Ip Cameras, NAS Storage and few other questions

[maysky 0]

Hi,

Gratz to everybody with the new server!

Several questions - as usuall.

 

- Have anybody tried any IP cameras (Panasonic BL-C101 in particular) with NAS devices (Buffalo for example)? If I do not want to keep PC on - all the time - can I store video from those cameras on NAS? Is it worth it?

 

-I am looking at the company's - offering dynamic DNS hosting. Found few so far - http://www.easydns.com/ (somebody here told me about this one) and http://www.dyndns.com/

Does anybody has any experience with those or any other ones? Main concern is using that service with different locations on my own domain (ex: loc1.host.com etc) It will be great if I create many 3rd lvl domains with that (>50)

 

-Does anybody has any experience with company's offering video streaming solutions (in case if some location has bad network connection and video stream will be really laggy if several (>10) users will be accessing it at the same time)??

[thewireguys 3]

I would recommend you look at Mobotix. There cameras can record strait to a NAS or locally to the camera.

[long520 0]

first:how many serves you want get.

second:how long times do you want record.

When we confirmed after the needs of users then we know how to use the storage type and equipment.

about the dns,that is not a problem,many free dns and i know some Manufacturers have the own dns server for their video servers and ip cam.that's mean more quickly link and more Specialization service

[Twilo123 0]

i forget offhand but i think you have to run recording software on pc anyways to record the panasonic video so it would kind of defeat your purpose to use the nas with this camera.

 

dyndns.com is very popular. the free version requires you to click an active link in an email every 30 days or it kills the account.

[maysky 0]

thewireguys: Mobotix is too expensive for me now. Maybe later, but now I probably need to look at NAS devices - if any of them can catch those cameras streams from network.

 

 

 

long520: how many serves? - ???

times to record... hm - i would like just to record a stream to the NAS and just delete the oldest records - usual way.

I know that even Panasonic is offering free DDNS service, but I would like to use my own one - or at least with my own domain.

 

 

 

Twilo123: I know that, but I guess some of the latest NAS devices offering some kind of software to catch those streams from network - then I do not need a PC for that. I want to eliminate PC from that system at all.

I do not mind paying for service at all - I just need to be sure that it is reliable and I can get what I need (usage with my own domain name and allowance to create bunch of 3rd lvl domains)[/b]

[Twilo123 0]

well if you knew that then i don't understand why you ask the question. look for what cameras the nas you are interested in says it supports in whatever recording software it supports inherently. all i am saying is i don't think the panny cam is inherently nas compatible as other cameras like mobotix are.

[long520 0]

long520: how many serves? - ???

times to record... hm - i would like just to record a stream to the NAS and just delete the oldest records - usual way.

I know that even Panasonic is offering free DDNS service, but I would like to use my own one - or at least with my own domain.

 

it is need to modify procedures(source code in the IC)if you want use you own domain.

[thewireguys 3]

thewireguys: Mobotix is too expensive for me now. Maybe later, but now I probably need to look at NAS devices - if any of them can catch those cameras streams from network.

 

Mobotix has the ability to record directly to a NAS... Panasonic does not have the ability record directly to a NAS..... You will have to have a NVR to record video from that camera. You might be able to upload images to a ftp on a NAS but it will only be images and not very user friendly to review recorded images.

[jtreibick 0]

I think a consumer NAS (like the buffalo) would be okay for a single cam, but not for a several cameras at megapixel or higher. My experience with consumer NAS is that the embedded server OS/hardware lacks speed for speedy data transfer ... even if they are endowed with gigabit network and bizillion mbps SATA drives.

 

Still, I would imagine in the not too distant future that many camera manufacturers and OEMs will support direct recording to fileshares as a way to offer a streamlined and lower cost solution for entry-level IP CCTV systems.

[Soundy 1]

Well, "consumer" is your key word there. We're dealing with "professional" and even "industrial-grade" cameras; a consumer-grade recording system is going to have problems keeping up.

[thewireguys 3]

I think a consumer NAS (like the buffalo) would be okay for a single cam, but not for a several cameras at megapixel or higher. My experience with consumer NAS is that the embedded server OS/hardware lacks speed for speedy data transfer ... even if they are endowed with gigabit network and bizillion mbps SATA drives.

 

Still, I would imagine in the not too distant future that many camera manufacturers and OEMs will support direct recording to fileshares as a way to offer a streamlined and lower cost solution for entry-level IP CCTV systems.

 

But you need to have a camera that can support recording directly to a NAS device consumer or professional it doesn't matter. As for as I know Mobotix is the only manufacture that can do this without having a dedicated PC running all the time. Hell depending in your storage requirements you wouldn't even need a NAS box becuase you can have the images stored directly on the camera without any computers running 24/7.

[thewireguys 3]

you could try something like this: I have never used it so I can't give you any feed back.

 

http://www.qnap.com/pro_detail_feature.asp?p_id=114

[ommarfarooq 0]

anyone could help on this..

 

why Nas storage is not prefered as primary storage for cctv survellance, what i could figure out is as below:

 

NAS provides only file level access to a storage volume while DAS and SAN provide block level access. In surveillance, block level access is required

by most systems, including Avigilon Control Center (ACC). As a result, file level access and the use of network attached storage is typically limited to applications with very few cameras.

 

Please specify if any other reasons?

[GMaster1 0]

I think there are more factors that the Avigilon papers aren't telling here.

 

SANs are almost always connected to a server. You could think of the iSCSI interface connecting the SAN to its server (called a "LUN") as a special "direct connection" which gives it that block level access. For that reason, you can't use a real SAN as a place to store things on a network by itself, so your idea of wanting to not use a PC would be an issue here.

 

Also worthy to note that both SAN and NAS performance rely heavily on the following:

 

1.) Individual and combined disk speeds (measured in IOPS)

2.) RAID configuration

3.) Controller size

4.) Physical channel configuration (Teamed Ethernet, Fiber, etc)

5.) Frame size (Even a NAS can increase throughput using jumbo frames)

 

As someone who inherently loves SANs and hates NAS boxes, I bought a little NAS box to test how it works with recording IP cams and was pretty impressed. Though, if I was to do any type of professional installation, I'd be really cautious on using them..

 

Almost every little NAS box is guilty of the following:

 

1.) Generally slower speeds due to small processors/specs

2.) No redundancy in PSU, controller, or OS!! (That's a big one)

3.) More difficult to repair/replace components

4.) Cost more than standard server when you want 5+ bays

5.) Cheap controller cards

 

And almost every SAN is guilty of the following:

 

1.) Expensive!

 

 

Hope that helps

[dexterash 0]

One other factor of the NAS: usually, uses a common filesystem, so there is no control on the security of the recordings. Thus, the recordings can be deleted or a part of them can be deleted (usually by a third person).

[thewireguys 3]

I have been using a Synology DS1812+ for my Avigilon storage for the last week or so. Right now I have 100Mbps ish streaming to it and I have had no issues. I really like how easy it is to expand your storage with Avigilon. So far I am very happy.

[GMaster1 0]

I looked into that DS1812+ as well but the price was almost the same as a traditional 2U NAS with redundant architecture. Then again I'm not sure why I need redundancy... until I think about my days managing walls of these:

 

 

 

wireguy-- what drives did ya stack it with out of curiosity?

[dexterash 0]

I have been using a Synology DS1812+ for my Avigilon storage for the last week or so. Right now I have 100Mbps ish streaming to it and I have had no issues. I really like how easy it is to expand your storage with Avigilon. So far I am very happy.

Via what protocol? NFS/CIFS/SMBFS/FTP/other?

[thewireguys 3]

Have 2 volumes setup one with 4 year old 500GB WB Blacks for iSCSI storage and another volume with 3TB WD Reds for NAS/iSCSI. I got this just to test iSCSI with Avigilon and other VMSs. I would not use this unit for enterprise customers but iSCSI has worked very well with Avigilon.

[shropna 0]

Also Bosch use recording directly to NAS (iSCSI protocol). And free viewing software, up to 16 cameras.

Range of Bosch cameras is wide, from cheap to "hi end", with inteligent image analytic, etc...

[ommarfarooq 0]

Thanks Guys

 

however i need some major reasons to defend myself not to use NAS storage (ISILON) for survellance as a primary storage however could use as back up. i am willing to use RAID 6 arrays as i am pretty comfortable with that but have to motivate client on this, need some valid technical points to justify.

 

we are talking about more than 250 cameras above 2 Mega pixel, which means above 500 Mbps throughput/ingest rate.

 

could anyone add comments on this??

[thewireguys 3]

Just quoted a project with 1300Mbps incoming bandwidth and we are quoting internal storage for this project.

[ommarfarooq 0]

for 1300 Mbps That is grt,

 

we have 250 cameras

 

proposed hardware from avigilon goes like below

 

1. NV Server ( upto 128 cameras each max from avigilon) proposed three of them for future expandability.

 

2. NVR expansion Module 30TB Each . ( no. of expansion modules is too many)

 

i want to reduce the no of expansion modules, as total storage is around 700 TB.

 

could you help on this to suggest some better solution or we could use some software for compression?

all system from avigilon will be best?

[thewireguys 3]

FYI if you have 250 2MP cameras you bandwidth will be a lot more then 500Mbps. A 1080P will normally give you 4-6Mbps per camera so with 250 cameras you are looking at around 1500Mbps of max incoming bandwidth. At that level of bandwidth you will need more then 6 servers if you want room to grow.

[ommarfarooq 0]

thanks for the information about servers..

 

what about the storage? how many expansion modules i need , max we can have 30 tb module from Avigilon attached with servers, and why we cant have San storage as primary storage?

 

2 MP - 201

 

11 MP - 8

 

5 MP - 11

 

PTZ - 26

 

TOTAL : 246 CAMERA at 12 f/s and 70 % motion all cameras at full resolution for all cameras.