Can I use a access point in a offline LAN system?

[Safari]

I currently have a PoE offline LAN security system at work with 5 cameras that is accessed locally through an app on my phone

I want to extend the system with 2-3 cameras to another part of the huge warehouse, but would prefer they be separate from my router which is maxed out. And because my current system is offline/ local only, it's sometimes difficult to reach the other end of the warehouse from where I'm at

Since the new system will also be offline, I was wondering if I could use a TP-link (or other) access point with 2-3 wireless cameras as a stand alone "long range system", that can be reached from the entire warehouse, without the need of setting up another router? Or do all access points require a router to function properly?

I'm assuming a wireless access point will reach further than my router does

 

[TonyR]

Yes.

Most newer TP-LINK and Netgear routers have a check box for "AP mode" which essentially you can do if it does not offer the option: assign it a static LAN IP and turn off DHCP.

FWIW, all cams and the NVR or PC/VMS should all have unique static IP's assigned, all on the same subnet and that are OUTSIDE of the router's DHCP pool. The router would actually only come into play assigning IP's to DHCP devices that come in on the LAN to access/view the cams.

I have put together several systems pretty much like you described.

 

[Safari]

Yes.

Most newer TP-LINK and Netgear routers have a check box for "AP mode" which essentially you can do if it does not offer the option: assign it a static LAN IP and turn off DHCP.

FWIW, all cams and the NVR or PC/VMS should all have unique static IP's assigned, all on the same subnet and that are OUTSIDE of the router's DHCP pool. The router would actually only come into play assigning IP's to DHCP devices that come in on the LAN to access/view the cams.

I have put together several systems pretty much like you described.

This brings up a second question, if a modern router has a access point option, then do I need to buy a more expensive access point?. The only reason why i considered a access point for a offline system is because I assumed they offered much longer range, and maybe they do to a small degree

Right now I have a WAVLINK router. Maybe all I need is two cheap $30 routers, one being used in access point mode to extend the range

What's the cheapest option I have for the longest range offline system?

 

[TonyR]

Not sure the distance and direction you're seeking but depending on your answer, an outdoor, 2.4GHz Ubiquiti radio configured as an access point, such as the NS2M-US, might be in order. They are high power, high sensitivity but very directional. It can be configured to work with typical Wi-Fi devices.

A pair can also be used LOS (line Of Sight) using their proprietary AirMax O/S to provide a Layer 2 Transparent Bridge, pretty much like a CAT-5e cable but without, of course POE.

Please elaborate more and/or provide a sketch of what you're trying to do with the "access point" and the location of it and the cams you're wanting it to provide a wireless connection to.

 

[Safari]

Not sure the distance and direction you're seeking but depending on your answer, an outdoor, 2.4GHz Ubiquiti radio configured as an access point, such as the NS2M-US, might be in order. They are high power, high sensitivity but very directional. It can be configured to work with typical Wi-Fi devices.

A pair can also be used LOS (line Of Sight) using their proprietary AirMax O/S to provide a Layer 2 Transparent Bridge, pretty much like a CAT-5e cable but without, of course POE.

Please elaborate more and/or provide a sketch of what you're trying to do with the "access point" and the location of it and the cams you're wanting it to provide a wireless connection to.

The warehouse is approximately 100x100 yds, that includes the parking lot. My current setup at one end of the warehouse includes 5 Amcrest PoE cameras and only covers 1/4 of the warehouse. But the next 2-3 camera setup needs to be wireless, at the other end of the warehouse and on another network. And I would like to be able to access it wirelessly from the opposite end (my end) of the warehouse.

Maybe I just need a more powerful router to be able to reach the other end of the warehouse. My WAVLINK 1200 has trouble reaching that far.

I know multiple access points can be utilized as a mesh network, and I may need to do that if I can't find a router/access point that can reach 75-100 yards

 

[sebastiantombs]

I'd use a wireless link instead of relying on WiFI and APs. One piece at each end and you effectively have a CAT6 cable without the wire. They're basically a plu and play, well a little config work, but it's quick and easy.

Ubiquity Nano Station Loco M5

Amazon.com

TP Link Bridge

Amazon.com

 

[Safari]

I'd use a wireless link instead of relying on WiFI and APs. One piece at each end and you effectively have a CAT6 cable without the wire. They're basically a plu and play, well a little config work, but it's quick and easy.

Ubiquity Nano Station Loco M5

Amazon.com

TP Link Bridge

Amazon.com

So you're saying a point to point wireless bridge is all that is needed to reach 100 yards?. No router is needed?

 

[sebastiantombs]

Yes. I use a Nano Loco M5 to link a shed to my house and it's supporting four cameras, three 2MP and one 4MP. That hardly tickles the available bandwidth. As long as you have a clear line of site, they will go several kilometers, 100 yards is nothing to them. Plus they're encrypted unlike WiFi which isn't and can be more easily hacked.

 

[TonyR]

As stated in my post #2, assign unique, static IP's in the same subnet to all devices on the camera LAN network, no router needed.
Use a Layer 2 Transparent Bridge as mentioned above by @sebastiantombs and linked in my post #4.

A similar schema below of which I've installed a half dozen at least, just modify configuration to fit YOUR schema:

 

[Flintstone61]

i'm also running 2 cams across a 300 ft. distance (parking lot) on a pair of Ubiquiti Loco Nano's

 

[Flintstone61]

The little Nano's are mounted under the far right patio and on the telephone pole, It's quite impressive, at one point i was streaming a dvr off that connection....

 

[Broachoski]

I use the Nano M5 setup at my barn along with a POE switch running 5 cameras. They share my local network in the house.
They do not output a WIFI signal so your phone ap will not pick the signal when you are in that far location. If you want to be able to access WIFI at that location you can plug another router into the new switch and either set it up in AP mode to your original router or either place in repeater mode. To keep it simple I would just set up a pair of Nano's, one as AP an 1 as Station and get the cameras working on your original network. Once that is working well then consider adding another remote router to extend your WIFI if you desire.

 

[Safari]

Yes. I use a Nano Loco M5 to link a shed to my house and it's supporting four cameras, three 2MP and one 4MP. That hardly tickles the available bandwidth. As long as you have a clear line of site, they will go several kilometers, 100 yards is nothing to them. Plus they're encrypted unlike WiFi which isn't and can be more easily hacked.

Ok thanks, I'm looking into that now

 

[Safari]

The little Nano's are mounted under the far right patio and on the telephone pole, It's quite impressive, at one point i was streaming a dvr off that connection....

View attachment 143349View attachment 143351

Nice, I'm now on a rabbit trail looking at this setup, as well as audio/video transceivers, and LoRa that transmits over 100 km (62 miles). This will keep me busy for a while.

Thanks for the help

 

[Safari]

I use the Nano M5 setup at my barn along with a POE switch running 5 cameras. They share my local network in the house.
They do not output a WIFI signal so your phone ap will not pick the signal when you are in that far location. If you want to be able to access WIFI at that location you can plug another router into the new switch and either set it up in AP mode to your original router or either place in repeater mode. To keep it simple I would just set up a pair of Nano's, one as AP an 1 as Station and get the cameras working on your original network. Once that is working well then consider adding another remote router to extend your WIFI if you desire.

I might do that. I can get a cheap router to get my phone on the network. At this point the Nanos are my first option. But I'm intrigued with the LoRa setup for an alternate auxiliary project

 

[TonyR]

Keep in mind that the UBNT Nano, if properly configured for the most dependable, error-free, highest bandwidth performance as a Layer 2 Transparent Bridge, will only "talk" to each other and not conventional Wi-Fi devices, because of its Airmax protocol. This is especially true of the 2.4GHz version because of the additional and recommended setting for 40Mhz channel width; conventional 2.4Ghz devices want 20MHz.

Based on that, to connect conventional Wi-Fi devices at the remote location, I'd go with a wireless router set to AP mode (or static LAN IP, DHCP server disabled), where even dual band (2.4 and 5GHz) is possible.

EDIT 10/20 @ 2143 CT: More info; that remote AP could be plugged into the switch as shown in my image in post #9 at the "Barn/Shop".

 

[Safari]

Keep in mind that the UBNT Nano, if properly configured for the most dependable, error-free, highest bandwidth performance as a Layer 2 Transparent Bridge, will only "talk" to each other and not conventional Wi-Fi devices, because of its Airmax protocol. This is especially true of the 2.4GHz version because of the additional and recommended setting for 40Mhz channel width; conventional 2.4Ghz devices want 20MHz.

Based on that, to connect conventional Wi-Fi devices at the remote location, I'd go with a wireless router set to AP mode (or static LAN IP, DHCP server disabled), where even dual band (2.4 and 5GHz) is possible.

EDIT 10/20 @ 2143 CT: More info; that remote AP could be plugged into the switch as shown in my image in post #9 at the "Barn/Shop".

I plan on using the Nano in the warehouse, it has a lot of advantages including creating a long range mesh network. My current router is set to AP mode, and I was thinking I may only need one Nano. But the question is if I get only one, can it run as a stand alone AP with 2-3 separate cameras on it?. If so, I won't worry about extending my current system.

I thought someone said the Nano won't connect to a phones wifi by itself, if this is true I'll need to connect it to my router or buy another router.

When I first started this camera setup almost two years ago, people here said cameras multiply like rabbits, which is true. So now I purchase things with future expandability in mind, something I did not do when I started.

 

[TonyR]

Yes, the Nano can be configured to connect to 2 to 3 wireless cameras if configured with WDS disabled, Airmax disabled and channel width set to 20MHz and will likely operate better than with a conventional wireless router.

Again, the Nano can be configured to operate with either phones or other routers and will, IMO, operate better than trying to use a router in client mode (add wireless to a wired camera) but I feel I must re-state: the best performance comes with a pair of these radios configured as Layer 2 Transparent Bridge, using their proprietary Airmax protocol.

It's possible to use a conventional wireless router to connect to 3 cameras, as I have that now and they operate well. They are the venerable 2MP/1080p @ 15FPS wireless Amcrest IP2M-841's. The wireless router is an Asus RT-N66U configured as a wireless AP only (static LAN IP, DHCP disabled, not routing) and that's the ONLY devices connecting to it, those 3 cams.

 

[Safari]

Yes, the Nano can be configured to connect to 2 to 3 wireless cameras if configured with WDS disabled, Airmax disabled and channel width set to 20MHz and will likely operate better than with a conventional wireless router.

Again, the Nano can be configured to operate with either phones or other routers and will, IMO, operate better than trying to use a router in client mode (add wireless to a wired camera) but I feel I must re-state: the best performance comes with a pair of these radios configured as Layer 2 Transparent Bridge, using their proprietary Airmax protocol.

It's possible to use a conventional wireless router to connect to 3 cameras, as I have that now and they operate well. They are the venerable 2MP/1080p @ 15FPS wireless Amcrest IP2M-841's. The wireless router is an Asus RT-N66U configured as a wireless AP only (static LAN IP, DHCP disabled, not routing) and that's the ONLY devices connecting to it, those 3 cams.

"the Nano can be configured to operate with either phones or other routers and will, IMO, operate better than trying to use a router in client mode (add wireless to a wired camera) but I feel I must re-state: the best performance comes with a pair of these radios configured as Layer 2 Transparent Bridge, using their proprietary Airmax protocol."

If that's my best option, that's what I'll do. Considering future expansion -which seem to be inevitable- I'll just get two and mesh the entire warehouse. It's cheaper to think ahead than to pay more later.

Thanks