tdaugirdas
Technical User
Dagwood - I would be interested in how you can get Caller ID info to pass to an analog phone on a Legend.
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
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 Westi on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Passing Caller ID to Analog Phones on a Legend 2
- Thread starter tdaugirdas
- Start date
- Status
- Thread starter
- #21
tdaugirdas
Technical User
Ahhh - I wonder if this Caller ID converter box ()like the EX-220) would work in getting Caller ID from a Vonage line connected to a Merlin/Legend PBX. Dagwoodsystems - where did you buy the EX220? I see it is a taiwanese manufacturer.
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
dagwoodsystems
Programmer
God you guys are sharp. Yes, technically what is passed along is the number dialed which again, is not precisely Caller-ID.
I used this trick because I needed to be able to uniquely identify the called number so that it could be mapped to a specific email.
And why did I go down this path of insanity? Well, the customer purchased a four port analog fax-modem card more than two years ago and couldn't return it. They spent some vulgar amount of money for it because it came bundled with the software. RightFax tech support told me that only the Definity was supported, not the Magix. And I thought, "No clown is gonna tell me what my Magix can and can't do." And thus endeth my grip on reality.
Tom--I just Googled the EX-200 and see that they don't make it anymore. Obviously it's been a while since I've done this. Looks like the 220 does essentially the same thing, although I'm not sure what the differences are.
After reviewing my notes, I should correct a point in the story: The EX-200 could not throw away the extraneous digits. Instead I see that the RightFax software automatically threw away *, # and any leading zeros; we simply added the "3" to the list as well. It took a couple cracks at the software's receive digit pacing, but after finding the sweet spot, it hasn't failed since.
I discovered a couple of things in my experimentation. One was that the group had to be set to VMI. Otherwise, hunt groups would pass #01#817## (or whatever the trunk number was). I guess that's how (1) the Magix knows what information to gather before sending to an end-user display ("OUTSIDE" vs "TIM A") and (2) how voicemail knows to play an Auto Attendant rather than an ordinary mailbox greeting. Something like that anyway.... What's clear is that there is additional information (mode codes?) that have to be dealt with in this situtation.
Clearly, this is an unsupported config. But I personally don't see how I've broken any of the rules of telecom just because the hunt group was designed with VMS in mind.
I used this trick because I needed to be able to uniquely identify the called number so that it could be mapped to a specific email.
And why did I go down this path of insanity? Well, the customer purchased a four port analog fax-modem card more than two years ago and couldn't return it. They spent some vulgar amount of money for it because it came bundled with the software. RightFax tech support told me that only the Definity was supported, not the Magix. And I thought, "No clown is gonna tell me what my Magix can and can't do." And thus endeth my grip on reality.
Tom--I just Googled the EX-200 and see that they don't make it anymore. Obviously it's been a while since I've done this. Looks like the 220 does essentially the same thing, although I'm not sure what the differences are.
After reviewing my notes, I should correct a point in the story: The EX-200 could not throw away the extraneous digits. Instead I see that the RightFax software automatically threw away *, # and any leading zeros; we simply added the "3" to the list as well. It took a couple cracks at the software's receive digit pacing, but after finding the sweet spot, it hasn't failed since.
I discovered a couple of things in my experimentation. One was that the group had to be set to VMI. Otherwise, hunt groups would pass #01#817## (or whatever the trunk number was). I guess that's how (1) the Magix knows what information to gather before sending to an end-user display ("OUTSIDE" vs "TIM A") and (2) how voicemail knows to play an Auto Attendant rather than an ordinary mailbox greeting. Something like that anyway.... What's clear is that there is additional information (mode codes?) that have to be dealt with in this situtation.
Clearly, this is an unsupported config. But I personally don't see how I've broken any of the rules of telecom just because the hunt group was designed with VMS in mind.
- Thread starter
- #24
tdaugirdas
Technical User
Hi Dagwoodsystems! I did find a place to order the EX220. I hope in converting the "dirty" CID signal from Vonage - it just may clean it up enough for my trusty Magix to finally understand it. It's certainly worth a shot - and they now make a 4-port version (EX600). If this works - I may just be able to start recommending Vonage as an option to small business Legend/Magix customers that want cheap Local Toll and LD phone service AND Caller ID. I will let you know if it works!
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
dagwoodsystems
Programmer
Tom--You've got me curious as to what the "dirty" CID is all about.
What I know is that VoIP carriers rely on signal analyzers to detect modems and fax calls. They do so because those devices cannot tolerate the compression that's ordinarily used for voice calls. The downside is that modem detection doesn't always work. It works MOST of the time, but there seems to be enough frustration out there that Vonage users keep it for voice only.
I'm wondering whether the problem CID that you refer to has anything to do with an inability to keep compression turned off during the ring cycles. Caller-ID is an adaptation of an old modulation technique used by Bell 103 modems, so it kinda makes sense.
Anyway, I'm jumping to conclusions. And as usual, my mind automatically steers itself toward the most complicated explanation without knowing all the facts.
But I'd love to chase this one in another post.
What I know is that VoIP carriers rely on signal analyzers to detect modems and fax calls. They do so because those devices cannot tolerate the compression that's ordinarily used for voice calls. The downside is that modem detection doesn't always work. It works MOST of the time, but there seems to be enough frustration out there that Vonage users keep it for voice only.
I'm wondering whether the problem CID that you refer to has anything to do with an inability to keep compression turned off during the ring cycles. Caller-ID is an adaptation of an old modulation technique used by Bell 103 modems, so it kinda makes sense.
Anyway, I'm jumping to conclusions. And as usual, my mind automatically steers itself toward the most complicated explanation without knowing all the facts.
But I'd love to chase this one in another post.
- Thread starter
- #26
tdaugirdas
Technical User
Well - I have always heard that the signal from Vonage is "dirty" - meaning a lot of uninterperable garbage - along with the CID signal. For some reason a $5 CID/ or cheap single-line phone with a display can interpret the CID info correctly - but a PBX - such as Legend/Magix draws a blank. I am sure the fax/modem call issue is related. I hope that the EX220 - which converts the signal - can first interpret it and then output a "clean" caller ID signal to the PBX. It sounds like it COULD work - or at least worth a try. So - I ordered one - and we will check it out. Now - Merlinman indicates that he has no trouble getting CID from a Comcast VOIP line. I would try Comcast - but they are more expensive - and I would have to get a cable modem. I now use DSL. I will start a new post - once I get to check this out. I have been looking for a solution to the Vonage CID issue for some time - and even worked with one of their Tier 3 level engineers for some time to see if we could tweak settings to make it work - but to no avail.
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
dagwoodsystems
Programmer
After doing a little research, I see that several PBX vendors are complaining about Vonage specifically. Here's one involving an Altigen PBX. All the customer did was switch carriers and boom , no CID:
Vonage advertises use of the MDMF "flavor" of Caller-ID, which sends the number AND NAME. However, some forum users complain that the CID name isn't sent either ( This may be an indication that the standard is not strictly adhered to. Let me tell you, after working in a startup company that makes telco products, it's not all that unreasonable to expect these standards to be bent a little.
Believe it or not, a lot of these cheapo telephones are sold internationally, and are therefore made with the ability to decode five or six different versions of CID. Comcast appears to use a CID format that's closer to the British Telecom FSK standard, which the Magix may support.
Given all this, you should belay the order on that EX200, sailor. That box just does a DTMF to FSK conversion, it doesn't reformat or "clean up" the FSK tones in the same way that a CSU/DSU might recover and reframe a T1 signal.
It would be interesting to have you plug into your SMDR port and see if the CID is arriving at the line level, but somehow not being passed to the telephone.
Lotsa good stuff at I'm hoping we'll also hear from a certain "phone phreak since phorever" who may know something about orange boxes.
Vonage advertises use of the MDMF "flavor" of Caller-ID, which sends the number AND NAME. However, some forum users complain that the CID name isn't sent either ( This may be an indication that the standard is not strictly adhered to. Let me tell you, after working in a startup company that makes telco products, it's not all that unreasonable to expect these standards to be bent a little.
Believe it or not, a lot of these cheapo telephones are sold internationally, and are therefore made with the ability to decode five or six different versions of CID. Comcast appears to use a CID format that's closer to the British Telecom FSK standard, which the Magix may support.
Given all this, you should belay the order on that EX200, sailor. That box just does a DTMF to FSK conversion, it doesn't reformat or "clean up" the FSK tones in the same way that a CSU/DSU might recover and reframe a T1 signal.
It would be interesting to have you plug into your SMDR port and see if the CID is arriving at the line level, but somehow not being passed to the telephone.
Lotsa good stuff at I'm hoping we'll also hear from a certain "phone phreak since phorever" who may know something about orange boxes.
- Thread starter
- #28
tdaugirdas
Technical User
Well - in "converting" - I hope it also clarifies the CID message. I plan to set it to convert from Bellcore FSK to Bellcore FSK - and hopefully clean up the transmission. Hey - it's worth a try.
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
Tom Daugirdas,
President
STCG, Inc.
stcg.com
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question