Advice on MultiSite NVR System

[Snooty 0]

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

[Megapixelman 0]

Hi Peter,

 

I would be looking at the Exacq Products, Should fit your Budget and also fit the scope of the job. The have unlimited Clients and also on edge processing, this means the camera handles the motion. ( Don't need a Super Computer with a super Price tag )

 

There is a online trail at www.exacq.com and I think you will be impressed.

 

I have used the QNAP many times before and although they are OK thye are not at the level I think you need for management and backups are a pain with QNAP.

 

Hope this Helped.

[Snooty 0]

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

[fa chris 0]

Check out Genetec Omnicast Enterprise:

 

http://www.genetec.com/Products/Omnicast/Pages/omnicast-enterprise-en.aspx

 

Not sure if it will be cost prohibitive or not, but it should do what you're looking for.

 

The architecture is simple, there's a gateway server that controls everything at a single location (your HQ? or 1&1), then you'll put an archiver at each site and the cameras will record directly to the local archiver. Any client can connect to the gateway (which is connected to the archivers) and pull recorded video or stream live video from any archiver. Omnicast is just a software package, the servers can be anything. They have a pretty wide list of cameras they support. Also has a web interface I think.

 

You should also check into Avigilon Control Center: http://www.avigilon.com/products/controlcenter/

 

I'm not sure Avigilon does everything above but I know it at least comes close and I'm a big fan of the interface and ease of use.

[Campbell 0]

NUUO has a CMS system

[Snooty 0]

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

[SDM Group 0]

Check out go1984.com

[thewireguys 3]

Milestone

OnSSi

Genetec

Exacq

IPconfigure

 

They will all do what you want.

 

You will install a server at each site and then use the client software to view all cameras as one big system.

 

Some systems will do it better then others, but your biggest problem will be your up load speeds.

[Snooty 0]

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

[Snooty 0]

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

[securitysys 0]

Genetec is an awesome system and I always recommend it but for this case couldn't you just multi-stream the cameras to the local NVR and the headquarters NVR at the same time and then let the headquarters NVR re-stream to your other customers? Most NVR's should do the job.

[thewireguys 3]

What are you trying to gain by setting the system up this way?

[fa chris 0]

Sounds like he's on a corporate network and only wants one gateway to the outside world, ie: the head end server. Having the local recorders only stream what's requested to the head end server at certain times will also save on bandwidth and storage space (at the HQ nvr) compared to having it all on all the time.

[thewireguys 3]

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

 

Not sure how you think your only gonna have one stream from local to headend. If your viewing more then one camera your gonna have multiple streams live or recorded.

 

Typically you would install a server at each site then use client or web software to log into and view the cameras that the admin lets you have access to.

 

Have a look at Ipconfigure, they might have what your looking for. It is enterprise and all browser based. http://www.ipconfigure.com/ if you need contact info let me know.

Edited July 26, 2011 by Guest

[securitysys 0]

What are you trying to gain by setting the system up this way?

 

All of his other locations are 256k to 1Mbps uploads, so he wants to re-stream all cameras from the HQ because it has a faster internet connection. So if he's streaming cameras from site a and b to the HQ and HQ has a 10Mbps upload for example more users will be able to watch those cameras at the same time.

 

Only problem with the method I suggested is he's going to be streaming all cameras all the time over the net.

[thewireguys 3]

If you only have a 256K upload to the headend how are you gonna take advantage of the 10Mb upload at the headend?

[securitysys 0]

If you only have a 256K upload to the headend how are you gonna take advantage of the 10Mb upload at the headend?

 

Say he has 4 sites at 256k each and 4 users that wanted to access each site, that means each user would get 56k a site. If he streamed all 4 sites to the server at 256k each the server could then restream at the full 256k to each user.

[thewireguys 3]

If you only have a 256K upload to the headend how are you gonna take advantage of the 10Mb upload at the headend?

 

Say he has 4 sites at 256k each and 4 users that wanted to access each site, that means each user would get 56k a site. If he streamed all 4 sites to the server at 256k each the server could then restream at the full 256k to each user.

 

Well the will depend on the VMS that he uses. Some VMS software when you connect to the cameras from the client you connect directly to the camera other you connect to the server. So then correct name that he should be using is a "restreaming server" at the headend but you will still have to stream ALL cameras to that server so it will handle the client connections.

 

"Say he has 4 sites at 256k each and 4 users that wanted to access each site, that means each user would get 56k a site. If he streamed all 4 sites to the server at 256k each the server could then restream at the full 256k to each user."

 

If he has 4 cameras at the remote site they will have to share the upload bandwidth to the restreaming server and they will be limited to the same 256K.

[securitysys 0]

If you only have a 256K upload to the headend how are you gonna take advantage of the 10Mb upload at the headend?

 

Say he has 4 sites at 256k each and 4 users that wanted to access each site, that means each user would get 56k a site. If he streamed all 4 sites to the server at 256k each the server could then restream at the full 256k to each user.

 

Well the will depend on the VMS that he uses. Some VMS software when you connect to the cameras from the client you connect directly to the camera other you connect to the server. So then correct name that he should be using is a "restreaming server" at the headend but you will still have to stream ALL cameras to that server so it will handle the client connections.

 

Yea, I think Exacq streams directly from the camera, but as long as he goes with a NVR that restreams he'll be okay. It's still an NVR as he wants to record cameras at the HQ as well.

 

"Say he has 4 sites at 256k each and 4 users that wanted to access each site, that means each user would get 56k a site. If he streamed all 4 sites to the server at 256k each the server could then restream at the full 256k to each user."

 

If he has 4 cameras at the remote site they will have to share the upload bandwidth to the restreaming server and they will be limited to the same 256K.

 

Yea, but whats better 4 client connections to that same 4 cameras on 256K of bandwidth which would give them a total of 16K per camera-per user, or the site streaming to the the HQ NVR and being re streamed to all users at the full 64K per camera-per user?

[Snooty 0]

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

[SDM Group 0]

Obvious question, but will the customer spring for more bandwidth. Also are the branch offices also using the network for uploading to corporate, you may not have the 256k at certain times if so.

[Snooty 0]

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.

[hardwired 0]

Milestone Corporate supports multicasting, which would reduce bandwidth in the way you are asking, but only for live viewing, playback is in unicast.

 

Not sure if any manufacturer supports multicast playback, I'm not sure if that would even be technically feasible.

 

Also, if you want to enable multicasting to reduce bandwidth, you will need to have all sites linked with VPN tunnels (layer 2 connectivity between sites) to allow multicast traffic through (and, all switches in the path would need to support IGMP).