Same old story, just a different customer.

The customer has an original ESI IVX system. Yes, I know it is old but still reliable. Everything was working fine till recently. In the beginning the customer had 6 lines provided by local service provider via copper from the street. CLEC enters the game and takes over service and now we have a T-1 feeding a CISCO 2430 channel bank with 6 lines broken out to copper.

Technical Problem: Sometimes when a call comes in there is not a sufficient signal created for the system to recognize it as an incoming call, then at other times the signal is sufficient.

Guess what happens next? You guessed it,

MBSWWYPBX

In most cases the channel bank is located in the same room as the phone system. Not in this case. The channel bank is located a considerable distance away. Local testing by qualified tech did verify that there was significant voltage loss between the output point (channel bank) and the receive point (telephone system) that I suspect to be the problem.

Just to add the on site techs are aware that this system is polarity sensitive and have terminated appropriately.

If anyone has had any experience in these issues I would like to hear it. A vendor meet is scheduled soon and the finger pointing will begin.

Myself & JWRacedog appreciate any input you may have.

Just how far is "a considerable distance"? I'd imagine that the channel bank might have a setting to boost the signals... like in one of the current threads in the T1 section.

The on location qualified tech estimated the length to be around 75 feet. I personally was surprised to hear that. 75 feet isn't much.

The CLEC & CISCO tech support tried to figure out how to adjust the ring voltage unsuccessfully. I know it can be done with some Adtrans but hey, we are talking CISCO here. No need for standardized specs from them.

The end result was the CLEC& CISCO tech support said that they had software in their channel bank that nobody with their company recognized. Imagine that. They changed the software but it still didn't work. They convinced the customer that the distance was not the issue.They told the customer that they need to go back to pots lines or buy a new system that is compatible with their "new" equipment.grider and I explained to the customer in every way I think possible what the problem was as we saw it but they choose to believe what they wanted.When I arrived for the vendor meet the customer had two pages of "research"printed out and waiting for us.I told the customer to call me when he decided what he wanted to do.grider thanks for all your help.I really appreciatte it.

UPDATE:

Today, TDS Metrocom (the CLEC in question) installed POTS lines and VOILA!---everything works as it did before.

Brtnfone (Dave) gave me the "research" that the customer had given him---an article on VOIP & Channel banks from Mike Sandmans' website (I've already read it, thank you).

IMHO, this episode just shows again, that there are CLECs out there that just don't know their products and don't know the equipment that they're providing. This CLEC (like others in our area) has started to sell systems and hosted VOIP systems. End Users---Caveat Emptor!

Same old story, just a different customer.

Those were the words used to begin this thread for a reason. Customer was purchasing service from one provider and along came a second provider touting their ability to provide services better, faster and of course cheaper. Unfortunately the NEW provider fell flat on their face when trying to clear the first hurdle which simply was MAKE THE PHONE RING when someone dials the phone number.

We tried diligently but if a provider can't ring the phone then it is time to hit the road.

I wonder, would it behoove (What in the world is the source of that word!) us to carry a couple of plain old straight-line ringers with a total R.E. of 3.0 or more. Then when the channel bank in question cannot ring them loudly, you drag out the TELCO-F.C.C. negotiated specs that say a loop start line WILL support an R.E. of 5.0! Yeah, like CLECs think they have to comply with the rules! John C.