Subscriber Discussion

Is Anyone Running Their Own Private Cloud Storage For Cameras?

UI
Undisclosed Integrator #1
Jun 09, 2017

The recent post about Axis cameras going to cloud was relevant to a project I'm looking at, but the customer in this case would insist on their own private in-house cloud (yes, they know it will be expensive to do right). Has anyone done this? If so, what are you using for the back end? I'm familiar with the "private cloud" services that come built into consumer storage units like QNAP, but I'm pretty sure these guys will want something more robust than that.

 

DC
Dominic Chanderbhan
Jun 09, 2017

Hi,

please look at our product www.iwcpinc.com

 

JH
John Honovich
Jun 09, 2017
IPVM

Dominic, please explain what your product does and how it meets #1's request. If you do, happy to leave it. Otherwise, I will delete since we don't want to encourage 1 line self promotions.

UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #2
Jun 09, 2017

It has been a while, but looks like an OEM/Custom version of Dahua's mobile app.  

DC
Dominic Chanderbhan
Jun 09, 2017

Hi John,

it wasn't meant to be self promotions.

We developed a solution where cameras can be streamed on websites and could be stored on a remote server/NVR instead of cloud storage so we wound not have recurring monthly cost. 

And we would gladly share the solution with the person if they want to communicate with us. 

There's loads of options. Just would need more info from the original poster.

its not Dahua btw.

Thanks

UI
Undisclosed Integrator #1
Jun 12, 2017

Sounds interesting, yes! As long as the client can do it using their own in-house datacenter storage. All the other cloud solutions they've looked at so far that seem viable for the potential load are hosted by someone else (Amazon AWS, Google, etc.) and they're not keen on that.

 

UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #3
Jun 09, 2017

Can you explain what does more robust than consumer storage units like QNAP mean? any specific features? what kind of cameras? is it one location or multiple? 

UI
Undisclosed Integrator #1
Jun 12, 2017

"More robust" means just that. More reliable, better support, less chance of issues.

QNAP, Synology, et al have cloud services among the many different functions they perform (media server, file server, SAN, etc etc etc). But in my experience, they don't always stand up well to heavy datacenter-type usage. And being consumer/prosumer systems, you tend to have to go through low-level support before getting anywhere to actually get things solved.

The specific feature would be anything that allows storage from a remote camera (probably via 3G/LTE). "What kind of cameras" is something we're still working on - IP cameras, of course. A previous discussion about Axis cameras going to cloud via WEBDAV seemed somewhat applicable. It would be multiple locations.

JA
Jeff Adams
Jun 09, 2017

To offer additional assistance, it would be quite helpful to know some specifics of the application such as geographic locations, current size/capacity and 3-5 year projections of edge device and capacity growth.  The key is to properly design-build the infrastructure at the beginning to avoid system collapse when moving a white box solution in a small controlled lab environment to primetime production with reasonable scale on the horizon.  Offering suggestions and solutions without knowing more about the application does not make that much sense.  You have an interesting project at hand and there are products out there today that address the overall need.  If you provide more project information, I am certain others will assist as well.  Good luck.

 

Jeff (DDN)

UI
Undisclosed Integrator #4
Jun 12, 2017

Plenty run their own private cloud, and cost in in the owner's hands.....not nearly as expensive for most as you would believe.  We have some hosting as their own cloud provider, and also some business hosting within their own networks (their own 'cloud').  It's not very difficult.

Avatar
Danny Vallejo
Jun 12, 2017

Let me just shed some light on the word "cloud". There is no cloud. All storage is located in some sort of infrastructure. The word cloud has existed since the beginning of networks but was used as a new buzz word to sell people that do not understand networks.

The main difference between a private cloud storage and a service like Amazon or Azure is the way you're charged. Amazon is going to charge you based on the number of instances (logical servers not necessarily physical) and storage you use. Often charging you by the kilobyte and number of logical servers you need. If you have your own private cloud you're going to be paying for bandwidth and the price of your physical server chassis for your instances. I can take a private server and make it cloud based simply by creating a NAT (Network Address Translation) from my private network to a public network. I could simply put my NVR out on the edge or in the cloud by giving it a routable IP address that can be connected to from anywhere. 

The downside to this is I would need to ensure my bandwidth is adequate and that my NVR is secure sitting out on the public side instead of a private network. If I have an NVR out on the cloud and a camera pointing video to it I would need to ensure that the bandwidth at the remote site where the camera is adequate to upload to the cloud and then stream to the NVR. I will also need to ensure that I can stream live and recorded video to end users from either the camera or the NVR depending on the architecture of the VMS platform. 

In these situations always compare the cost of the bandwidth and cost to secure your private NVR that is now facing the public against the costs to use a cloud service. Often times your up front costs are going to be less for a cloud service but you are going to be paying an ongoing subscription cost. With your private cloud solution you'll be paying for the price of the hardware and the bandwidth plus the cost to ensure it's secure. That does not even get into the reliability of your private cloud to the cloud service. There are many factors that go into this but please do not get caught up in the buzz words of cloud and private. I can easily make an NVR or camera cloud based simply by assigning it a different IP address with internet connectivity.

 

But to keep things simple: You can make anything sit on the cloud by doing this. Call the Internet Service Provider for the customer site and ask them to purchase a block of routable ip addresses. Now, you can either put your nvr, cameras, or both on that ip address range. Now, you'll be able to connect to all of them on the "cloud". 

(2)
(3)
UI
Undisclosed Integrator #1
Jun 12, 2017

Thanks. Already fully aware of HOW it works and the downsides to it. I'm looking for input from those actually doing it and what system they use.

 

UI
Undisclosed Integrator #4
Jun 12, 2017

It's easy to do, and doesn't take much budget....just depends on the needs of the customer.  Want 99.9% uptime?  Better be paying for it.  Want 97% uptime?  It'll be half the cost but the servers may be in someone's closet....but who cares if managed well.  Have an IT group?  Don't cut half your profit by paying AWS or Azure.

Not much for promotion of products on these kind of sites (they keep it relatively clean) and we stay under the radar and often prefer it that way, but if looking for general easy-to-use feel free to look at www.cbncloudsurveillance.com.  It's simply cloud-software for running a VSAAS.

UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #5
Jun 12, 2017

I couldn't agree with Danny V more. I don't know who said it first but, "the cloud is just someone else's computer. 

It all comes down to total cost of ownership and the needs of the user. Bandwidth, service, support, maintenance, reliability and security are a majority of the parameters to consider. Way too much to matrix here but there's a business case for every application depending on the weighting of the aforementioned parameters.

One critical difference between "data cloud" and "video cloud" is the relatively intense up-time required to write to storage continuously (or nearly so) when implementing video solutions. Data can wait temporarily. Video cannot (effectively). 

In general, summary would be that recording video to the "cloud" can be a cost effective solution if op-ex more important than cap-ex and the necessary reliability can be achieved. 

The cloud is an exceptional opportunity for development and applications for managing systems, accessing  video and retrieving video. For camera to storage connections, I'm not so convinced with a few exceptions. 

 

New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions