Milestone MAC Licensing Myth

By: Ethan Ace, Published on Aug 05, 2014

One of the most consistent complaints about Milestone is wrong and has been for years.

In this note, we look at how Milestone used to license cameras, the problems with that process, and how it is done now.

*** ** *** **** consistent ********** ***** ********* is ***** *** *** been *** *****.

** **** ****, ** look ** *** ********* used ** ******* *******, the ******** **** **** process, and *** ** ** done ***.

[***************]

Old ***/*** ********

** ***** ********* ********, ***** were ******** ** ******** ******** MAC ********* ** ******* to ** ***** ** the ****** *** **** them ** *********. * .dlk (****** ******* ***) **** *** **** generated ** ********* *** emailed **** ** *** integrator, *** **** ******** the **** ** *** server, ********** *** ********. Any **** * *** camera *** ***** ** the ******, **** ******* had ** ** ********.

**********, *** ******* ***** not ** **** ** all ***** *** ******* was *********, ****** ****-*** changes ***********. ***** ******** allowed * ********* ***** ****** to ******* *** *** activation *******. **** ******* also ******* ** ***** systems, *** ** ***** use ** *** ********* 'recording ******'.

New ******/****** **********

** ******* ******** ** Milestone, *** ********** ******* has **** *********. *** systems ***** *** ********* to *** ********, *** user **** ** ********** wizard ***** ***** ****** information ** *********, ****** it ******* ***** ************ information, *** ********* *** camera ******** *************, ** long ** **** ******** are *********.

**** ******* ** ***** in *** ********* *****:

*** ******* ******* ** internet **********, ***** ******** a ****** **** ** a *** *** ***** is then ******** *** ** internet ********* ** ** Milestone's******** ************ ****. * .*** ** generated, ***** ** *********** to *** ****** *** activated. ** ****** ************* or ******** *** ********.

Compared ** ***** *****

**** ***** ***** *** methods ******* ** *********'* current ********, ****** ******* activation *** ****. ******************, *** *******, **** require *** ******** ** be ********* ****** ** via ************/********** ******* *** ****.************* * *** ******* key ** ** ******* via **** ****** ** pasting * *** ******* key ******* *** ******* is *******. ******** ** these, ********* ******* ********** should **** ** **** time ****** ************.

Comments (19)

I'm sorry, but the way I read it, it sounds like Miletone licensing based on camera MAC address hasn't changed, just the methodology of submitting licenses.

"In current versions of Milestone, the activation process has been automated. For systems which are connected to the internet, the user runs an activation wizard which sends camera information to Milestone....."

Or at least I didn't see anything that said explcitly Milestone does not base it's camera count based on the MAC address of the cameras.

Since the subject of the title of the article is "Milestone MAC Licensing Myth", a simple question from me is, does Milestone associate it's camera licenses based on the MAC address of a camera? So that if I want/need to replace a camera, I have to go through a process to remove the old associated MAC and associate the new MAC?

People typically criticized Milestone's methodology of submitting licenses manually, not the concept of MAC addresses.

Sorry then, wasn't sure exactly what the myth was.

" Exacq requires a new license key to be applied via file upload or pasting a new license key anytime the license is updated."

Just to be clear - this is not similar to what you describe as the process for Milestone. With Exacq you buy a certain number of camera licenses, Exacq generates your license file and you can add cameras up to your license limit. You can also remove cameras and add new ones, again without any changes to the license.

Also, Exacq assigns the license to the MAC of the NIC you are going to use, which makes it difficult to order the software before the server is in-hand.

I like the way milestone does it in the fact that I can pre buy licenses and assign them at will to a server via the registration and licensing portal. We always keep a few on hand. Exacq however has no way to do this and needs to get with the times and allow us to manage our own licenses online.

I don't understand why Milestone requires MAC addresses at all. There are other VMS systems that license based on the number of cameras created in the system and have nothing to do with the MAC addresses.

In the big picture, it probably allows them to know which manufacturers are being used with their software. What they do with that information, who knows?

While I agree having the ability to generate licenses self-service is highly convenient, I do find they turn around licenses typically within hours.

Tom

And hours waiting for a license turnaround is not something we typically like having to pay our guys, or especially subcontractors, to do. Those "hours" add up over a year.

Don't you typically procure the server before the install? Why would you be waiting for hours?

Typically we do procure servers before install to test and prep before sending it to site- I assumed most installers would not have a new server shipped direct to site and take a chance everything works out of the box and do all pre-setup onsite...?

But I should maybe have elaborated my statement- if we have to replace or add a new camera, I would not want the tech waiting around hours for a license turnaround before the camera became active. Maybe if Milestone's license change request provides you a way of manually entering the new MAC before installing the camera so they could at least be doing something while the license request is going through....? But I think most existing cameras accessible by ladder can be changed in 10 to 20 minutes. And if it's replacing a failed camera, most times you'll have a new one shipped direct to site so you won't know the MAC until it gets there.

So does Milestone at least let you manually enter camera MAC addresses before transmitting a license change?

But really I'd be more curious to know what Milestone says their reasoning is for requiring the cameras MAC address versus just licensing by number of camera channels created.

Ah - you are talking abotu Mileston and I about Exacq. I agree, licensing by camera MAC is a bit ridicilious.

Well if you license by MAC address, you'll know the distribution of every camera manufacturer used on your systems. I am not saying that's why Milestone does it that way, but it's certainly one advantage. When they start incenting on attach rate of Canon cameras, they will be able to precisely track their success ;)

It wil be adverstised right on the box...

All Canon cameras now come pre-licensed with Milestone Quik-Connect.

And not disputing that may be the case. And it would be a good reason... for them. I'm just curious if they would come out and say "we purposely inconveinance out integrators and use up their valuable time to collect statistical information about what cameras they use, kind of like Facebook, except you pay us to collect information about you", or if they would come up with some more creative reason. :)

To correct a few on changing of cameras licenses during operation due to faulty cameras. Milestone do have a wizard for changing of cameras if the previous cameras fails , by using the wizard , we are able to update the new license replacing the previous license automatically.

While doing the above, the old video footages that is stored with the old faulty cam will seamlessly "join" the new camera thus resulting in a seamless transition during this process.

As for the mac address myth, there is no need to see or memorize the mac addresses of the cameras anymore , the license are tied to the base license which in turn tie to the servers GUID for tagging purpose.

Process is simple

Automatic licensing

- Update license if your server is online (automatic go through the licensing policy)

Offline licensing

- While every cam have been installed , (30 days grace) , download the LRQ file (license request file) and upload to Milestone server , a new LIC file can be downloaded automatically , upload new LIC file to server. License activated

You forgot one thing. Problem is in multiserver environment. If you buy licenses for 200 cameras, and you have to use it at five servers. Practically you can install 200 cameras per server. But if you must register every camera, then you can't do that.

Has anyone tried capturing packets on these license update transactions? Online update abilities save so much time and return trips from extracting and emailing, confirming and reapplication of license files it seems the best method. There are many a system that never see the internet as certain customer IT protocols require internet immunity.

What Im saying is...I should be able to take a generated license file from my customers system that will never see an internet connection, process from my own phone app or website a full license update. I can then take my processed file and update my recorders, base station etc. This method of automation needs to be looked at; exhausting manhours due to system design limitations are not acceptable.

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Most Recent Industry Reports

TMA Apologizes to Amazon / Ring on Aug 23, 2019
Not only is Amazon / Ring making major incursions into the residential security market, the organization representing the biggest incumbents, The...
China Dahua Replaces Their Software With US Pepper on Aug 22, 2019
What does a US government banned company do to improve its security positioning in the US? Well, Dahua is unveiling a novel solution, partnering...
Security Integrators Outlook On Remaining Integrators In 2025 on Aug 22, 2019
The industry has changed substantially in the last decade, with the rise of IP cameras and the race to the bottom. Indeed, more changes may be...
First GDPR Facial Recognition Fine For Sweden School on Aug 22, 2019
A school in Sweden has been fined $20,000 for using facial recognition to keep attendance in what is Sweden's first GDPR fine. Notably, the fine is...
Anyvision Facial Recognition Tested on Aug 21, 2019
Anyvision is aiming for $1 billion in revenue by 2022, backed by $74 million in funding. But does their performance live up to the hype they have...
JCI Sues Wyze on Aug 21, 2019
The mega manufacturer / integrator JCI has sued the fast-growing $20 camera Seattle startup Wyze. Inside this note: Share the court...
Dahua 4K Camera Shootout on Aug 20, 2019
Dahua's new Pro Series 4K N85CL5Z claims to "deliver superior images in all lighting and environmental conditions", but how does this compare to...
ZK Teco Atlas Access Control Tested on Aug 20, 2019
Who needs access specialists? China-based ZKTeco claims its newest access panel 'makes it very easy for anyone to learn and install access control...
Uniview Beats Intel In Trademark Lawsuit on Aug 19, 2019
Uniview has won a long-running trademark lawsuit brought by Intel, with Beijing's highest court reversing an earlier Intel win, centered on...
Suprema Biometric Mass Leak Examined on Aug 19, 2019
While Suprema is rarely discussed even within the physical security market, the South Korean biometrics manufacturer made global news this past...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact