Member Discussion

Migrate Facility Commander To Genetec Synergis Using Mercury M5s?

Using the soon to be dead Facility Commander with the ACUXL panels, strongly considering Synergis and going Mercury panels moving forward. Anyone done the migration without replacing all the field panels at the onset? Not so much about the cost, more the inconvience and downtime this would cause. Can I use the Mercury M5’s which what I think Lenel pitches to transition to OnGuard? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Can I use the Mercury M5’s which what I think Lenel pitches to transition to OnGuard?

The M5-bridge is meant for the legacy Casi-Rusco Pictureperfect/Secureperfect  M5/M3000 controllers.  The one you are looking for is the MI Bridge.  If Genetec carries them, which I am certain they do, a quick call to your rep to verify is recommended.

Agree
Disagree
Informative: 2
Unhelpful
Funny

If Genetec carries them, which I am certain they do

I'm not as certain.  The MI Bridge boards are not listed explicitly on the Genetec website, and my reasonably recent (5.7) version only shows the backplane-mounted M5 boards as options.  UE#1 should certainly call his rep to check.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative: 1
Unhelpful
Funny

M5 is for Micro 5, which are Mercury transition boards.

MI is for GE Infograhics Diamond II hardware and I am aware that only Lenel Onguard has the ability to convert.

I am waiting to see...as  a lot of us are...from lenel….

The MS2 - The Mercury(Lenel Only) S2 Blade/ Network Node, MicroNode transition series hardware. This way Lenel can grab the entire S2 user base and plug them in to Onguard. 

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Hi, I’m Despina Stamatelos, Product marketing manager at Genetec.

Essentially, the Mercury ACU XL panel is only accessible through restricted manufacturers and is therefore not integrated into Synergis.

In order to migrate onto Synergis, you must replace the controller by one compatible with the Synergis architecture.

 

Agree
Disagree
Informative: 5
Unhelpful
Funny

While it is cheaper and faster to convert Micros using the M5 Bridge it has drawbacks.  If you want any kind of encryption  don't use the M5 Bridge hardware, go with the Series 3 Mercury Controllers and Readers Boards.  The M5 Bridge is a stop gap to get you off FC and the hardware will not be developed much further to support new features and functions as the platforms grow.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative: 1
Unhelpful
Funny

If you want any kind of encryption don't use the M5 Bridge hardware,

The M5 Bridge hardware certainly supports encryption between the main panel and the PACS host itself, and the comms between the main board and the reader boards are on the backplane of the enclosure...you can argue that those comms are secured by the enclosure's tamper switch.  However, I don't think the bridge reader boards support OSDP secure channel at all.

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Are we sure the M5 Controller can support encryption at rest and in flight/motion using hardware crypto on the board and not software crypto?  I want to make sure I did not get incorrect info when doing my research earlier on getting rid of Micros and the options that were avaialbe. 

It was a blanket statement, if there is no hardware based crypto/encrption for at rest/moition as well as OSDPv2 then IMO it does not support encryption just becuase it can do AES128-256/TLS. (at least to standards that I must follow to be complaint)

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

...more I read this, the more I’m thinking a forklift job is required. Personally I don’t like businesses telling me which products I can use or locking me in with proprietary hardware. To me, the product I use should be based on their ability to meet my functional needs, not it’s too expensive to go elsewhere. Reminds me of the government bailouts of Merrill Lynch, Chrysler etc...too big to fail so make the little guy pay for their greed and poor management only to be charged an arm and leg.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

I agree with EU 1.  Problem is, that you will be running two concurrent systems and you will have issues running the data import from FC which is encrypted in some way and you will have issues mating up photos with the cardholder records. How many cardholders are involved?  

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny