Help with Lorex Setup

stefanbagnato

stefanbagnato

n3wb
Mar 18, 2022
5
3
Raleigh, NC
Hi. I just purchased the Lorex Fusion NVR setup. It comes with 8 wired and 2 wireless cameras. I am having issues getting the wireless cameras connected to the NVR. Lorex Support is not helpful.

My setup:
pfSense Router/Firewall/Gateway
Wired devices are on the 192.168.27.x subnet and connected through a Cisco switch
Wireless devices are on the 192.168.28.x subnet and connected through a Ubiquiti AP
The NVR is statically assigned 192.168.27.50 and can be pinged from my desktop and also has internet access to update the firmware
The two wireless cameras are 192.168.28.58 and 59, respectively. They are configured through the Lorex Home App and are working correctly.

On the NVR (both through the console itself as well as browsing via IP), I click Device Search but the wifi cameras do not show up. If I manually configure them by adding their IPs as well as passwords, they do not connect. I "thought" the issue was due to the separate subnets, however I have 3 Amcrest wifi cameras for my childrens' rooms which show up when I click Device Search (I do not want to add them to the Lorex setup) so I do not believe the subnets are the issue. However, Lorex Support does not want to assist further as they insist the cameras must be on the same subnet to work, and while I refuted this due to the Amcrest cameras showing up, they denied to assist further.

I do not want to reconfigure my home network for this issue. I have to assume someone else in the camera world has a Lorex setup with wifi cameras on a different subnet. Any assistance is appreciated!
 
stefanbagnato said:
Hi. I just purchased the Lorex Fusion NVR setup. It comes with 8 wired and 2 wireless cameras. I am having issues getting the wireless cameras connected to the NVR. Lorex Support is not helpful.

My setup:
pfSense Router/Firewall/Gateway
Wired devices are on the 192.168.27.x subnet and connected through a Cisco switch
Wireless devices are on the 192.168.28.x subnet and connected through a Ubiquiti AP
The NVR is statically assigned 192.168.27.50 and can be pinged from my desktop and also has internet access to update the firmware
The two wireless cameras are 192.168.28.58 and 59, respectively. They are configured through the Lorex Home App and are working correctly.

On the NVR (both through the console itself as well as browsing via IP), I click Device Search but the wifi cameras do not show up. If I manually configure them by adding their IPs as well as passwords, they do not connect. I "thought" the issue was due to the separate subnets, however I have 3 Amcrest wifi cameras for my childrens' rooms which show up when I click Device Search (I do not want to add them to the Lorex setup) so I do not believe the subnets are the issue. However, Lorex Support does not want to assist further as they insist the cameras must be on the same subnet to work, and while I refuted this due to the Amcrest cameras showing up, they denied to assist further.

I do not want to reconfigure my home network for this issue. I have to assume someone else in the camera world has a Lorex setup with wifi cameras on a different subnet. Any assistance is appreciated!
Click to expand...

Try to change the subnet mask on the NVR so you can see 192.168.x.x on the LAN side ..
 
Hm no luck. Same issue. I am wondering if maybe I do in fact need to switch up the network topology. Maybe make use of vlans instead of using the physical ports on the pfsense box. I don't want to change it, but seems somewhat inevitable now...
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat200
What ports are the amcrest visible on 80 and 37777? Maybe Lorex is on a diff port than the Amcrest IP config is looking for. Or whatever Device search your using.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat200
Maybe this piece of info from a Goog search....?
"In order for two different networks / subnetworks / broadcast domains / VLANs to talk to each other, a Layer three device (like a router or so-called L3 switch) is necessary.

If the two different networks / subnets existed on the same logical "wire," they would not be able to talk directly to each other, they would still have to use a layer three device to move the traffic from address block A to address block B (and vice-versa). "

Can 2 different subnets talk to each other?

I'm not sure I've got the right terminology but here's the crux:Server A: 192.168.0.5 Server A's Workstations: in the range of 192.168.0.100 to 0.150Current Subnet mask for the above: 255.255.255.0Server B: 192.168.2.8Server B's Workstations: in the range of 192.168.2.100 to 2.150Current...
arstechnica.com arstechnica.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
Flintstone61 said:
Maybe this piece of info from a Goog search....?
"In order for two different networks / subnetworks / broadcast domains / VLANs to talk to each other, a Layer three device (like a router or so-called L3 switch) is necessary.

If the two different networks / subnets existed on the same logical "wire," they would not be able to talk directly to each other, they would still have to use a layer three device to move the traffic from address block A to address block B (and vice-versa). "

Can 2 different subnets talk to each other?

I'm not sure I've got the right terminology but here's the crux:Server A: 192.168.0.5 Server A's Workstations: in the range of 192.168.0.100 to 0.150Current Subnet mask for the above: 255.255.255.0Server B: 192.168.2.8Server B's Workstations: in the range of 192.168.2.100 to 2.150Current...
arstechnica.com arstechnica.com
Click to expand...

That's not the issue though. The switch is an L3 switch. Plus, as mentioned, the Amcrest wifi cameras show up just fine. However, I took your suggestion about ports and did some comparing between the cameras. Turns out if I tell the Lorex cameras to connect via port 80, they work. They won't over 37777, but do over 80. No idea why, since the Amcrest cameras work over 37777.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flintstone61
TCP is on 37777 and HTTP is on 80
UDP may also run on 37777 not fer shure though....
 
Might be able to address that in the NVR. the ports.
 
Do you have a NVR page like that? can you enable the wifi Lorex ports in that at all? Just brain storming. I forgot most of my networking class stuff LOL/
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2022-03-18 201809.png
    Screenshot 2022-03-18 201809.png
    42.6 KB · Views: 10
stefanbagnato said:
Yup. But best part, to get the Lorex cams to work, I had to enter port 80 in the TCP port line. Makes no sense lol. I think I'll still go the vlan route in the end. I really don't want cameras communicating over http.
Click to expand...

Hi @stefanbagnato

Feel free to share a "how to" or as close to a quick guide on what you did to resolve the issue.

Thank you
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flintstone61
Flintstone61 said:
Do you have a NVR page like that? can you enable the wifi Lorex ports in that at all? Just brain storming. I forgot most of my networking class stuff LOL/
Click to expand...

Don't have quite as many options as that. However, I do see on that page that TCP is set to 35000 and UDP 35001. I updated those in the config and then tried changing the settings of one of the cameras to 37777, but the connection dropped. Changed it back to 80 and it came back up.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: Flintstone61
Apologies for resurrecting this thread, but it seems I have a similar issue.
I already spent 2+ frustrating hours on the phone with the Lorex support.

I have a dedicated subnet I set for the security system behind my Fortigate. A set policy gives the NVR access to WAN and the LAN WiFi router.
The N910 NVR receives updates and connects successfully to the Lorex app.

The WiFi doorbell cam also successfully connected to the app but would not connect to the NVR through the app.
Working through the NVR interface, I get the same result as you. Search does not find it, and manual add fails to connect.
However, I couldn't get it working by modifying the ports.

When they complained about the subnet, I tried hooking up the NVR directly to the router, still no luck. Were you able to resolve it?
 
kapusta said:
Apologies for resurrecting this thread, but it seems I have a similar issue.
I already spent 2+ frustrating hours on the phone with the Lorex support.

I have a dedicated subnet I set for the security system behind my Fortigate. A set policy gives the NVR access to WAN and the LAN WiFi router.
The N910 NVR receives updates and connects successfully to the Lorex app.

The WiFi doorbell cam also successfully connected to the app but would not connect to the NVR through the app.
Working through the NVR interface, I get the same result as you. Search does not find it, and manual add fails to connect.
However, I couldn't get it working by modifying the ports.

When they complained about the subnet, I tried hooking up the NVR directly to the router, still no luck. Were you able to resolve it?
Click to expand...
Did you happen to get a resolution? I am having a similar issue. I set up a TP Link Omada in AP mode, and it is on the same switch as the NVR. Paired and added the first camera in about 5 seconds. Couldn't get the other two to connect to save my soul. They are about 100' away, but the wireless AP should be roubust enough to hadle it, and I'm getting a pretty hot signal at the cameras. I should note that this is on Frontier fiber, which already has a wireless netword. I would have set the AP in repeater mode, but it would not connect to the SSID coming from the router (I found this in a similar set up recently; only three devices could connect and after that none. That problem was a subnet limitation, imposed by frontier for some reason. I see nothing in the subnet mask to suggest this here, though. The isntallation is a small car lot, and outside of running a NetSpot frequency analysis with heatmaps, I see no reason to suggest any kind of interference or channel congestion. Any clues? Anyone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom