RE: FXO vs. E&M

From: Kent (cciecn@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri May 19 2000 - 10:19:34 GMT-3


   
Hi Dave,

Thanks

Kent
--- Dave Gingrich <Dave@dcg.org> wrote:
> At 05:13 PM 5/18/00 -0700, you wrote:
> >I have question, I think FX0 can only be connected
> to
> >the C0 line, E&M is used for PBX, but you mentioned
> >that FXO can be used to connected to PBX, then
> under
> >what situation you want to do that in stead of
> using
> >E&M?
>
> There are exceptions but generally...
>
> FXS port - outbound calls, cause the connected
> device to ring (ring out)
> FXS port - inbound calls, receive digits (dial in)
> Think of an attached telephone, a call TO the phone
> rings, a call FROM the
> phone involves dialed digits.
>
> FXO port - outbound calls send digits (dial out)
> FXO port - inbound calls receive ringing (ring in)
> Think of a phone line, CO Line or PBX extension
> (connected to the FXO port)
> Inbound calls ring; outbound calls digits are sent.
>
> E&M ports, both inbound and outbound receive or send
> digits (2-way dial)
>
> If two PBXs both support E&M tie lines, (special E&M
> trunk interfaces are
> required) then E&M would generally be the preferred
> method of
> connection. Often though, one or both PBXs does not
> support E&M, therfore
> you may have to use some combination of FXO/FXS
> ports.
>
> =====================
> Dave Gingrich, K9DC
> Indianapolis, Indiana
> Dave@dcg.org
> =====================
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:23:30 GMT-3