help!!!!!

[Wesleywoo]

does anyone know the nortel networks 81c is a-law or u-law?

thanks everyone

quickly

 

[HASAGO]

I believe that A-Law and U-Law is defined by the country that the PABX resides at. U-Law is generally used in North America and Japan and A-Law is used in Europe and the rest of the world. Hope this helps?

 

[Wesleywoo]

thanks I'm in the China

 

[Wesleywoo]

thanks HASAGO!!!!! I'm in the China,so it's A-law.is it?

 

[johnpoole]

yes, unless your running north america software it's a a-law switch.. quickest way to tell is e-1 vs t-1, t1

john poole
bellsouth business
columbia,sc

 

[worldwidedialtone]

You can use Mu law in China or any where else. Same for A law. THe A law tone and cadence tables (LD 56) are different than Mu law. As long as you LD 17 setting and the in LD 97 international companding match up and same for voice voice mail. In China if you are set for Mu Law and have digital trunks then PECL in LD 14 is set for A law. There are several switches around the world that are configured for Mu law and work just fine.

 

[johnpoole]

i agree with that, as long as the switch is changed from the default for that area and the other end of your ties agree it's not a problem.. i never knew you could run boht e1 and t1's in the same switch until i had to do it on an international account.. one good thing (?) about this switch is that very little is carved in stone.. the amount of flexability makes it hard to state absolutes.. i've heard to many techs tell the customer that you can't do that when the truth was the switch could the tech couldn't.

john poole
bellsouth business
columbia,sc

 

[worldwidedialtone]

The only place I could not do Mu Law set up was in Australia, but we were using specialized COT/DID trunk cards and FALC cards for the analog stations and some quirky thing with Telstra the LEC folks.

 

[srmega41]

I can also validate that. We had several Option 11's that were running A-law on one T1 and U-law on another. I have no idea why they were set up that way, but it did work. We did clean it all up once we found the discrepency (actaully came to a head when we upgraded to Succession 3.0), but the branches never complained, and we never had any issues.

Scott M.