Use Exisiting Infrastructure or Pull New Network?

[TK 0]

Over the past year I have had vendors come to our corporate office to demo IP cameras for our sales staff. Last year before we started installing IP solutions our sales staff was given training by a nationwide supplier. This supplier as well as about half of the vendors have sworn that it is good practice to install IP solutions on existing infrastructure. Typically we do not install more than 50 IP cameras per site, but running on an existing network does not sound like an optimal solution

 

Currently I have an installation of 9 IP cameras 5 that are Axis 211M running on a 10/100 network. Normally this would be ok if the network wasn't also carrying the normal network operations and IP phone system. Clocking the cameras back to 7 ips should prevent the cameras from fully clogging the network, but I am concerned about the possibility of a faulty camera dumping garbage packets onto the network.

 

My question is - Do you run your own network for the IP cameras or utilize existing infrastructure?

 

Any and all feedback is welcome

 

TK

[user1 0]

I generally set up a separate network for the cameras. Cabling is pretty cheap, as is switching hardware or wireless. I always do PoE when able, and then stick it on a UPS so if the power goes out the entire system will stay up.

[VST_Man 1]

seperate network is always best.but, ask "them" to provide you with a network load/usage chart for the system "they" are recommending. It;s easy to say ok but another to prove it....and in our world you should be able to prove the installation of X cameras onto a know network and calculate the impact.

 

I have a client that has fiber everywhere and continues to place everything onto it with the idea that they can't bottleneck it or break it. I cautioned them and advised them t the above. If someone wants to stack things on your network inorder to sell you a product "they" should be able to explain the impact. If they cannot, you'd better be careful since "buyer beware" applies.................

[jasonkkn 0]

I guess a good place to start is asking yourself questions like these:

 

1. how many IP cameras will I install in total? (this will give you an idea of the amount of bandwidth that will be consumed by the cameras)

 

2. what is the expected viewing frame rate? (this will let you know the bandwidth consumption per camera)

 

3. Is there gonna be recording? (if there is, it only means that there is constant traffic from camera to recording server)

 

4. How many clients will be viewing the same cameras simultaneously? (if camera is transmitting in unicast, number of clients multiply by number of cameras will be the total bandwidth)

 

5. Where are the clients located logically (with respect to the LAN)? (this will help you determine if video traffic will be routed across subnets)

 

6. the video stream from the camera - are they sent in multicast?

 

7. if its in multicast, can my existing network equipment handle multicast traffic? (most existing network equipement are not multicast ready, unless your corporate LAN is being used for lots of multimedia / video applications)

 

Typically, if you have small number of cameras (say below 15 units) and does not require any form of recording, then I'd assume that it'll be safe to have it in your existing LAN. Other than these, it'd be better to opt for a seaparate infrastructure for your IP cameras.

 

hope this helps somewhat.

[fields_g 0]

Yes, separation is important for both data security and performance, but it can be rather simple if you have the right network equipment. There has been talk in this thread about physical separation of networks. The same can be done with implementing VLANs in the network hardware.

 

In layman's terms, you can tell your switch that port #1,5,7, and 9 are to be separated from the rest of the network. There is to be no communication between the two sets. This makes sure unauthorized people don't see data coming from cameras as well as separates broadcast/multicast traffic from the rest of the network. Just choose the ports that contain your cameras, DVRs, monitoring clients, etc. and separtate them. If you need network/internet connection, you need to configure a router or have a computer with 2 network cards connected to both networks, that can act as a router. Most institutions have VLANSs setup already for management of network equipment, separating server farms, separating sensitive offices (security), and/or VOIP telephones.

 

If this seems a bit complicated, the exact same result can be achieved by installing a new switch and moving the cables that run to your cameras to that switch. This approach doesn't work so well if you have multiple cable closets.

 

Either way, if you have enough jacks on walls already, you do not need to pull new wire, but just organize how they interface with the network.

 

BTW.... I am a networking professional.

[jeromephone 6]

If you can keep the cameras on a seperate network it is best. A lot of times you will have spare data drops that can be patched to seperate switchs etc. Then only run new cable where necessary. A lot of stuff is going on the network and QOS problems are bound to come up. If you have a seperate network you can tweak your own equipment without having to involve IT as much.

[Thomas 0]

Seperate network is always better. Because issues like this can always pop up:

 

http://seclists.org/bugtraq/2006/May/0336.html

http://securitytracker.com/alerts/2003/May/1006854.html

http://securitytracker.com/alerts/2004/Nov/1012157.html

 

So either physical or VLAN separation should be used on the cameras.

[Soundy 1]

And another consideration: if you're "retrofitting" an IP-cam setup into an existing building, you can't always be sure of the quality of the existing network wiring. Pulling your own allows you to control the quality yourself.

 

Naturally, this may be less of a concern with new construction... or not, depending on who's wiring the LAN.