SecurityInfoWatch, click to go home
Most Popular: Today | OverallMost E-Mailed: Today | Overall

IPVision seeks to bypass the NVR for IP video

Company seeks to create scalable solution for managing IP video storage
BY GEOFF KOHL, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
SecurityInfoWatch.com
Updated: 10-29-2009 4:32 pm

During ISC East 2009, recent technology firm start-up IPVision Software was exhibiting in the booth for Hirsch Electronics, and former Cisco, AgentVi and Verint employee Mark Kolar was there along with IPVision’s CEO and founder Mark Felberg to shake up the world of NVRs and VMS solutions.

IPVision Software, it seems, has a new approach to video management and video recording which throws out the server model we’re all used to. To quote from of IP Vision Software’s own documents, “..DVRs and NVRs suffer from using an approach to recording that is rooted in 50-year-old technology. All live and recorded video must go through the recorder, creating a costly, DVR/NVR server intensive bottleneck.”

What IPVision wants to do is run the software so that it takes advantage of smart cameras which can manage their own recording functions by allowing those cameras to talk directly to the recording medium. The idea is that the camera sends data directly to the network attached storage (NAS) or storage area networks (SAN). The result is that the IT or security department doesn’t have to buy DVRs or NVRs, but can instead buy less expensive NAS devices. To put this in perspective, on NewEgg.com, 1 or 2 terabyte networked attached storage units go for a few hundred dollars (and even less for simple network attached drives). By comparison, you’d likely drop thousands of dollars simply for an NVR.

What the IPVision Software does is run as a video management system (they call it the “Virtual Video Recorder (VVR)”. The VVR only controls access to the video and indexes the video rather than running like most video management solutions on a server or NVR, controlling the video recording process. The idea is that this keeps the system imminently scalable. That model with the software can allow users to buy fewer servers, and Felberg and Kolar’s numbers indicate that this can lead to a 57 percent lower total cost of ownership for a 10-site deployment using eight high-definition cameras per site.

At the ISC East 2009 show, the technology was being shown in the booths of Hirsch Electronics (an access control company whose solutions integrated with a number of video systems) and SecureWatch24. Both companies plan to OEM the IPVision Software system.

The solution is primarily focused for third party “smart” cameras that can manage their own video recording, but Kolar noted that it also supported the use of legacy cameras and encoders, although this would require a different configuration than the management of smart cameras.

Post a Comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

Questions

Given the bold claims of cost savings, here are some operational questions that should be addressed:

What IP cameras are supported? Does this support vary based on how 'smart' the camera is? Does the performance gains vary depending on the smarts of the camera?

How do IP cameras connect to SANs without a built-in iSCI initiator? If the video first needs to be streamed to the VVR, how is this different from what normal VMS systems do today.

NAS devices are inexpensive but tend to have lower reliability and throughput than SANs. How does the VVR ensure that these NAS limitations do not undermine overall performance?

For the 57% cost savings, what VMS system was used in the comparison? How does the savings vary based on the VMS competitor compared? Did IPVision compare their system to systems such as Mobotix, March Networks and Axis AVHS that already can stream directly to NAS devices.

Excellent questions, John

Beyond my ability to answer, but I hope that IPVision may be able to shed some light.

IPVisionSoftware TCO Advantages

Hi John,

Thanks for your questions. IPVisionSoftware supports a wide range of new and older cameras and encoders. A lot of them have the ability to write directly to storage via several methods such as FTP, NFS, and SAMBA (none of which really impact performance since there's no recorder between them and their storage). I don’t know of many that directly write to SAN, just internally or to NAS (which avoid the need for recorders in the middle).

As for NAS reliability, the IT market is flooded with options which most IT departments know really well, and can choose from. Performance of NAS will vary, but has yet to be an issue for us. Event-based recordings vs. everything running full-time all the time helps reduce storage performance and costs. NAS performance continues to improve, along with RAID and other options. As time goes by, IPVisionSoftware will work with its camera and encoder technology partners to truly leverage even more in-camera technologies to further expand your reliability and failover options beyond those that we already support.

Finally, the 57% cost savings used one of the most prominent NVR company's scalability and pricing, along with independently sourced OpEx expenses for maintaining, updating, powering and cooling them over 3 years. Thus, our comparisons were head-to-head against other multi-vendor camera VMS systems with enterprise level capabilities and deployments such as IPVisionSoftware.

If you need more details, please contact me at mkolar@IPVisionSoftware.com.

Have a great day - Mark

Where are the answers?

The questions really excellent, but where are the answers? There is no data whatsoever to support the reliability and cost savings claims.