Snooty

Paying for more bandwidth at BranchSites is ok when you have a few sites but when you have 10+ sites there is a significant saving to be made by using a smarter solution In most cases the ADSL upload limit is due to distance from exchange. The only real way around this is to move from cheap ADSL to expensive SDSL. These ADSL lines will be only used for cctv so system has full 256K to play with.

Hello Everybody, Thank you for your replies and apologies for the delayed post. In essence the wireguys are correct what I am looking for is a list of systems that have a 'restreaming server' facility. This restreaming server will connect to all the other servers rather than the cameras directly. Users will logon to the restreaming server and be able to view any camera at any site. Reasons Better bandwidth management - BranchSites have poor upload bandwidth so If 4 different web users connect to siteA to view camera1 then SiteA is trying to upload the stream to each users. e.g 256K upload = 64K Each User This makes for a very poor experience. Much better if SiteA streams to Headoffice (plenty of bandwidth) and then Headoffice system 'restreams' the video to multiple users. So Stream from SiteA to headoffice of camera1 is 256K and then stream from headoffice to each user is 10MB/4=2.5MB which means each user can get the full 256K. Also as Fa chirs says the BranchSite systems will only stream to headoffice system upon request so if users only view 2 cameras then only those two are sent by the BranchSite to headoffice for restreaming. Better Security - BranchSites simply connect to headoffice via vpn and do not allow any other form of connection to the general web. No users to manage etc... This allows for low cost and no maintenance router setup at each BranchSite. Headoffice system network system is much more sophisticated and includes 2 factor authentication before users can logon. So users need only be created and managed at headoffice system. The option securitysys suggested of multi-stream the cameras to the local NVR and a HeadOffice NVR is my fallback position and will also do the job. However I thought it was worth investigating all my options prior to commit. I have done a number of simpler installs mainly based around axis and qnap systems but in this job a more sophisticated system is required. Thanks to you guys I now have a list of systems which I will research more closely before putting a proposal together for the project. Many Thanks for all your help. Peter

Thanks for the list wireguys, there were a couple on there which I was not aware of and will also investigate. What I am after is a little more complex and as far as I know not available for some included on your list. I want to install a localserver at each site for local recording. I want to install a headserver at headoffice or cloud. The HeaderServer will stream from each localserver (Not directly from the cameras). Users can only log into the Headserver (Via Browser) and be able to view any camera at any local site. The key thing is that there will only ever be one stream between localserver and headserver. Users cannot logon to the localserver. Users can only logon to the headserver. Thanks again for all your help. Peter

I have actually taken a look at go1984 It is an interesting program to say the least I think its bandwidth adjustable stream abilities and browser support is fanstastic. However unless I have missed something it does not have the ability for a single system to connect to multiple go1984 systems. I had thought that its "cluster mode" might do this but it did not seem to work in this way. In many ways go1984 is a very advanced system however I think the programmer should be forced to undertake a GUI design course Also I simply cannot work out why given its excellent web page support and the fact it can run as a service, it cannot be configured remotely via a web page. Thanks again Peter

Thank you very much for the Genetec Link, I had not come across it before. (Perhaps a sticky link in [EDITED] with a current list of IP NVR software might be a good idea ) It certainly sounds along the lines of what I had in mind, I had thought my idea would be fairly simple but obviously not! I shall make further enquiries with Genetec and will also check out Avigilon. With regard to NUUO, it does has a CMS system but as far as I know its CMS system does not act as a server allowing clients to log into it via a web interface. Thank you all for your advice and as ever any other software to add to my list would be greatly appreciated. Peter

Hello Megapixelman Thank you for your reply. I have actually looked at the Exacq products and indeed it is very good but unless I have missed something it does not seem to do what I need. From my research so far it seems that most decent systems including Exacq have a a video management system VMS ability. However as far as I can see the VMS software itself then does not act as a broadcast server to allow users to log into the VMS system so that they can view cameras from multiple sites. What I am really after in summary is a system where the central server can take the feed from remote servers (not the cameras) and then users can log into the central server (via web browser) to view feed from multiple sites. To me this makes good sense from a security and bandwidth viewpoint but I seem to be the only one who thinks so!! As I said the only system I found capable of doing this is QNAP but I prefer a software solution as from my experience the QNAP hardware is grossly underpowered. Any ideas or guidance appreciated Thanks Peter

Hello All, I have been scratching my head over the following and would appreciate any insight that you can give. I wish to select a IP NVR system which would allow the following. (IP Cameras Mixture of Axis , Panasonic , Mobotix) SiteA: 10 IP Cameras -LAN--LocalNVRSystemA---Internet---- SiteB: 15 IP Cameras -LAN--LocalNVRSystemB---Internet---- SiteC: etc... 10 Sites in total This is so far pretty straightforward and any half decent NVR system will do the job nicely. i.e Record Locally at High Quality for local view and playback Now the upload speed at these sites is pretty limited i.e. standard ADSL Upload varies between sites from 220KB to 1MB So if I allowed multiple users to log into each site for live view then things would get become dire very quickly. It is also very messy for users (Mostly management!) to have to log onto each site as multiple addresses have to be used etc.. What would therefore be ideal is NVRSystem at Headoffice Site (or even using a hosted server using a provider such as 1&1) which would attach to each sites LocalNVRSystem (not directly to the cameras) e.g: LocalNVRSystemA----Internet----HeadOfficeNVRSystem LocalNVRSystemB----Internet----HeadOfficeNVRSystem etc.. so each LocalNVRSystem would connect to the HeadofficeNVRSystem (which has plenty of bandwidth) The idea is that users would simply logon to the HeadofficeNVRSystem (via web browser with bandwidth adjustment) and could view camera at all sites rather than having to logon to each site. The network load & security would be much better as I would only have one connection between the LocalNVRSystem and the HeadofficeNVR System. For example. 5 users logged onto HeadofficeNVR system to view SiteA would not be a problem as SiteA only has to connect to Headoffice and not manage 5 separate connections. The HeadofficeNVR system would be mainly used for live view but ideally could even record for selected cameras at a lower quality / frame rate e.g 1 frame per 5 seconds etc.. for evaluation playback at good bandwidth for users logging on. All of this would create no further congestion for the LocalNVRSystems. The only system that I have been able to identify that comes close to the above is qnap viostor. (Although it does not allow the remote view quality to differ from the local recorded quality - which is really daft). However I would much prefer a software solution so that I am not tied to a single hardware and also can use decent hardware. I would appreciate if anyone can provide me with a list of NVR software that could do the above. Many Thanks Peter