Networking a 1000' gap

[replant]

I have a client that wants me to set up a camera system for two locations 1000 feet apart. Four cameras at each site and monitoring feed one one.

Site 1: House
Cameras 4
Internet Connection: DSL 512kbps (Yes it's that slow; we live in a small country)

Site 2: Barn
Cameras 4
No network connection yet​

Note: LOS from Site 1 and Site 2 will be nearly perfect with maybe only the slightest shrubbery (easily cleared).

I have set up Swann IP camera systems and probably won't have any trouble figuring out how to network a setup as I've worked with POE switches and the like. I want to see if anyone can suggest a cost-effective way of getting both sites monitored centrally at Site 1 (the house). Is it possible to use a single wireless link to bridge the locations? Will any camera models have problems with network congestion? Just how much capacity do I have realistically using something like a Nanostation loco?

Thanks for any help!

 

[SyconsciousAu]

Ubiquiti make a number of solutions under their Airmax range that will bridge that gap.

Ubiquiti Networks - Products

 

[CamFan]

I had to run 420 ft, used fiber. I used some Gigabit fiber media converters and ordered the cable terminated from Stonewall cable, with the pulling eye, so I could pull it thru the conduit. I ordered the duplex singlemode, media converters (bidi SC) only use 1 fiber, so I have a backup fiber for future use if needed.

Just an option to consider if you can trench.

 

[NoloC]

+1 Ubiquity. Great stuff

Agree fiber is great but costly

 

[tangent]

I have a client that wants me to set up a camera system for two locations 1000 feet apart. Four cameras at each site and monitoring feed one one.

Site 1: House
Cameras 4
Internet Connection: DSL 512kbps (Yes it's that slow; we live in a small country)

Site 2: Barn
Cameras 4
No network connection yet​

Note: LOS from Site 1 and Site 2 will be nearly perfect with maybe only the slightest shrubbery (easily cleared).

I have set up Swann IP camera systems and probably won't have any trouble figuring out how to network a setup as I've worked with POE switches and the like. I want to see if anyone can suggest a cost-effective way of getting both sites monitored centrally at Site 1 (the house). Is it possible to use a single wireless link to bridge the locations? Will any camera models have problems with network congestion? Just how much capacity do I have realistically using something like a Nanostation loco?

Thanks for any help!

A pair of nanostations or similar will easily handle that. You could also try powerline networking assuming wires run directly between the house and barn, but imho ubiquiti is the better choice.

Budget somewhere around 6-10mbps / camera

 

[yellowbunny]

Buried fiber, do it right. Never trust wireless links for security, period.

 

[yellowbunny]

Can't edit my post because it thinks I'm entering spam?

I'd go with buried cable or fiber, if cable - this unit (The Enable-IT 860C PRO - Coax Ethernet Extender), or avoid the hassles of eventual water entry into cable (every direct burial cable will get water into it - just a matter of time) and do fiber. Depends on the cost and terrain (creeks, wet pasture, or dry desert) that you can get away with.

 

[bp2008]

Ubiquiti radios are a heck of a lot cheaper and easier than running fiber optics 1000 feet. Slightly more trouble if the hardware at either end fails, though, as they aren't exactly plug-and-play.

5GHz LiteBeam AC: Amazon.com: Ubiquiti 5GHz LiteBeam AC 23DBI (LBE-5AC-23-US): Computers & Accessories

Or, if that is unavailable in your area, this older model is more than adequate: Ubiquiti NanoStation Loco M5: Amazon.com: Ubiquiti NanoStation loco M5: Computers & Accessories

Buy two of the same item. Mount them outdoors, facing each other with clear line of sight, high enough that vehicles passing between them will not block the line of sight. Configure one as "Access Point" and the other as "Station", sharing the same SSID and a long WPA2-AES key. This should get them linked. Once linked, reduce output power until the signal received at both ends is no higher than -50 db (-40 db is higher than -50 db).

NanoStation Loco M5 should deliver a solid 100 Mbps (the radios are actually faster than the 100 Mbps wired network interface).
LiteBeam AC can deliver at least 3 times that.

 

[TonyR]

A big 'amen' to what bp2008 said.
I agree that fiber would provide the fastest, most secure connection but if your monetary or time budget won't allow it, I highly recommend using a couple of Ubiquiti NS5M (5 GHz) or NS2M (2.4GHz) radios (if LOS is partially obstructed) and set up a layer 2 transparent bridge as in this guide: airMAX - Configure a Point-to-Point Link (Layer 2, Transparent Bridge)
I have set up about a half dozen of these over the past 3 or 4 years and all have performed remarkably and reliably. Like many forum members I understand the negative issues surrounding any kind of wireless device or wireless network but here in rural Alabama the lighting is so destructive that in many cases those negative issues are outweighed by the protection afforded by a non-hardwired connection between two distant points. Again, I agree that the speed and lightning-immune property (high dielectric ?...not sure of correct term) of a fiber optic install would be the ultimate non-wireless means of interconnection but I'd try this route first. I think you'd be pleasantly surprised.

 

[VRC]

I've used Nanostations for surveillance many times, they work very nicely. I find them extremely reliable.

 

[SyconsciousAu]

Buried fiber, do it right. Never trust wireless links for security, period.

Overkill much? He wants to link four cameras on a barn to the house. Unless that barn happens to conceal area 51 under it there is no need to spend such an inordinate amount of money.
It is like hiring armed guards to protect your garden shed. Sure you can never trust a padlock to absolutely secure your shed but are you really getting a return on your investment by hiring armed guards?

 

[cctvnerd]

Good ideas, well educated people here... I'm also the kind of hardwired guy because I always had some bad experience with WiFi. I'm also always concerned about security, even if you use wpa2 there are options to get into the network. But I have to say that I never used these ubiquiti devices.
But does it has to be an IP connection? What about using Coax Cable with these HD technologies like HDTVI from Hikvison or HDCVI from dahua. They are capable of bypass the range with hd or maybe 4k. I don't want to do advertisement but I think it's another option to keep the cost low and have a wired connection.

 

[TonyR]

Good ideas, well educated people here... I'm also the kind of hardwired guy because I always had some bad experience with WiFi. I'm also always concerned about security, even if you use wpa2 there are options to get into the network. But I have to say that I never used these ubiquiti devices.
But does it has to be an IP connection? What about using Coax Cable with these HD technologies like HDTVI from Hikvison or HDCVI from dahua. They are capable of bypass the range with hd or maybe 4k. I don't want to do advertisement but I think it's another option to keep the cost low and have a wired connection.

I prefer wired, too. BUT......having either witnessed others having to or myself replacing 2 to $3K worth of equipment damaged by lightning that can come in on ANY type of hard-wired, metallic connection (even with 'surge' or 'lightning protection' in place), I would definitely not rule out a wireless Ubiquiti layer 2 transparent bridge IF the installation was to be in a violent lightning-prone area...especially in MS, AL, GA and FL (certainly there could be other states, I am only familiar with those 4 regarding lightning).

 

[cctvnerd]

I live in Germany and here your house insurance pay for these kind of lightning damages, if you have one . But you are right, damages by lightning is definitely a point to think about...

 

[TonyR]

I had 5 year surge & lightning protection on a 65' Sony 4K 3D UHD flat screen TV (cost over $5,000 in Oct. '15). In July '16 lightning came in via the powerline, went through the local utility company's whole-house surge protector behind the meter, went through a week-old CyberPower UPS and knocked out the Sony. I even had the HDMI cables disconnected from the Sony because in the past I've had the lightning come in via the DirecTV satellite, damage their receiver and come in via the HDMI port. I have monthly-paid insurance protection via the power company, the satellite provider AND with the store where I bought the TV. They all kicked in, paid their share and I was reimbursed completely but the hassle was a pain, not to mention going without the 65-incher for over 2 months while they attempted in-house repair. They finally had us come in and pick out a new TV! Around here, the best insurance against lightning is to unplug EVERYTHING!
In 2015 I installed a Ubiquiti layer 2 transparent bridge system as shown below for a customer that had a barn & shop located about 800' away from his house on 5 acres. Both the house and the barn have a metal roof and the system has survived several severe electrical storms since.

 

[Frankydp]

+1 for UBNT wireless bridge. If you have LOS.

You could also bury Coax with some network links on the ends, cheaper than fiber. Actiontec Ethernet over Coax Adapter Kit for Homes without MoCA Routers

I have had extremely solid reliability out of the UBNT wireless bridge, and I too am a wired first guy.