You still need your own physical pair of wires between the 2 locations, which is back to the initial problem to begin with... These "extenders" are designed for going across a local campus or private area where you control and have access to the wires deployed across the campus, plant, or school.
If you are already paying for dial-up connections in both places, perhaps switching to satellite internet would be a solution for the cams and give you (somewhat) improved internet access as a side- benefit.
Would cost $300-600 for equipment + $60-90 per month - for each site.
The practicality of that depends on many things, one of which is data thruput over 24 hours. Sat plans, though often faster, are very limited in total thruput allowed for the consumer accounts.
They also have lag issues, but I doubt that would come into play for cams.
Actually We tried Hughes Net on both ends and the camera techs never got it to work. The data went up okay and can be retrieved from dialup or DSL at any location, but having sattlelite links on both ends never worked. Harvey
Walter Roberson wrote: (snip)
Co-located may be the easy way, I believe all it requires is a digital line, such as ISDN. Primary rate ISDN (which is pretty much T1) holds about 23 voice calls at 56K (or 64K if no bits are stolen).
If you can get basic rate ISDN to both ends, you can send (usually) 128K bits/second through it.
-- glen
I am trying a link to my new thread (if it works), click to go to
Whoops, I'm a little remiss in answering posts this(last) month. Yes, the picture shows the front and back of the remote unit. The diagram at the bottom does the same, but shows how it functions. Yes, everybody, you need a pair, but it doesn't have to be dedicated. At
2000 feet, it will probably synch up at 25M.Carl
Oh, OK. I wonder what the problem is. I suspect it's something that having a fixed IP at the receiving end would solve.
Well, there is a fixed IP address at the server end. Why the receiving end? Harvey
I tried this today, and when I dialed, it wanted a username, password and IP address - none of which I had. The IP address that I have is for the camera scanner box, not the computer it is connected to. So do I need an IP address set for it too. I eventually got it to stop asking for a username and password but then I couldn't tell if anything was happening. I brought up a browser, but it couldn't connect to the IP address of the scanner (I didn't think it would - because I didn't know how to even tell if it was connected to the host computer. Then how to get it to connect to the LAN, I was lost.)
Harvey
Some detail: If you have a direct copper connection to the CO (central office), you'll up to about 48Kbits/sec download, and up to
33.6Kbits/sec with upload, depending on line condition, loading coils, bridged taps, and modem quality. However, if you have an SLC (subscriber line concentrator) or Pair Gain device, the best you can do is 28.8Kbit/sec.I once scribbled some tests that can be done with a USR modem and the ATY11 command:
Depends.... There is streaming video and packetized video, and the streaming won't work on sat (even with the fixed ip's, probability is it wont, cuz of packets and latency)... If you are using the software that came with the camera's look to see if it is streaming or not, and maybe look at alternate software that is made to work on packetized links (microwave/sat/cell/etc).. Remember a sat at both ends does 2 latency laden/packetizations, and 4 latency laden transmissions.... 2 up and two down)....
Got the 1xrtt cell service there? (not as fast as evdo, but faster than dial-up)... FWIW in Rural northern Idaho we went with cell for security cameras (bonus, the cell phone worked real good too with the repeaters see
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required