Dual-Path Alarm Communicator(GSM Version)

[Scottmichaelj]

SIP is a protocol. Just like HTTP - it can be used locally as well as across the Internet. I do a *lot* of SIP on my LAN (not involving the Internet at all).... I run Asterisk as a PBX and all my phones are SIP phones. They all still work when the Internet is down - because it's local. The same way the ISY is still accessible thru it's HTTP interface when the Internet is down...

 

Plug a cross-over cable between these two and give them static IPs in the same subnet - and they can talk SIP to each other without needing any other equipment or connectivity - not even a switch. They would be completely isolated just talking to each other for calls. Of course to manage them you'd need to put a switch in the middle.  I share that Internet based telephony is a non-starter.  

 

I use T-mobile - and I'm told they got a contract with a major private ambulance company that requires them to keep 2G active for a while longer. Not sure though. 

 

Michael.

 

 

I need to read up more in SIP it appears. I know its like HTTP and can be used local to local as a phone (internal) but not to make outgoing calls. Thats where I am lost. Guessing that the SIP connects to a SIP on the CS side?

[MWareman]

Guessing that the SIP connects to a SIP on the CS side?

Yep...

 

The idea is that one device provides a GSM<=>SIP gateway and the other provides a SIP<>FXS gateway. Back-to-back them you get GSM<=>SIP<=>FXS - and can connect your Elk to the FXS port to obtain a dial tone.

 

An added benefit - the SIP<=>FXS gateway also has an FXO port - so it could connect to a POTS line as primary - then use the GSM gateway only if the POTS line has failed....  if configured correctly. 

[Scottmichaelj]

The idea is that one device provides a GSM<=>SIP gateway and the other provides a SIP<>FXS gateway. Back-to-back them you get GSM<=>SIP<=>FXS - and can connect your Elk to the FXS port to obtain a dial tone.

 

An added benefit - the SIP<=>FXS gateway also has an FXO port - so it could connect to a POTS line as primary - then use the GSM gateway only if the POTS line has failed....  if configured correctly.

 

 

Thank you for the explanation, I appreciate it. I don't nor have I done any SIP installs.

[G W]

Not sure what people are expecting from a company that produces and sells hardware based on 1990 technology? I'm not sure why this company is only coming out with such communications support.

 

Most if not all the major vendors have been producing 2G, 3G, 4G, GSM, cellular units for years. I know the folks who own and use the ELK security alarm system like the tight HA integration. But, at some point the hardware really needs to be updated to 2016 standards.

 

It should be noted several companies offer dual SIM capability and also don't require you to be locked into a CS vendor and have the ability to *Bring your own* SIM's.

 

Though most of them are vendor specific but some also have universal modules which enable 3rd party support too.

Not much has changed in alarm technology in the last 30 years.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[G W]

Ask them if they intended the C1M1 to be a giant bag of suck on purpose, or if it was just an accident...

 

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

I beg to differ. It's more box of suck.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[MWareman]

 

 

I beg to differ. It's more box of suck.

...that you have to keep paying for, month after month!

[G W]

...that you have to keep paying for, month after month!

That's expected. Paying for monitoring service is a monthly fee.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[MWareman]

Yep. Don't mind paying a monitoring fee (I do that now - Alarm Relay). I just don't want to be locked to a specific vendor, who is likely subsidizing the device. I just want to pay full price and not have it locked. Then I can choose who I have monitoring my system.

 

I wonder how many people will buy this without really realizing that it means you are changing monitoring company in order to use it.

 

As stated above, a box of suck (IMO). Not because of its tech, but because of the lockin.

[G W]

I think Elk made a mistake by making this device closed. I think it's a very small market for them.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[giesen]

Yep. Don't mind paying a monitoring fee (I do that now - Alarm Relay). I just don't want to be locked to a specific vendor, who is likely subsidizing the device. I just want to pay full price and not have it locked. Then I can choose who I have monitoring my system.

 

I wonder how many people will buy this without really realizing that it means you are changing monitoring company in order to use it.

 

As stated above, a box of suck (IMO). Not because of its tech, but because of the lockin.

Likely Telguard did most or all of the development on the device in exchange for the closed market. I think the real shot in the foot was closing the device to HA integration.

 

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

[Teken]

Not much has changed in alarm technology in the last 30 years.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

 

That would apply mostly to the ELK technology you're using now opposed to other brands. Off the top of my head in terms of technological advancements is opto-isolated dialers, creep sensing, dual tech, masking, dual / quad element arrays, fully digital and auto temperature compensation, encryption, quad parallel dialing, SMS / emailing, higher conformance and standards in UL / cUL security standards, higher baud rates, 3G/4G/GSM.

 

Many companies have been using this or similar technology for years - Almost everyone who owns a ELK alarm system uses another 3rd party branded sensors.

 

The question people need to ask is why?!?!

 

There main board hasn't been updated dramatically for what seems like forever which again is based on 1990 technology. Even the lowest priced Ademco, Honeywell, DSC, have been updated four times since inception. My reply is merely to point out this company misses the mark on several fronts which many of you have already pointed out.

 

A perfect example was SSL everyone in the industry knew this was coming and new hardware or firmware needed to be released. Yet two years later nothing has been done to address this fact. Now the same company is releasing a product that offers the most basic remote control and is locked to a new vendor?

 

I am sure there were lots of back room deals as to why this was so but certainly it wasn't to make the product more attractive to Enterprise, Military, Police, Hospital, Government acceptance. 

 

Other competing products not only allow arming, disarming, but stay, force arming, zone grid status, logging, I/O port control, sms / emailing, dynamic DNS, multi recipients, multi level access and control, dual SIM, dual tamper, 128 bit encryption, heart beat, battery back up, etc.

[G W]

Likely Telguard did most or all of the development on the device in exchange for the closed market. I think the real shot in the foot was closing the device to HA integration.

 

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

Not every product should be made for HA. I can see a use for this product but I just don't see it as a big market. Maybe there are several hundred thousand commercial installs. I just don't know.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[G W]

That would apply mostly to the ELK technology you're using now opposed to other brands. Off the top of my head in terms of technological advancements is opto-isolated dialers, creep sensing, dual tech, masking, dual / quad element arrays, fully digital and auto temperature compensation, encryption, quad parallel dialing, SMS / emailing, higher conformance and standards in UL / cUL security standards, higher baud rates, 3G/4G/GSM.

 

Many companies have been using this or similar technology for years - Almost everyone who owns a ELK alarm system uses another 3rd party branded sensors.

 

The question people need to ask is why?!?!

 

There main board hasn't been updated dramatically for what seems like forever which again is based on 1990 technology. Even the lowest priced Ademco, Honeywell, DSC, have been updated four times since inception. My reply is merely to point out this company misses the mark on several fronts which many of you have already pointed out.

 

A perfect example was SSL everyone in the industry knew this was coming and new hardware or firmware needed to be released. Yet two years later nothing has been done to address this fact. Now the same company is releasing a product that offers the most basic remote control and is locked to a new vendor?

 

I am sure there were lots of back room deals as to why this was so but certainly it wasn't to make the product more attractive to Enterprise, Military, Police, Hospital, Government acceptance.

 

Other competing products not only allow arming, disarming, but stay, force arming, zone grid status, logging, I/O port control, sms / emailing, dynamic DNS, multi recipients, multi level access and control, dual SIM, dual tamper, 128 bit encryption, heart beat, battery back up, etc.

That's where I thought you would go.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[Teken]

That's where I thought you would go.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

 

If your going to make a point might as well lay out the facts, right! The question still stands why do the majority of ELK users purchase 3rd party sensors opposed to those offered by ELK? Why isn't ELK used in any of the industries I just listed off keeping in mind everyone says its a security hardware device?

 

Why hasn't ELK addressed fixing or releasing a fix for SSL?

 

All three questions are not only valid but have been addressed for years by competing products. Staying on topic this new dual path hardware in 2016 only offers the most basic control, why?

 

As stated above other competing products offer much more and they don't require you to be locked in to a CS vendor of their choosing.

 

Those are my points about this product and the lack of thought in its development.

[G W]

Why do car owners purchase third-party wheels and tires?

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[Teken]

Why do car owners purchase third-party wheels and tires?

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

Some how I don't believe using a tire analogy is going to prove very helpful in supporting your position.

 

Considering the simple fact tires aren't made by any car maker.

[giesen]

Not every product should be made for HA. I can see a use for this product but I just don't see it as a big market. Maybe there are several hundred thousand commercial installs. I just don't know.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

When their main differentiator of their product in the market is HA, I find it a little strange. If you're not buying Elk for the HA/integration, why would anyone buy it at all instead something like a Honeywell or ADT. I doubt Elk is being used in any serious quantity in the commercial market.

 

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

[G W]

And ELK doesn't make 99% of the sensors used. .

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[G W]

Some how I don't believe using a tire analogy is going to prove very helpful in supporting your position.

 

Considering the simple fact tires aren't made by any car maker.

But the wheels are.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[G W]

When their main differentiator of their product in the market is HA, I find it a little strange. If you're not buying Elk for the HA/integration, why would anyone buy it at all instead something like a Honeywell or ADT. I doubt Elk is being used in any serious quantity in the commercial market.

 

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

The ADT equipment is crap. And only the high-end and expensive Honeywell equipment is good.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[Teken]

And ELK doesn't make 99% of the sensors used. .

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

 

Well, before you edited your post from ELK doesn't make sensors this was my reply. http://www.elkproducts.com/two-way-wireless-for-m1-controls

 

Now, if ELK truly doesn't make their own hardware but subs it out or rebrands them that doesn't give me a warm fuzzy either. Unless its a industry standard sensor which is field proven. 

[G W]

I won't be using Elk sensors so I really don't care. I use the good parts of technology regardless of who makes it.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[Teken]

But the wheels are.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

 

Well, that's a little over generalization as not all car makers actually make their own rim / wheels. The bulk of them are made by 3rd party vendors to their specifications and costs.

 

The ADT equipment is crap. And only the high-end and expensive Honeywell equipment is good.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

 

Well, now I believe the discussion is getting a little off base here but glad you acknowledge there are different tiers of security alarm systems in the market place. This has and is my only point that ELK does serve a specific market and does pretty well. It however does not address the points I just made above.

 

But as you kindly noted many hardware makers offer units from base to more advanced systems. Cost is an obvious factor but as I recall you stated you spent upwards of $4K on your install. If true you saw value in doing so and many like minded folks did too.

 

Ultimately its a personal choice as to what to buy and use - my personal views and comments are to offer insight about the differences and over all value of other competing products.

[G W]

Well, before you edited your post from ELK doesn't make sensors this was my reply. http://www.elkproducts.com/two-way-wireless-for-m1-controls

 

Now, if ELK truly doesn't make their own hardware but subs it out or rebrands them that doesn't give me a warm fuzzy either. Unless its a industry standard sensor which is field proven.

I'm sitting in a cafe in Saigon so I have to use my phone and frankly, this conversation bores me.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

[Teken]

I won't be using Elk sensors so I really don't care. I use the good parts of technology regardless of who makes it.

 

Best regards,

Gary Funk

 

LOL, I believe my point has been made.