setting up a telecommunications network for company

[errtu]

I need to set up a way of communicating data from several selling locations of the company. First, we need to provide each business spot with a pda or something of that sort to provide real-time data for inventory control. then we would need to put video surveillance in each spot. but the data from the cameras would be viewed from a remote location, so I'm guessing IP cameras? Now, we would like to avoid internet costs because each PDA would have to have wireless internet access and that would be expensive in the long run. is there a way to mount an antenna in headquarters to give us machine to machine communication and the cameras information? What kinbda of antenna would it be? the farthest business location is 60 miles away. Or use satellite communications? what is needed to accomplish this? I'm really lost.

 

[MikeHalloran]

I'm betting you already have a budget for this project, and that it's laughably small, too.

Setting up your own network with a 60 mile range transmitter at every location is going to cost a lot and cause you a lot of headaches.

Using the cellular network via PDAs and 3G cards might actually be the cheapest way to do it, by far. The technology is available and produced in quantity, and there are multiple providers competing for your business.

I suggest you engage a local consultant to help you prepare an RFQ for a system that fully meets your requirements, then just put it out for bid.






Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[VEBill]

3G mobile data networks generally allow several GB per month for $30-ish per month. I've been through several providers over the past few years. YMMV! A few GB/month is plenty of bandwidth (overkill) for moving inventory data (text) around, but not continuous video. You'll probably have to use wired (DSL, Cable) business-class Internet from each location back to headquarters.

 

[MikeHalloran]

For surveillance, a really low frame rate, or just sending delta information, or periodic stills, might be sufficient for your purposes.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[DanEE]

Speaking from experience... starting with lowest cost, worse performance to an acceptable system (T1).

A. Satellite
Satellite is out of the question for streaming video from a security system due to latency, irregardless of data rate. Been there done that. Asymmetric data rates, downstream can be reasonable, but expect unsatisfactory upstream rates for the money. Latency is the killer. Expect occasional unexplained dropouts and loss of service. Satellite FAP policies are a pain in the A...

B. Cellular Radio
Cellular radios can work well, provided you have sufficient strength at all locations AND the cell towers have sufficient backbone data rates.. The latter is generally improving, but not something to be assumed. Latency is generally not an issue. Summer time leaves on trees can be a killer to signal strength. If you are at the margins of signal strength, a system that works well in the winter will cease to operate reliably in the summertime with leaf cover. Most likely asymmetric data rates, no QOS unless you pay through the nose.

C. T1
If you shop around, T1 lines have become reasonable ($400 - 500/month) and would probably be the most reliable way to go. As part of the price you will have guaranteed QOS (quality of service), fast and reliable technical support.

Each T1 site will be equipped in addition to the T1 CSU, with a premium quality fire walled router (e.g. CISCO) as part of the T1 service and, will have it's own dialup modem for remote diagnosis and configuring your system as needed and provided by T1 tech support. T1 provides minimal latency, symmetric data rates, for example 1.5mbps upstream and downstream or, whatever you are willing to pay for, e.g. T1 multiples or moving to T3 45mbit channels. They can be configured into your own virtual private network and of course provide an internet gateway.

Security system DVRs/cameras can burn a lot of bandwidth, depending on the video quality, frame rate settings. Go with the new generation system that uses H.264 compression, the newest and most efficient currently available. You can easily stream D1 video (720x480) resolution at reduced frame rates and still get acceptable live coverage and sharpness. A 16 camera capable, H.264 system can now be had for around $1000.00. Just got one for my home and as a demo system.

You need to do some overall bandwidth planning to determine your requirements before choosing a solution.

As said earlier, if you think you can build your own system cheaper than buying the service, you might want to think again.

 

[DanEE]

Oops, left out business class DSL as mentioned in earlier post.. Your total bandwidth requirements (especially upstream) should determine what is the best solution.

 

[VEBill]

OP is apparently in California. The details mentioned don't seem to fit with his offices being perched on isolated mountain tops, so he's probably in an urban area and probably has the luxury of choice of numerous wired and wireless Internet providers.

If wireless data networks are required but are just out of range, many cell network modems have antenna jacks for external high gain antennas. Such antennas are not expensive.

 

[rhodie]

In the words of those who came before: 'It's hard to cram 20 pounds of crap into a 2 pound bag...'

I think your overly ambitious performance requirements given the transmission methods you specify make this one an ugly baby.

 

[errtu]

who are you talking to? me? then how would you suggest it should be done?

I need ti transmit video and watch it via internet. that's it. the only question is what do I need to do it, what is needed in each remote location.

 

[errtu]

the main issue is the video surveillance. forget about the pdas and data transmission. just video surveillance.

 

[errtu]

ok, so you already told me that a symmetrical upstream connection is needed. how fast does it have to be to provide say, megapixel quality? hd quality?

 

[errtu]

you guys told me the antenna path is expensive. how much are we talking about? antenna and the 60 mile transmitter. thank you.

 

[DanEE]

Megapixel Quality? HD Quality? You are definitely talking high end DVR Systems (and bandwidth requirements)

Try some sample calculations here.. This calculator is titled for Hard Drive Calculation requirements, but also shows the data rate (and subsequent bandwidth requirement) produced for a given camera specification.

Click on this link...

http://www.aventuracctv.com/howthingswork/fps.asp

then click on "Calculators" on the menu on the left side, select "DVR Hard Drive Space" to get to the calculator.

For example, one 1Megapixel (1280x1024) camera running at 10 frames/second using H.264 compression set to produce the highest video quality is churning out 1.67Mbps.

This site has a number of other tutorials and good reading worth your time.

 

[VEBill]

60-mile path. Where? California?

If the sites are in a populated areas, then you're obviously not going to be able to rely on unlicensed frequencies (60 miles, over a populated area, think about it...). So you'd have to go to the FCC and announce to them that you'd like a chunk of precious spectrum to transmit security video. Their reply is predictable.

 

[VEBill]

Why not just visit your local Costco, or if you need more help a CCTV company, and purchase a CCTV system. Even 8-camera systems are so cheap that you could have one in your home, $500-$800 or so.

These days, they all provide remote monitoring over an Internet connection. Just take the bandwidth requirements from the manual and contact your local ISPs to see the best deal.

Do these locations have Internet already?