Post by thread:More about PIC and CallerID

Well, I was able to discover 2 chips that seem to be good for decoding the caller ID stuff..... MC14LC5447 Motorola MT88E43BE Mitel Even found the odd FSK Modem chip but were not proper audio freqs for CID. If anyone comes across some PIC source code on how to generate the CallerID transmission please, by all means forward it to myself. I can figure out the actual data bits to send, but generating a carrier frequency and modulating it at the correct frequencies is beyond me. I'm more or less just a "digital" type, analog scares me :) John Mullan PS: I suppose I could just do some fancy switching to send the data portion through to the remote phones......

can you sent me the scanned article? Thank Randy Glenn wrote: {Quote hidden}> I have found, in my great stack of electronics magazines, the article from > the August 1996 Popular Electronics, about a Caller ID - PC interface, using > a PIC and the Motorola CallerID chip. Anyone who wants it can mail me > off-list - I've scanned it in. > > -Randy Glenn > E-Mail: .....PICxpertKILLspam@spam@yahoo.com > Web: http://i.am/PICxpert > > Currently wondering why I can't get in to Safe Mode - where's a Mac when you > need it? > > {Original Message removed}

John, I've done plenty of telephony, CID, blah blah blah and I have to tell you, if it was me I'd leave the phones DC connected to the telco all the time, except when I specifically wanted to take over a line. I'd use a one of those part-68 or better yet BATB approved line siezure detect relays in series with each phone to know when it came offhook. I would connect only passive components to the phone line: movs, relays, flame-proof resistors. FLASH would relay the phone over to 'command' mode, i.e. 6V with DTMF detect (I would remember that I have line sieze detect per line, I can tell who flashed). So commands would be FLASH 1, FLASH 2, etc. I would also remember to have a command like FLASH 9 that caused a 'real' flash on the telco. Why? First, if everything on the line is passive, I would be able to get a waiver on part 68, so no 6 month repeat inspection, Second, IIRC Caller ID is licensed by Nortel. Third, there's quite a variety of onhook services besides Caller ID: VMWI, ADSI, stutter dial tone, ring cadences, CID call waiting, etc. It is unlikely that I could accurately model the entire phone system, and certainly couldn't predict it: I wouldn't want customers to complain when the emulation didn't support some new magic service. Also if it was me, I totally ignore pulse dial phones. But on the other hand it isn't me :) - Rich On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, John Mullan wrote: {Quote hidden}> Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:20:13 -0500 > From: John Mullan <jmullanKILLspamHOME.COM> > Reply-To: pic microcontroller discussion list <.....PICLISTKILLspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU> > To: EraseMEPICLISTspam_OUTTakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU > Subject: More about PIC and CallerID > > Well, I was able to discover 2 chips that seem to be good for decoding the > caller ID stuff..... > > MC14LC5447 Motorola > MT88E43BE Mitel > > Even found the odd FSK Modem chip but were not proper audio freqs for CID. > > > If anyone comes across some PIC source code on how to generate the CallerID > transmission please, by all means forward it to myself. I can figure out > the actual data bits to send, but generating a carrier frequency and > modulating it at the correct frequencies is beyond me. I'm more or less just > a "digital" type, analog scares me :) > > John Mullan > > PS: I suppose I could just do some fancy switching to send the data portion > through to the remote phones...... >

Rich... Sounds like a good idea. I really want to add the ability to call each extension phone using seperate voice paths. Your idea would work if I utilized a few extra relays. I could just monitor the line and switch as necessary, either by listening for DTMF or FLASH. Come to think of it, I would listen for DTMF so that FLASH could remain it's usual function. I've already invested in the Mitel hybrids and don't want to waste them. This really isn't a commercial venture yet. It is something for me to work on between projects. I can handle everything I need to, just not passing the CNID data to capable sets. I wouldn't even care but the wife (already distraught over the fact that I am concocting another device, hehehe) loves her CallerID so I need to plan it into my circuit. My alternative to date is to run 4 wire to each jack. Bypass any CNID processing, switch the current ringing line to the spare pair and just use dedicated boxes. But then that wastes the phones I have already. Oh well, the standard is plain enough, just need to generate the carrier and properly formated data packet and modulate. Seems simple but I'm a digital guy and analog is not my strong suit. John -----Original Message----- From: pic microcontroller discussion list [@spam@PICLISTKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of Rich Leggitt Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 9:14 PM To: KILLspamPICLISTKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: More about PIC and CallerID John, I've done plenty of telephony, CID, blah blah blah ......