SIA releases IP standard, encourages compatibility
ALEXANDRIA, Va.Ã¢â‚¬â€The Security Industry Association on Nov. 14 released a digital communication standard for Internet Protocol Event Reporting, ANSI/SIA DC-09-2007. This standard is intended to ensure equipment compatibility for IP-based reporting from a panel back to a receiver at a central station.
Ã¢â‚¬Å“What this standard does, is it establishes a preferred protocol for manufacturer-independent implementation of Internet reporting,Ã¢â‚¬Â said Ted Nesse, DC-09 technical editor for SIA and vice president of technology for Sequel Technologies. Ã¢â‚¬Å“Now any manufacturer that implements this protocol can expect its panel to be able to report into a receiver at a central station that has a receiver which implements this protocol,Ã¢â‚¬Â he said.
This standard is intended to alleviate the need for central stations to own manufacturer-specific receivers to receive signals over IP. Morgan Hertel, vice president of The Command Center, a California contract central station, said that this incompatibility causes a lot of confusion and cost for central stations. Ã¢â‚¬Å“For every manufacturer, we have to invest a significant amount of cash into equipmentÃ¢â‚¬Â to receive their specific signals, he said. Nesse of SIA said Ã¢â‚¬Å“the manufacturers IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve talked to have been waiting for this day when the standard is officially released for saleÃ¢â‚¬Â¦Manufacturers realize that open design standards are the way to go.Ã¢â‚¬Â
Sascha Kylau, business development manager of Digital Security Controls, the manufacturer of Sur-Gard receivers, was involved in the development of the IP standard and said he believes manufacturers will embrace this standard. Ã¢â‚¬Å“Standards just make it easier for everyone Ã¢â‚¬Â¦ I think a lot of the manufacturers will implement this standard, but I think itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s going to take time and, for receiver manufacturers like myself, this will take time to implement.Ã¢â‚¬Â Kylau couldnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t elaborate on the timeframe for Sur-Gard products to comply with this standard, but Nesse said he expects this standard to have Ã¢â‚¬Å“solid commercial solutions in 2008.Ã¢â‚¬Â
While the standard seems to be welcomed overall by the industry, Hertel of The Command Center thinks SIA took too much time to release this standard.
Ã¢â‚¬Å“Five years is too long to crank out a standard,Ã¢â‚¬Â he said. Ã¢â‚¬Å“I realize some of the timeline is mandated within the ANSI process and the intent is to protect the process so thereÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s plenty of time for public comment, but none of that causes a five-year timeline.Ã¢â‚¬Â
Kylau of DSC also acknowledged that the Ã¢â‚¬Å“standard is probably a little lateÃ¢â‚¬Â but said that it Ã¢â‚¬Å“took time to get all the manufacturers together and get everyone on the same page and agreeing to what the standard should be.Ã¢â‚¬Â
Despite the delay, neither Hertel nor Kylau think the standard is too late to be effective.
Ã¢â‚¬Å“IP is not as prevalent, especially in North America, because of a lack of a standard. ... Hopefully, this will make it easier for central stations to have IP,Ã¢â‚¬Â said Kylau.
Hertel agreed, saying: Ã¢â‚¬Å“ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s not that IP deployment has been so huge that weÃ¢â‚¬â„¢re too late [with this standard]. Central stations may have one or two percent [of their accounts over IP] ... most central stations are not near a rapid deployment of IP, so we need to start with this standard and move forward.Ã¢â‚¬Â