Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
Yes BI needs thinks the link is near death has other things for CPU to do.
Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam pag
- Thread starter hekg
- Start date
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
Hey guys, so BP is saying that BI pulls images from the cameras and it's clogging the airwaves, this actually makes sense to me. However, how come of the two cameras which are sitting side by side only one of them acts up? Why don't they both act up or alternate between working and dropping out?
Anyway, my next step is to put a huge five foot long tp-link antenna on a mast and connect all of the cameras to the main router. I'm going to try to eliminate the wireless bridges or mount the bridges next to the trouble cameras and connect them to the bridge router via ethernet.
I guess trial and error is the only way to go with these things.
Hey guys, so BP is saying that BI pulls images from the cameras and it's clogging the airwaves, this actually makes sense to me. However, how come of the two cameras which are sitting side by side only one of them acts up? Why don't they both act up or alternate between working and dropping out?
Anyway, my next step is to put a huge five foot long tp-link antenna on a mast and connect all of the cameras to the main router. I'm going to try to eliminate the wireless bridges or mount the bridges next to the trouble cameras and connect them to the bridge router via ethernet.
I guess trial and error is the only way to go with these things.
David Messenger
Young grasshopper
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
I tried several things last night and now I believe that it just might be a wireless congestion problem too. I connected a USB powered webcam and watched for awhile. While all the wireless cameras would take turns going in and out of service, the web cam remained solid. My desktop is also connected wirelessly so even though the desktop is on a different frequency (5Ghz) the router has to work harder to get the job done. Probably the only thing that has made it workable so far is the fact that I am using 5Ghz to connect my desktop and the cameras are all on 2.4 GHz. 2.4 is probably very congested but the 5GHz frequency is probably not that bad, especially since it has a lot more bandwidth.
I tried changing back to 32 bit, and even rolled the version back to 3.66. I also reduced the frame rates and increased the receive buffers on all the cameras. When I get home, I'm going to start turning them off one at a time to see if that makes things more stable. I'm guessing its going to improve things with each disconnect. I have a GB switch I can put in the attic so I will be able to connect some of the cameras by wire without crawling around in the hot attic for too long. I might even run some cat 5 to my desktop which should also help to reduce the wireless load on my router. I still don't get why the cameras seem to stay up better using IP Camera Viewer, but maybe the timeout is different so it keeps showing the last frame it received for a longer period of time before it errors out.
Thanks to everyone in this thread. It's nice to talk things out with other people. I'll come back and let you know how it goes after my experiment is complete.
I tried several things last night and now I believe that it just might be a wireless congestion problem too. I connected a USB powered webcam and watched for awhile. While all the wireless cameras would take turns going in and out of service, the web cam remained solid. My desktop is also connected wirelessly so even though the desktop is on a different frequency (5Ghz) the router has to work harder to get the job done. Probably the only thing that has made it workable so far is the fact that I am using 5Ghz to connect my desktop and the cameras are all on 2.4 GHz. 2.4 is probably very congested but the 5GHz frequency is probably not that bad, especially since it has a lot more bandwidth.
I tried changing back to 32 bit, and even rolled the version back to 3.66. I also reduced the frame rates and increased the receive buffers on all the cameras. When I get home, I'm going to start turning them off one at a time to see if that makes things more stable. I'm guessing its going to improve things with each disconnect. I have a GB switch I can put in the attic so I will be able to connect some of the cameras by wire without crawling around in the hot attic for too long. I might even run some cat 5 to my desktop which should also help to reduce the wireless load on my router. I still don't get why the cameras seem to stay up better using IP Camera Viewer, but maybe the timeout is different so it keeps showing the last frame it received for a longer period of time before it errors out.
Thanks to everyone in this thread. It's nice to talk things out with other people. I'll come back and let you know how it goes after my experiment is complete.
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
In addition to this, there are some rules you should follow to make best use of the available 2.4ghz channels:
1. Don't let your router use more than 20mHz channel width. Some have the option to use 40mHz, but since there is only about 60mHz total available spectrum, this is often a bad idea. In ideal conditions, it results in a speed improvement. But it drastically increases your chance of picking up interference (and causing interference for others) because you would be using two thirds of the available 2.4ghz spectrum! The result may be that you (and others) have worse wifi performance than you would if you were set to 20mHz. Only use this if you don't have neighbors.
2. Only use the channels 1, 6, or 11, and do not let the channel be chosen automatically. Combined with the use of a 20 mHz channel width, these channels are far enough apart to allow for 3 separate wireless networks to operate in the same physical area without interfering with each other. Any other choice of channels is less efficient and will result in only 2 separate networks being possible without interfering with each other. You can think of it as a small parking lot with 3 parking spaces. If you choose any channel besides 1, 6, or 11, then you are double-parking. (To take things further, if you use a 40mHz channel width, then you are also parking two cars in the lot).
Scan for wireless networks yourself with a mobile app, to see which channels are in use. These apps are unable to determine the channel width of a router, so all are shown as 20 mHz.
Despite the cameras being side by side, the conditions can be different. The radio/antenna quality can vary, and the surroundings can still be different enough that one of them has a better signal. It is a bit surprising that they don't both give you problems at least some of the time, though.
If you are using wireless repeaters, they can be part of the problem. I am talking specifically about the type that connect wirelessly to your router and extend the signal. These, by their very nature, cut your available bandwidth in half. They must spend half the time re-transmitting something they just received! If you must use additional wireless access points, it is better to wire them back to the main router and have the additional access points using different wifi channels.
In addition to this, there are some rules you should follow to make best use of the available 2.4ghz channels:
1. Don't let your router use more than 20mHz channel width. Some have the option to use 40mHz, but since there is only about 60mHz total available spectrum, this is often a bad idea. In ideal conditions, it results in a speed improvement. But it drastically increases your chance of picking up interference (and causing interference for others) because you would be using two thirds of the available 2.4ghz spectrum! The result may be that you (and others) have worse wifi performance than you would if you were set to 20mHz. Only use this if you don't have neighbors.
2. Only use the channels 1, 6, or 11, and do not let the channel be chosen automatically. Combined with the use of a 20 mHz channel width, these channels are far enough apart to allow for 3 separate wireless networks to operate in the same physical area without interfering with each other. Any other choice of channels is less efficient and will result in only 2 separate networks being possible without interfering with each other. You can think of it as a small parking lot with 3 parking spaces. If you choose any channel besides 1, 6, or 11, then you are double-parking. (To take things further, if you use a 40mHz channel width, then you are also parking two cars in the lot).
Scan for wireless networks yourself with a mobile app, to see which channels are in use. These apps are unable to determine the channel width of a router, so all are shown as 20 mHz.
It sounds like you are on the right track. Usually it is a very bad idea to connect a Blue Iris machine wirelessly, but since you are using an entirely different frequency for it, I imagine it is not the source of your problems. Changing Blue Iris versions rarely has a useful effect on camera stability, since camera stability problems are usually related to wifi and changing the BI version will have no effect on that.
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
Adding to BP, if cameras support wireless N, then choising wireless N only on the router is robust. Also if your router supports tweeking there some setting like Beacon interval and RST setting might be optimized.
Adding to BP, if cameras support wireless N, then choising wireless N only on the router is robust. Also if your router supports tweeking there some setting like Beacon interval and RST setting might be optimized.
David Messenger
Young grasshopper
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
Ok, I think I have made some progress tonight. I came home and made some adjustments to my router. I was reading up on beacon intervals, preambles, IGMP snooping and multicasting to name a few. I decided to try adjusting my beacon interval to half of the default (50 ms), turning on IGMP snooping, and changing my preamble to short. I also removed 2 wireless repeaters I had installed to try to improve my signal strength on two of the furthest away cameras. After I did that, I went out and mowed the lawn. When I got back to checking my cameras afterwards, things looked pretty good. Almost no drops at all! Then my son came in AND TURNED ON THE MICROWAVE while I was getting ready to write to Ken to tell him the good news. All that good news just went down the drain almost immediately.
I happened to be watching the traffic monitor on the router and the status monitor in BI when he started it up. I noticed a ton of erratic activity on the network, cameras timing out, I/o errors etc. Of course after that I zeroed in on the microwave as a possible source of most of my aggravation. My router is only about 10' from the microwave so I guess it's in a good spot to cause trouble. I hadn't thought about that being an issue before so I looked it up on the web. Sure enough (and I'm sure most of you probably already know) microwave ovens cause lots of RF interference with 2.4 GHz networks. After several cycles of microwave on for a couple of minutes then off for several minutes, I was convinced that I definitely had a problem with my microwave. I still think that my adjustments to the router were warranted and I want to see how it does over a longer period of time before I make any more changes. If I roll anything back, I plan to do it only one adjustment at a time to make sure I know what effect that one adjustment has made.
I also ordered a powerline adapter to connect one of my less reliable cameras which will reduce the load on my 2.4GHz so hopefully, it will improve the connection on that one camera and make the others more reliable by freeing up some wireless bandwidth. Seems like interference should be a basic consideration when troubleshooting a wireless network but I completed overlooked it. Maybe someone will be reminded about it by reading this post and avoid the problem for themselves. Thanks again everyone. I'll let you know how the powerline adapter works out after I get it installed.
Ok, I think I have made some progress tonight. I came home and made some adjustments to my router. I was reading up on beacon intervals, preambles, IGMP snooping and multicasting to name a few. I decided to try adjusting my beacon interval to half of the default (50 ms), turning on IGMP snooping, and changing my preamble to short. I also removed 2 wireless repeaters I had installed to try to improve my signal strength on two of the furthest away cameras. After I did that, I went out and mowed the lawn. When I got back to checking my cameras afterwards, things looked pretty good. Almost no drops at all! Then my son came in AND TURNED ON THE MICROWAVE while I was getting ready to write to Ken to tell him the good news. All that good news just went down the drain almost immediately.
I happened to be watching the traffic monitor on the router and the status monitor in BI when he started it up. I noticed a ton of erratic activity on the network, cameras timing out, I/o errors etc. Of course after that I zeroed in on the microwave as a possible source of most of my aggravation. My router is only about 10' from the microwave so I guess it's in a good spot to cause trouble. I hadn't thought about that being an issue before so I looked it up on the web. Sure enough (and I'm sure most of you probably already know) microwave ovens cause lots of RF interference with 2.4 GHz networks. After several cycles of microwave on for a couple of minutes then off for several minutes, I was convinced that I definitely had a problem with my microwave. I still think that my adjustments to the router were warranted and I want to see how it does over a longer period of time before I make any more changes. If I roll anything back, I plan to do it only one adjustment at a time to make sure I know what effect that one adjustment has made.
I also ordered a powerline adapter to connect one of my less reliable cameras which will reduce the load on my 2.4GHz so hopefully, it will improve the connection on that one camera and make the others more reliable by freeing up some wireless bandwidth. Seems like interference should be a basic consideration when troubleshooting a wireless network but I completed overlooked it. Maybe someone will be reminded about it by reading this post and avoid the problem for themselves. Thanks again everyone. I'll let you know how the powerline adapter works out after I get it installed.
Last edited by a moderator:
fenderman
Staff member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2014
- Messages
- 36,902
- Reaction score
- 21,274
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
@David Messenger If you have any cameras that can be wired, run cable to them. If you cant do it yourself, hire a low voltage cable runner to do it..it will cost a bit more than powerline but will be much more reliable and you will have the ability to use poe cameras in the future.
@David Messenger If you have any cameras that can be wired, run cable to them. If you cant do it yourself, hire a low voltage cable runner to do it..it will cost a bit more than powerline but will be much more reliable and you will have the ability to use poe cameras in the future.
David Messenger
Young grasshopper
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
Thanks and that sounds like good advice. The powerline adapter I'm getting is not going to use wireless, it will be connected at both ends with cat5 cable. It's a TP-LINK TL-PA6010KIT AV600 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IBPLI48?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00 It costs a little but at least I won't have to crawl around in the attic to get run the cable. Thanks again...
Thanks and that sounds like good advice. The powerline adapter I'm getting is not going to use wireless, it will be connected at both ends with cat5 cable. It's a TP-LINK TL-PA6010KIT AV600 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IBPLI48?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00 It costs a little but at least I won't have to crawl around in the attic to get run the cable. Thanks again...
As an Amazon Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
fenderman
Staff member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2014
- Messages
- 36,902
- Reaction score
- 21,274
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
I understand that it doesnt use wifi..my point is that for about 100 dollars you can pay someone to run ethernet for that connection and it will be much more stable than powerline and you can use POE cams in the future..will save you lots of hassle and headaches...
As an Amazon Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
He could always connect a PoE switch to a powerline adapter. Of course it won't have the speed and stability of a pure ethernet run but it will be better than wifi
FYI the beacon interval has nothing to do with stability. That is just the interval at which the router announces that it exists. So with a 50ms interval, the router will be sending out its SSID saying "I'm here" 20 times every second. The other settings, IGMP snooping and preamble length, I don't know anything about. The wireless repeaters probably were not helping matters, since they work by retransmitting everything that goes through them, each repeater tends to cut your available bandwidth in half.
He could always connect a PoE switch to a powerline adapter. Of course it won't have the speed and stability of a pure ethernet run but it will be better than wifi
FYI the beacon interval has nothing to do with stability. That is just the interval at which the router announces that it exists. So with a 50ms interval, the router will be sending out its SSID saying "I'm here" 20 times every second. The other settings, IGMP snooping and preamble length, I don't know anything about. The wireless repeaters probably were not helping matters, since they work by retransmitting everything that goes through them, each repeater tends to cut your available bandwidth in half.
fenderman
Staff member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2014
- Messages
- 36,902
- Reaction score
- 21,274
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
Technically yes, but This would require a separate injector/switch at each powerline location and would look terrible...defeating the purpose of poe..He could always connect a PoE switch to a powerline adapter. Of course it won't have the speed and stability of a pure ethernet run but it will be better than wifi
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
http://routerguide.net/beacon-interval-best-optimal-setting-improve-wireless-speed/
Lower beacon interval helps with weak signalsHe could always connect a PoE switch to a powerline adapter. Of course it won't have the speed and stability of a pure ethernet run but it will be better than wifi
FYI the beacon interval has nothing to do with stability. That is just the interval at which the router announces that it exists. So with a 50ms interval, the router will be sending out its SSID saying "I'm here" 20 times every second. The other settings, IGMP snooping and preamble length, I don't know anything about. The wireless repeaters probably were not helping matters, since they work by retransmitting everything that goes through them, each repeater tends to cut your available bandwidth in half.
http://routerguide.net/beacon-interval-best-optimal-setting-improve-wireless-speed/
David Messenger
Young grasshopper
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
Good morning... The routerguide article that Marty referenced is the reason I made the changes that I made. I was reading it yesterday and decided to try some of the suggestions to see how they worked out. Last night, after running for a few hours at 50 ms beacon intervals, I reconsidered and decided to see if putting the beacon interval at a larger value would make a difference since I made multiple changes at one time. I first put it back to 100 ms and waited a little while. It was not working nearly as well with my more difficult to reach cameras. So then I changed it to 75 but that still didn't work out very well.
Admittedly, I didn't test with those other values for more than 10 or 15 minutes, but the change seemed to be pretty obvious in my log. The entries went from lots of errors to very few once I changed it back to 50 ms. After running it all night at 50 ms, the errors were much fewer than they had been previously and they only involved the 2 furthest cameras from the router.
I am keeping track of my settings changes vs. performance by making notes in the log files as I make the changes. It will be easier to see how changes to the settings affect the network and to compare different combinations of settings. Of course, that doesn't mean that something else couldn't coincidentally cause some change in performance to happen around the same time as a settings adjustment, but it seems to be the most likely way to get to the causes of the problems I've been having.
I'm going to keep making small changes and try to determine if those changes have a positive or negative effect on my network. I know that running cable is the most reliable way to get good performance, but I'm having fun trying to make this work better. If it doesn't pan out, I can always run cable.
Good morning... The routerguide article that Marty referenced is the reason I made the changes that I made. I was reading it yesterday and decided to try some of the suggestions to see how they worked out. Last night, after running for a few hours at 50 ms beacon intervals, I reconsidered and decided to see if putting the beacon interval at a larger value would make a difference since I made multiple changes at one time. I first put it back to 100 ms and waited a little while. It was not working nearly as well with my more difficult to reach cameras. So then I changed it to 75 but that still didn't work out very well.
Admittedly, I didn't test with those other values for more than 10 or 15 minutes, but the change seemed to be pretty obvious in my log. The entries went from lots of errors to very few once I changed it back to 50 ms. After running it all night at 50 ms, the errors were much fewer than they had been previously and they only involved the 2 furthest cameras from the router.
I am keeping track of my settings changes vs. performance by making notes in the log files as I make the changes. It will be easier to see how changes to the settings affect the network and to compare different combinations of settings. Of course, that doesn't mean that something else couldn't coincidentally cause some change in performance to happen around the same time as a settings adjustment, but it seems to be the most likely way to get to the causes of the problems I've been having.
I'm going to keep making small changes and try to determine if those changes have a positive or negative effect on my network. I know that running cable is the most reliable way to get good performance, but I'm having fun trying to make this work better. If it doesn't pan out, I can always run cable.
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
Interesting. I would not have expected the beacon interval to affect the reliability of a wireless connection. Anyway, further cameras will use more airtime than close ones as they may need to retransmit more data, and transmit at a slower rate to avoid excessive transmission errors. Try to run cable to those cams first, of course!
Interesting. I would not have expected the beacon interval to affect the reliability of a wireless connection. Anyway, further cameras will use more airtime than close ones as they may need to retransmit more data, and transmit at a slower rate to avoid excessive transmission errors. Try to run cable to those cams first, of course!
David Messenger
Young grasshopper
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
Thanks again bp... I would rather have cable, but summertime here in the south is not a good time for venturing into the attic for any length of time, even at night. I really hope the Powerline adapter works ok so I don't have to go up there. If I do end up running cable, it's going to have to wait till things cool off in a couple of months.
I'll let you know how that adapter works when I get it installed. By the way, my further away cameras still dropped out some today, but not for as long and it still seems like an improvement over what it was before the adjustments to the router.
Thanks again bp... I would rather have cable, but summertime here in the south is not a good time for venturing into the attic for any length of time, even at night. I really hope the Powerline adapter works ok so I don't have to go up there. If I do end up running cable, it's going to have to wait till things cool off in a couple of months.
I'll let you know how that adapter works when I get it installed. By the way, my further away cameras still dropped out some today, but not for as long and it still seems like an improvement over what it was before the adjustments to the router.
David Messenger
Young grasshopper
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
So much for the powerline adapter being a good way for me to get some of my cameras off the wireless network and onto the wired network. It didn't work out as advertised for me so I'm returning the adapter to Amazon. Maybe it's my old house wiring that is making it not work so well. It supposedly has a pretty long range but didn't even do well at my house a distance of about 40 to 50 feet.
I am going ahead with cat5 to all the cameras in my house. It's kind of a pain to run the cable, but I know it will be much more reliable.
So much for the powerline adapter being a good way for me to get some of my cameras off the wireless network and onto the wired network. It didn't work out as advertised for me so I'm returning the adapter to Amazon. Maybe it's my old house wiring that is making it not work so well. It supposedly has a pretty long range but didn't even do well at my house a distance of about 40 to 50 feet.
I am going ahead with cat5 to all the cameras in my house. It's kind of a pain to run the cable, but I know it will be much more reliable.
David Messenger
Young grasshopper
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Camera dropping out when used with Blue Iris but works when viewed through Foscam
That's pretty much what I am doing. I am going to do all the ones that are actually on the house. I have a detached building about 100' away with two cameras that run wirelessly and I'm hoping that getting the other ones off the wireless will improve how they work. If they don't work well enough to suit me, I'll run cable out there too. I'm just tired of having my cameras stop working for a few moments when I'm interested in what should be getting recorded.
That's pretty much what I am doing. I am going to do all the ones that are actually on the house. I have a detached building about 100' away with two cameras that run wirelessly and I'm hoping that getting the other ones off the wireless will improve how they work. If they don't work well enough to suit me, I'll run cable out there too. I'm just tired of having my cameras stop working for a few moments when I'm interested in what should be getting recorded.