Does the Avaya 9608 require the S Series Replacement line cord (700383326). Im being told that its the cause of static on the phones. I've installed hundreds of these without these without issues. ive checked all the threads and see nothing that indicate its a requirement or anything special on it. Im being told by an Avaya technical person that it has a special filter on it ????
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations John Tel on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
9608 S Series Line cord
- Thread starter lmonreal
- Start date
intrigrant
Systems Engineer
I have never seen such a cord and I have never had any complaint about static as well.
So what Avaya suggest is bull, they better say "we dont know, but maybe a 700383326 line cord helps", that would be honest.
So what Avaya suggest is bull, they better say "we dont know, but maybe a 700383326 line cord helps", that would be honest.
Looks like a standard CAT 5 patch cord to me. If you really think that's where the problem is... Get a CAT 6. I would be looking at the handset cord for static if it just one phone.
Dermis and feline can be divorced by manifold methods.*
*(Disclaimer for all advise given)--'Version Dependent'
Dermis and feline can be divorced by manifold methods.*
*(Disclaimer for all advise given)--'Version Dependent'
- Thread starter
- #4
Thank you budbyrd and intrigrant; for the reply. its supposedly an intermittent issue at a hospital - by far the worse cases of trouble. As suggested by Avaya we're going to install these handy dandy special filtered magic cords on one floor to see if it magically fixes the issue. Their network has been crap from day one;this ought to be a fun waste of time.
Again thank you!!
Again thank you!!
This is an IP phone, so the signal going into the phone is 0 or 1's.
Interference would result in dropped packets, that gives dead air or chopped audio.
Putting in the 16 feet replacement Cat.5 cord, that's probably going to be coiled up.
If there was any truth to this, it would be even worse!
If you actually want a some serious high tech cord, get a solid core Cat.6e STP cable, fit a single pass split ferrite core about 2 inches from the receiver end, then a double pass ferrite core 3 inches away from the first core (make sure your loop is not exceeding the limitation of the cable spec's). That would be something NSA use on their dearest servers.
This will kill off any RFI/EMI, and reduce the impact of an EMP, though the phone's NIC is built for UTP.
The problem is probably the environment, healthcare appliances can give all sorts of radiation and background noise.
Hum or static would be picked up by the handset cord or the inbound transmission to the system (crap in, crap out).
Have you tried testing the phone outside off premises?
Kind regards
Gunnar
______________________________________
Mille viae ducunt homines per saecula Romam
Interference would result in dropped packets, that gives dead air or chopped audio.
Putting in the 16 feet replacement Cat.5 cord, that's probably going to be coiled up.
If there was any truth to this, it would be even worse!
If you actually want a some serious high tech cord, get a solid core Cat.6e STP cable, fit a single pass split ferrite core about 2 inches from the receiver end, then a double pass ferrite core 3 inches away from the first core (make sure your loop is not exceeding the limitation of the cable spec's). That would be something NSA use on their dearest servers.
This will kill off any RFI/EMI, and reduce the impact of an EMP, though the phone's NIC is built for UTP.
The problem is probably the environment, healthcare appliances can give all sorts of radiation and background noise.
Hum or static would be picked up by the handset cord or the inbound transmission to the system (crap in, crap out).
Have you tried testing the phone outside off premises?
Kind regards
Gunnar
______________________________________
Mille viae ducunt homines per saecula Romam
trace the port with wireshark by mirroring the port and listen to it when they have the problem. That way you know if it is in the actual conversation or if the phone creates the interference.
Do both parties hear the static?
are they on PRI and have some old analog backup lines?
Maybe it is just some of these backup lines that are crap?
Joe W.
FHandw, ACSS (SME), ACIS (SME)
“This is the end of the world, make sure to buy your T-shirt before it is too late"
Original expression of my daughter
Do both parties hear the static?
are they on PRI and have some old analog backup lines?
Maybe it is just some of these backup lines that are crap?
Joe W.
FHandw, ACSS (SME), ACIS (SME)
“This is the end of the world, make sure to buy your T-shirt before it is too late"
Original expression of my daughter
CAT6 is not "better" than CAT5 it is just made for a different implementation. Both are rated for 100 meters max. CAT5 supports 100 MHz and CAT6 250 MHz. It's NEXT that separates the two as far as performance. So replacing a CAT5 patch cord with a CAT6 patch cord will do nothing. Even if the entire link was CAT6 it would perform no better in a phone application than would CAT5.
@pmcook That part of my post was ment as a joke. The part about the handset cord was my actual advice. I have also seen unrelated devices too close to the phone to cause noise as well.
Dermis and feline can be divorced by manifold methods.*
*(Disclaimer for all advise given)--'Version Dependent'
Dermis and feline can be divorced by manifold methods.*
*(Disclaimer for all advise given)--'Version Dependent'
- Status
