Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office
-
@StorageNinja said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Nothing stops you from getting a SIM card modem backup for the PBX, or for IP using a SD-WAN solution that bridges in cellular networks to cover normal circuit outages.
There are lots of mitigations that one can do. But they are not required by law.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit. -
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Edit: I just saw a reddit post about an update to the USG line so I'm guessing not.
I've been looking for some inside info on that, got a link?
It was just sometime that said there's an update. There wasn't any information
-
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.
That goes against most of the recommendations we see around here. Not that I disagree with you.
-
@StorageNinja said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
In theory POTS is more reliable for 911 address lookup. In reality if I'm calling 911 in an office it's likely going to be from my cell phone assuming service.
Only a theory. You hook POTS to VoIP, like everyone does today, and suddenly it's 100% wrong and impossible to fix. POTS only works under very specific conditions and using it as the tech behind any business phone system means it doesn't do 911 properly and unlikely phone systems for the last 20 years, has no means of addressing it.
-
@JaredBusch said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Completely not true. POTS is not any different, except the carrier does not let you specify the address for a phone number in a convenient portal. Instead it is your billing address unless you go outside of default.
Yeah, I have loads of customers that still have POTS, but connect to the phone from random locations via an app on their cell phones. So the system claims that they are in one location, because of the POTS line, and doesn't give any way for the emergency services to know that it's somewhere else or might be somewhere else.
-
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
I guess I don't really see the downsides but that's fine.
-
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
I guess I don't really see the downsides but that's fine.
Well, lacking the option of central management is huge. Who buys gear that large and is not just a single location, but designing around staying a single location? Someone, somewhere, but it's so niche.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
I guess I don't really see the downsides but that's fine.
Well, lacking the option of central management is huge. Who buys gear that large and is not just a single location, but designing around staying a single location? Someone, somewhere, but it's so niche.
Tons of businesses grow, sure, and they just install new camera systems at each location - perhaps that's not the best solution, but it's what they do. The pharmacy I recently assisted - new location, whole new onsite camera system, nothing centralized about it.
-
@Dashrender said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
I guess I don't really see the downsides but that's fine.
Well, lacking the option of central management is huge. Who buys gear that large and is not just a single location, but designing around staying a single location? Someone, somewhere, but it's so niche.
Tons of businesses grow, sure, and they just install new camera systems at each location - perhaps that's not the best solution, but it's what they do. The pharmacy I recently assisted - new location, whole new onsite camera system, nothing centralized about it.
That's the DVR< that's the trivial part of this. I still think that that is bad, because you tie completely unnecessary things together in inflexible ways. But my point is that the controller being forced to one location is a huge problem. How do you manage multiple dream machines?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
I guess I don't really see the downsides but that's fine.
Well, lacking the option of central management is huge. Who buys gear that large and is not just a single location, but designing around staying a single location? Someone, somewhere, but it's so niche.
It's a $380 router with an 8 port switch and NVR. I don't think anyone bigger than a single location would look at it.
The NVR by itself is $300.
It doesn't support CLI access so it's more of a prosumer/small office setup.
The NVR is enough to make me want it. Until this year I don't believe their NVR software was available past Ubuntu 14.04 (it may have been 16.04 but I don't think)
-
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@Dashrender said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
I guess I don't really see the downsides but that's fine.
Well, lacking the option of central management is huge. Who buys gear that large and is not just a single location, but designing around staying a single location? Someone, somewhere, but it's so niche.
Tons of businesses grow, sure, and they just install new camera systems at each location - perhaps that's not the best solution, but it's what they do. The pharmacy I recently assisted - new location, whole new onsite camera system, nothing centralized about it.
That's the DVR< that's the trivial part of this. I still think that that is bad, because you tie completely unnecessary things together in inflexible ways. But my point is that the controller being forced to one location is a huge problem. How do you manage multiple dream machines?
Their cloud offering. As far as I know, it still works with their cloud interface.
-
It has a built in cloud key. So it's just a normal controller. You'd manage it the same as any other.
-
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
It has a built in cloud key. So it's just a normal controller. You'd manage it the same as any other.
Exactly - you publish the controller to the web and the other sites remote into it.
Also, nothing saying you have to use THAT controller, just setup a vultr instance if you want.
-
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
I guess I don't really see the downsides but that's fine.
Well, lacking the option of central management is huge. Who buys gear that large and is not just a single location, but designing around staying a single location? Someone, somewhere, but it's so niche.
It's a $380 router with an 8 port switch and NVR. I don't think anyone bigger than a single location would look at it.
The NVR by itself is $300.
It doesn't support CLI access so it's more of a prosumer/small office setup.
The NVR is enough to make me want it. Until this year I don't believe their NVR software was available past Ubuntu 14.04 (it may have been 16.04 but I don't think)
I guess if you are looking at it as an NVR for a single site mom and pop, and the whole thing is to be an NVR and it just comes with a tiny networking setup to go with it...
They make a dedicated NVR server still, I thought. It's new.
-
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@Dashrender said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
I guess I don't really see the downsides but that's fine.
Well, lacking the option of central management is huge. Who buys gear that large and is not just a single location, but designing around staying a single location? Someone, somewhere, but it's so niche.
Tons of businesses grow, sure, and they just install new camera systems at each location - perhaps that's not the best solution, but it's what they do. The pharmacy I recently assisted - new location, whole new onsite camera system, nothing centralized about it.
That's the DVR< that's the trivial part of this. I still think that that is bad, because you tie completely unnecessary things together in inflexible ways. But my point is that the controller being forced to one location is a huge problem. How do you manage multiple dream machines?
Their cloud offering. As far as I know, it still works with their cloud interface.
I don't think so. That's why we've avoided it at all costs. It says all over the place "cannot be joined to a controller."
-
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
It has a built in cloud key. So it's just a normal controller. You'd manage it the same as any other.
No, it's like Windows Essentials. You can't manage it like enterprise AD where you have multiple in an environment. Each device has to be on its dedicated internal controller. No central management, no enterprise hosting, no cloud.
-
@Dashrender said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Exactly - you publish the controller to the web and the other sites remote into it.
So you use the dinky consumer grade dreammachine as your hub, and all the enterprise devices that are higher end hook to it? See why I see this as a weird setup?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@Dashrender said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@scottalanmiller said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
@stacksofplates said in Router/firewall recommendations for small branch office:
Are you talking about the dream machine?
I sure hope not, that thing seems so dumb.
I can see the benefits for some people. It will also do IPS with full gig passthrough.
If I was running their cameras it would def be a plus to have the nvr and everything in the same rack unit.The speed is nice, but I sure don't want NVR or the controller in my router. It's crazy. It's like a cheesy consumer unit, in a rack form factor.
I guess I don't really see the downsides but that's fine.
Well, lacking the option of central management is huge. Who buys gear that large and is not just a single location, but designing around staying a single location? Someone, somewhere, but it's so niche.
Tons of businesses grow, sure, and they just install new camera systems at each location - perhaps that's not the best solution, but it's what they do. The pharmacy I recently assisted - new location, whole new onsite camera system, nothing centralized about it.
That's the DVR< that's the trivial part of this. I still think that that is bad, because you tie completely unnecessary things together in inflexible ways. But my point is that the controller being forced to one location is a huge problem. How do you manage multiple dream machines?
Their cloud offering. As far as I know, it still works with their cloud interface.
I don't think so. That's why we've avoided it at all costs. It says all over the place "cannot be joined to a controller."
You can attach it to your cloud account. From what I've seen that's currently the only way to do it. It's not a single interface, but I think they're working on that if I remember right.
