception reporting sits in this scenario.

And thats only page 1.

Now more people seem intent on knowing who I am than adding to valuable discussion. I must wonder what are their motives. People with these types of motives do scare me bacause I wonder what they are capable of...

So I will call it a day...

[IPAlarms]

This comes from the IR website -

I like the IR system - it is exactly the same as ours except we don't have the dialup facility.

Here's how I think the end user will look at the options. Each one gives slightly better security along with slightly more cost:

1. IP (ADSL) with PSTN backup. Same security level as Securitel but at a much lower cost.

2. IP + GSM Dialer + PSTN. Overcomes the worry of line cut and gives the chance of a meaningful alarm signal rather than just a "Loss of Polling" at the CMS. Slightly higher equipment costs and GSM costs.

3. IP + GPRS + PSTN. If the loss of both polled paths is treated as an alarm, then the extra PSTN or GSM dialer paths seem almost unnecessary except in a small number of cases.

I think what we have to remember is that the big four have to cater for some very high security applications and that is why they must cover all corners. Securitel + GSM backup has been acceptable for a long time, so for the majority of the market I don't see why this would not continue.

IP + GSM is my tip as being the most popular choice (volume wise).

[kiwitech]

Please explain why you have the second GPRS path.

If the GSM path is with a network other than Optus, then yes - that would make sense. If not, and the whole of Optus go down, then you are left with just PSTN.

I dont want to start an arguement. But I will answer this question as it is a valid qustion.
Its really quite simple one data centre is in Sydney the other in Melbourne they back up to each other. Say for example one has an emergency for arguements sake lets say a fire and the place burns down. All the CMS needs to do is switch to the other data centre and they are back on line with the transmitters. What happens if there is a fire at Suretek, Inner Range or Permaconn ?. That is a question I will leave you all to contemplate.

[IPAlarms]

What happens if there is a fire at Suretek, Inner Range or Permaconn ?.

I know that DW runs a "managed service", but I thought that Suretek and IR had signals go direct from the customer premises to the CMS. Am I mistaken ? Why would it matter if they had a fire ?

Actually, the "Direct" in Direct Wireless is a bit misleading as all signals must go thru their platform.

Monitoring Centres seem to have quite strong views on this (outside Australia at least). In the US - they do not want a "middle man". In the UK, some prefer to have a direct route, but others will not deal with a provider unless they handle absolutely everything and GUARANTEE that every signal gets through. That way, if a signal goes astray, the CMS is cleared of all liability

[AusSecTec]

I dont want to start an arguement.

Bit late for that, but we can have a NON heated, sensible discussion without threats of abuse etc, its pretty simple fella's

All the CMS needs to do is switch to the other data centre and they are back on line with the transmitters. .

So the operator has to manually "switch" to the other data centre.. OK opens up human error here in my mind.

What happens if there is a fire at Suretek, Inner Range or Permaconn ?. That is a question I will leave you all to contemplate

A fire at Suretek, well theres a SECURE offsite redundant base which mirrors the data / operations isn't there.

@ Inner range, well then all the stock gets burnt , damn great loss there if that happens, well have to wait some time for stock once SMA ran out.

@ Permaconn, well its receivers aren't onsite, they are situated at a grade one facility not in the same building.

So therefore it wont affect any of those networks.

Sorry had meetings till 2200 last night. I couldn't continue with this discussion till now.

[kiwitech]

Good Morning Steve.... The transmitters connect to a server as does the receiver where do you think these servers are kept ?. I think DW are being up front with there network structure. What is misleading about "Direct". All DW CMS have two servers ( Sydney Melbourne) and receivers each (In the CMS), they do not all share the same server as all the other CMS's do on the other networks. All they share is the network. Steve go back and look at the picture George posted where is the middle man. The beauty of a private network as apposed to the public domain is signals dont go astray, every signal has an audit trail if required.