My 4K-T works fantastic. I am using the G-711A and the mic is very hot but quite manageable and crisp.
Worlds First Review - Dahua DH-IPC-HDW5849H-ASE-LED / IPC-Color4K-T - 2.8mm Turret
- Thread starter Wildcat_1
- Start date
Yep exactly. If you do bump to AAC you’ll hear the crispness further and a little more depth. Either way, the cam does a good job of pickup and certainly hotter than the 4K-X at same settings.
@garycrist & @Wildcat_1
I have the encode settings at AAC, 16000, and mic volume at 75% and have attached an audio file of the massive amount of noise I hear from the 4k-T I got from Empire Tech (hover over the blank spot below in this post to see the video dialog to play it). I do hear some of the background noise I hear in the video @Wildcat_1 posted, but this is at least 5x as loud.
View attachment badmic2.mp4
I have the encode settings at AAC, 16000, and mic volume at 75% and have attached an audio file of the massive amount of noise I hear from the 4k-T I got from Empire Tech (hover over the blank spot below in this post to see the video dialog to play it). I do hear some of the background noise I hear in the video @Wildcat_1 posted, but this is at least 5x as loud.
View attachment badmic2.mp4
Hey guys, is there any word on a new firmware update to fix the profile schedule/day/night settings issues. Currently the cam is either useless in the night or useless in the day, I cant have it both ways, if i set it up for minimum shutter speed at night, then when daylight comes, the camera whites out/overexposed. And if i set it up for daytime exposure settings, when it gets darker, the image becomes black. So temporarily, i've left it on auto, where i have useable footage during the day, but night footage can get a bit blurry. I've tried multiple factory defaults, used both firefox and explorer, dleted caches from both, and still no luck with having the day/night settings work properly.
Replying to myself here with an update for all. I've completed thorough testing again across 3 different browsers Safari + Firefox (on Mac) + IE (on PC). I specifically went through each scenario people have reported, noted below for reference:
In each of these, I can state (and also show in this video) that they are not happening in my testing. The cameras are working correctly and as expected in each of these scenarios in my tests again today. I went back into each camera (the 3x 4K-T's I have) and tested. For reference, the camera that I recorded the footage against for the test in the video is a production (not beta, not pre-production) 2.8mm unit that Andy has been shipping out to all.
- Schedule not changing in Live View mode
- Settings not 'sticking' after being applied
- IVS rules being impacted (creation / adjustment)
- IVS rule resetting Exposure when clicking Apply
- Play back not working in browser for recorded clips from SD card
With the exception of the Mac based bugs for Safari and Firefox that I filed with Dahua when I first started testing these cams (applies to all 5.0 GUI cams on Mac), no issues are seen. Those bugs for reference are that Image Adjustment (for viewing parameter adjustments on Live Mode such as adjust contrast of the image for Live mode screen only) + on screen graphic functions such as E/PTZ creation (A180 cam) do not work with the embedded plugin and prompt you to download a Windows plugin ! This bug for Mac will stop IVS and E-PTZ graphics even being saved (you won’t even have an option to apply them as it will error out) BUT again this is ONLY for Safari & Firefox on Mac. This is NOT an issue for Firefox on PC as well as NOT an issue for IE as I show. So with that stated for continued reference, as you'll see on the video (11 mins but wanted to be complete), all the above scenarios tested fine.
Video being uploaded now and will update as soon as available thanks to the usual YouTube re-encode dance.
Almost forgot, didn’t show in this video as it was already 11 minutes in length BUT I did also test on Chrome on PC (v106.0.5249.119) as well as Firefox on PC (v102.3.0) and both of these are also working fine too in each of the 4 areas above. If people do want to see this as well, I can always capture more footage.
HTH show what I’m seeing across 1 x pre-production and 2 x production line 4K-T’s and critically that these issues are not present in this testing.
UPDATE - YouTube finally is ready in 1080p HD (make sure you manually select), still awaiting the YouTube 4K re-transcode (rant: wouldn't mind but the 4K file I upload already meets their standard requirements for encoding !, rant over)
Here is the video of the testing and the results
Additional Notes
- Timestamps added for each browser test + intro at start mentions versions used in the test
- At 07:47 of the video I mention setting night to 12:18:01 but my note I add shows 12:12:01, that was a Wildcat slip-up in the note, the actual time set as you can see on video is 12:18:01. You’ll also see the Windows Not Genuine popup when I have a fully licensed machine, gotta love Microsoft and one of many reasons why I moved to Mac
- Also while I show it on screen in the Safari on Mac test, I didn’t call out specifically (so doing it here) that exposure settings etc never changed when applying IVS rules. Just calling it out more clearly here so people saw that it wasn’t an issue in this test either.
@Steviedee here has some setting guide by @Wildcat_1 you make some time to watch it and try some testing and check if working on it.
For the audio, i also test on 4 ipc-color4K-T from different batches, white and black cams, the result is good, but i also have one camera has bad noise as @IAmWatchingYou! but when i move the camera somewhere it's back to normal again, so looks the testing enviroment make this happen. I also test the 5442 one. Here is the sample video, setting same as @Wildcat_1
IPC-T5442T-ZE
View attachment T5442T-ZE.mp4
4KT
View attachment IPC-color4K-T.mp4
IPC-T5442T-ZE
View attachment T5442T-ZE.mp4
4KT
View attachment IPC-color4K-T.mp4
Last edited:
@EMPIRETECANDY I did some more testing this morning. Can you tell me if you are using a PoE switch or power supply to power the cameras?
For reference, my testing are through managed POE switches
After testing today, I can confirm that the mic noise varies from power source - the camera produces different volumes of digital noise with different PoE switches and power supplies. So, it seems like Dahua didn't properly isolate the microphone circuitry, or used bad components to do so, in at least my camera.
Last edited:
The noise that was in the audio captures I posted was with the camera connected to a new PoE+ switch. Surprisingly with the power supplies the noise was about half as loud.
Thanks Andy - Camera and two mounts arrived safely this morning - now to play!
I thought I would give an update after playing with this for several weeks.
While we still have some quirky firmware issues to resolve, we do have some work-around solutions in the meantime. But after we initially set it up and dial it in to our field of view, we are rarely ever in it again, so I was never overly concerned about the quirks.
I find the image to be one of the better ones out there. This and the 4K/X bullet are the first cameras that I feel comfortable going with a little bit of digital zoom. Now of course many will digital zoom other cameras and they feel the images are ok, but I prefer the optical zoom. You can't get carried away with it LOL, but I feel it does a decent job.
The 4K/X and 4K/T are the first cameras I have had that I don't have to be pushing the limits of the camera parameters to get color at night in order to get a good image. We don't have street lights and most neighbors do not turn their outside lights on, so I am dealing with some challenging light conditions.
I will explain below, but for many of my other cameras that I have in color, I am running high gain, gamma, etc. and in some cases at around 70 just to be able to get color, but that does introduce artifacts and other issues. With the 4K/X and 4K/T I can run faster shutters and keep the parameters under 50, which helps tremendously.
Now with this being a 4K full-time color camera, it draws a different buyer to this prosumer market that we play in. These people are not aware of focal lengths and the value of varifocal and believe that the wide angle view allows them to make people and cars near and far. These people are chasing MP and full color. In short, they think these cameras are magic and can be the be all, see all, and that just doesn't exist. We have many posts within this thread and in other posts trying to educate the NOOB on the nuances. A great camera put in the wrong field of view or trying to do too much with one camera will result in poor performance, and we have seen that already with posts about the 4K/X or 4K/T. Like every camera, you need to select the correct camera for your needs and field of view.
So to build upon the thread regarding chasing focal length over MP, I wanted to take a moment to show some comparisons of the camera at a distance compared to their 4MP and 2MP equivalents, so I re-positioned several cameras to capture the same target at various distances.
To help guide the eye to the target (white car), I have blacked out all but the car moving at 25MPH out at a distance.
First up is the 4231 2.8mm 2MP Boobie cam. The white car is 100 feet away from the camera. So well beyond IDENTIFY distance.
I use this as an overview to "see the whole neighborhood" and not for IDENTIFY. I have to run a 1/30 shutter and high gain and gamma to keep it in color, but since it is for OBSERVATION and not IDENTIFY, it works and surprisingly with not a lot of blur/ghost. We can tell it is a white car and someone that knows cars may be able to identify it, but one shouldn't count on it. A lot of headlight bloom due to the high gain and brightness.
Next up is the 5421-Z12E varifocal camera set up at around 50mm. The white car is at 60 feet away at this location. We start to get to IDENTIFY at that combination of distance and focal length if the camera parameters are set-up correctly (shutter and other parameters).
Similar to above, I have to run the camera at 1/50 shutter and at much higher gain and gamma and brightness in order to make anything out in color. As such there will be some blur for a moving car.
Next up is the 5442-ZE varifocal camera set up at 3.6mm focal length. The white car is 55 feet away at this location, so about double the IDENTIFY distance of 26 feet.
Similar to the other cameras so far, I have to run the camera at 1/60 shutter and at much higher gain and gamma and brightness in order to make anything out in color, so it does introduce some blur with a car in motion.
Next up is the 4K/T camera with a 3.6mm focal length. The white car is at 110 feet away at this location, so well beyond the IDENTIFY distance of 24 feet.
I am able to run this at a much faster 1/120 shutter speed and with all the parameters below 50. And the image is much better than the 2MP above at comparable distance.
Now unfortunately, this camera is double the distance away from the other camera samples, so obviously the car is going to be smaller. Now you may not be able to tell here, but on my system, you can tell that even though this is more in the OBSERVE range, it captures a lot of detail. It has the least amount of blur (due to the larger sensor and faster shutter) and less headlight bloom due to not having to force the camera in color and running parameters like gain and gamma too hot. I am sure if the camera was closer at about the 40-50 foot range then the results would be even better.
Based on my experiences, for anyone with any light available (street lights or outside lights on) and is looking for a great OVERVIEW color camera that could be placed on a 2nd story to OBSERVE what is going on, I think the additional $70 to go up from the 5442 to the 4K/T is worth it.
I also think it is worth it if you have a location that is around the 6-7 feet high and you want to IDENTIFY at 15-20 feet out and have some light, then the 4K-T is a great camera that the increased resolution can provide more detail for a digital zoom in certain situations. I know some have expressed a concern about near and far distance focus, but I do not see that with my camera, especially once I dialed in the settings.
And then of course, if you do not have ambient light and do not want to use the built-in white LED, then you are better off with a camera with infrared capabilities.
Now I would be remiss LOL if I don't show what one should use if they wanted to IDENTIFY a car at the street from a distance (hint it isn't a 2.8 or 3.6mm fixed cam beyond 25 feet).
So this is the 5442-Z4E varifocal camera set to around 28mm to capture the car at 75 feet. Similar to the other cams, I have to run a 1/90 shutter and much higher gain and gamma and brightness, etc. than we typically like to see, but I spent a lot of time tweaking it to get the best picture possible. Like literally if I up the gain one number, it will be a ghost mess. The slower shutter results in some blur, but I am willing to accept it to get color.
While we still have some quirky firmware issues to resolve, we do have some work-around solutions in the meantime. But after we initially set it up and dial it in to our field of view, we are rarely ever in it again, so I was never overly concerned about the quirks.
I find the image to be one of the better ones out there. This and the 4K/X bullet are the first cameras that I feel comfortable going with a little bit of digital zoom. Now of course many will digital zoom other cameras and they feel the images are ok, but I prefer the optical zoom. You can't get carried away with it LOL, but I feel it does a decent job.
The 4K/X and 4K/T are the first cameras I have had that I don't have to be pushing the limits of the camera parameters to get color at night in order to get a good image. We don't have street lights and most neighbors do not turn their outside lights on, so I am dealing with some challenging light conditions.
I will explain below, but for many of my other cameras that I have in color, I am running high gain, gamma, etc. and in some cases at around 70 just to be able to get color, but that does introduce artifacts and other issues. With the 4K/X and 4K/T I can run faster shutters and keep the parameters under 50, which helps tremendously.
Now with this being a 4K full-time color camera, it draws a different buyer to this prosumer market that we play in. These people are not aware of focal lengths and the value of varifocal and believe that the wide angle view allows them to make people and cars near and far. These people are chasing MP and full color. In short, they think these cameras are magic and can be the be all, see all, and that just doesn't exist. We have many posts within this thread and in other posts trying to educate the NOOB on the nuances. A great camera put in the wrong field of view or trying to do too much with one camera will result in poor performance, and we have seen that already with posts about the 4K/X or 4K/T. Like every camera, you need to select the correct camera for your needs and field of view.
So to build upon the thread regarding chasing focal length over MP, I wanted to take a moment to show some comparisons of the camera at a distance compared to their 4MP and 2MP equivalents, so I re-positioned several cameras to capture the same target at various distances.
To help guide the eye to the target (white car), I have blacked out all but the car moving at 25MPH out at a distance.
First up is the 4231 2.8mm 2MP Boobie cam. The white car is 100 feet away from the camera. So well beyond IDENTIFY distance.
I use this as an overview to "see the whole neighborhood" and not for IDENTIFY. I have to run a 1/30 shutter and high gain and gamma to keep it in color, but since it is for OBSERVATION and not IDENTIFY, it works and surprisingly with not a lot of blur/ghost. We can tell it is a white car and someone that knows cars may be able to identify it, but one shouldn't count on it. A lot of headlight bloom due to the high gain and brightness.
Next up is the 5421-Z12E varifocal camera set up at around 50mm. The white car is at 60 feet away at this location. We start to get to IDENTIFY at that combination of distance and focal length if the camera parameters are set-up correctly (shutter and other parameters).
Similar to above, I have to run the camera at 1/50 shutter and at much higher gain and gamma and brightness in order to make anything out in color. As such there will be some blur for a moving car.
Next up is the 5442-ZE varifocal camera set up at 3.6mm focal length. The white car is 55 feet away at this location, so about double the IDENTIFY distance of 26 feet.
Similar to the other cameras so far, I have to run the camera at 1/60 shutter and at much higher gain and gamma and brightness in order to make anything out in color, so it does introduce some blur with a car in motion.
Next up is the 4K/T camera with a 3.6mm focal length. The white car is at 110 feet away at this location, so well beyond the IDENTIFY distance of 24 feet.
I am able to run this at a much faster 1/120 shutter speed and with all the parameters below 50. And the image is much better than the 2MP above at comparable distance.
Now unfortunately, this camera is double the distance away from the other camera samples, so obviously the car is going to be smaller. Now you may not be able to tell here, but on my system, you can tell that even though this is more in the OBSERVE range, it captures a lot of detail. It has the least amount of blur (due to the larger sensor and faster shutter) and less headlight bloom due to not having to force the camera in color and running parameters like gain and gamma too hot. I am sure if the camera was closer at about the 40-50 foot range then the results would be even better.
Based on my experiences, for anyone with any light available (street lights or outside lights on) and is looking for a great OVERVIEW color camera that could be placed on a 2nd story to OBSERVE what is going on, I think the additional $70 to go up from the 5442 to the 4K/T is worth it.
I also think it is worth it if you have a location that is around the 6-7 feet high and you want to IDENTIFY at 15-20 feet out and have some light, then the 4K-T is a great camera that the increased resolution can provide more detail for a digital zoom in certain situations. I know some have expressed a concern about near and far distance focus, but I do not see that with my camera, especially once I dialed in the settings.
And then of course, if you do not have ambient light and do not want to use the built-in white LED, then you are better off with a camera with infrared capabilities.
Now I would be remiss LOL if I don't show what one should use if they wanted to IDENTIFY a car at the street from a distance (hint it isn't a 2.8 or 3.6mm fixed cam beyond 25 feet).
So this is the 5442-Z4E varifocal camera set to around 28mm to capture the car at 75 feet. Similar to the other cams, I have to run a 1/90 shutter and much higher gain and gamma and brightness, etc. than we typically like to see, but I spent a lot of time tweaking it to get the best picture possible. Like literally if I up the gain one number, it will be a ghost mess. The slower shutter results in some blur, but I am willing to accept it to get color.
^ Damit @wittaj now you got me thinking of using this cam as a replacement for my SD12203T-GN that are used as overview cams in second story windows. I was all set to really consider the new mini-PTZ, but was not happy with 4MP in a 1/2.8" since the SD12203T-GN is a 2MP on 1/2.8" sensor. Was thinking of the mini-PTZ since it has way more zoom. But how often do I REALLY use the zoom? Both these high-mounted overview cams have been important in their normal 2.7mm settings.
Ahhhhrrrrrggg! Now I really need to think about this and define/redefine the use case for that position.
On the other hand, I COULD get both and mount them both in the same window. That way I get the great low light color performance of the 1/1.2" sensor AND the really long reach of the mini-PTZ! I mean I have room on the board in each window!
Rule #1 - Cams multiply like rabbits.
But that means I need another connection in those rooms. Or buy two more POE switches and two more UPS for them. Maybe get the solar panels on the roof then I don't need the UPS for each cam. Lets see, UPS for each room, that's about $200. Whole house solar with two Tesla battery banks, about $30k? I have to think about this. Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
Ahhhhrrrrrggg! Now I really need to think about this and define/redefine the use case for that position.
On the other hand, I COULD get both and mount them both in the same window. That way I get the great low light color performance of the 1/1.2" sensor AND the really long reach of the mini-PTZ! I mean I have room on the board in each window!
Rule #1 - Cams multiply like rabbits.
But that means I need another connection in those rooms. Or buy two more POE switches and two more UPS for them. Maybe get the solar panels on the roof then I don't need the UPS for each cam. Lets see, UPS for each room, that's about $200. Whole house solar with two Tesla battery banks, about $30k? I have to think about this. Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
@samplenhold yeah lol I am torn between the mini PTZ and another 4K-T myself LOL. I am leaning towards the 4K-T as I don't have the light for the mini PTZ MP/sensor combo. Or maybe both like you LOL.
I am dead serious about maybe two in those windows. I had never thought about putting a 4K-T up there until your post. You know I have light there. See the still from tonight for the SD12203T-GN.
(I need to trim that oak tree over the driveway soon)
The spec sheet that Andy posted for the Mini-PTZ said the lens is a 5-125mm. I could count the fleas on the kid down the road with that puppy!
So now I have the Dahua 4K-T 2.8mm on top and the competing Hikvision DS-2CD2387G2-LSU/SL 2.8mm right underneath it mounted about 7 1/2' high out front. This is definitely producing a lot of looks for people walking by, especially with a gigantic ladder out front with various object placed on different rungs.
@samplenhold Totally agree with Rule #1 now!
There is all sorts of quirks with and variations between these two cameras. I've spent the last couple of hours fighting with the image adjustment controls to get as close to a similar image as possible. I've been testing at night here with street lights, I manually set the shutter to 1/30 on both cameras. For both cameras, the WDR washes out colors. For both cameras, HLC produces the best image for me with both bright areas and dark areas, but I had to turn down the exposure compensation on the Dahua. Without HLC, the text on the box would be super overexposed, or after adjusting image settings the background very underexposed.. Overall I was able to produce a noticeably better night image on the Hikvision.
I also compared the microphone as I was having trouble with all the digital noise in the Dahua 4K-T. The Hikvision actually has some very noticeable background static, but nothing like the noise I was hearing from the Dahua. The microphone is definitely better in the Hikvision, and the Hikvision also adds a built in speaker. They're both not what I would call high quality audio though by any means.
Regarding the focus, I put a box with various sizes and colors of text on it out about 7' high on a ladder. Although the Hikvision DS-2CD2387G2-LSU/SL specs show a 4m to infinity depth of field, the Hikvision's close focus is quite noticeably better than the Dahua 4K-T's.
What's weird is that it seems even with the shutter on both cameras set at 1/30, it looks like the Dahua is doing noticeably better with cars driving by.
Edit: I now realize that shutter speed is the "slowest to allow", so the Dauha might have been using a faster shutter. I had the Dahua's shutter set to "Shutter Prioirty".
Anyhow, I think the right thing to do here would be to start a new thread for a comparison of the Dahua Color 4K-T and Hikvision DS-2CD2387G2. To be continued...
@samplenhold Totally agree with Rule #1 now!
There is all sorts of quirks with and variations between these two cameras. I've spent the last couple of hours fighting with the image adjustment controls to get as close to a similar image as possible. I've been testing at night here with street lights, I manually set the shutter to 1/30 on both cameras. For both cameras, the WDR washes out colors. For both cameras, HLC produces the best image for me with both bright areas and dark areas, but I had to turn down the exposure compensation on the Dahua. Without HLC, the text on the box would be super overexposed, or after adjusting image settings the background very underexposed.. Overall I was able to produce a noticeably better night image on the Hikvision.
I also compared the microphone as I was having trouble with all the digital noise in the Dahua 4K-T. The Hikvision actually has some very noticeable background static, but nothing like the noise I was hearing from the Dahua. The microphone is definitely better in the Hikvision, and the Hikvision also adds a built in speaker. They're both not what I would call high quality audio though by any means.
Regarding the focus, I put a box with various sizes and colors of text on it out about 7' high on a ladder. Although the Hikvision DS-2CD2387G2-LSU/SL specs show a 4m to infinity depth of field, the Hikvision's close focus is quite noticeably better than the Dahua 4K-T's.
What's weird is that it seems even with the shutter on both cameras set at 1/30, it looks like the Dahua is doing noticeably better with cars driving by.
Edit: I now realize that shutter speed is the "slowest to allow", so the Dauha might have been using a faster shutter. I had the Dahua's shutter set to "Shutter Prioirty".
Anyhow, I think the right thing to do here would be to start a new thread for a comparison of the Dahua Color 4K-T and Hikvision DS-2CD2387G2. To be continued...
Last edited:
1/30 shutter on a static image is useless.
You really need to be running faster shutters, especially with these bad boys. 1/60 at a minimum to minimize blur with a person walking, but preferably faster. What about gain and the other parameter (brightness, contrast, etc.) are those at default? You should be able to run 1/120 easy - I can and I do not have street lights nor neighbors that turn their outside lights on.
Using backlight at night can introduce blur, so make sure any of your comparison testing includes motion as that is when you can see the limitations of backlight at night - only use it after exhausting every other setting.
Also be cognizant of the field of view and try not to do too much. There is a post here of someone trying to do way too much with the field of view with the Hik and ended up having a mess everywhere near and far and was useless video. Running backlight to get a brighter image far away that blurs any motion is useless. Sometimes the background not being clear being 50 plus feet away is OK given the ideal focus range of the 2.8mm.
Be sure to do your testing with motion - that is all we care about here.
Last edited:
DanDenver
Getting comfortable
I think you have some valid points about the differences.
However motion videos at night are what concern me. How well do they catch motion when a perp is most likely to make a move.
However motion videos at night are what concern me. How well do they catch motion when a perp is most likely to make a move.
@wittaj I just set both cameras to 1/60 and am going to run them over night with human/vehicle enabled. I spent quite some time trying to get close objects not to be overexposed yet objects further out to be visible, but HLC definitely made a massive difference. I'll have to try disabling it to see if it has any effect on the Hik's blur. A box on the ladder was literally appearing as a white glowing blur before enabling it. You're right about field of view - I probably don't care about my neighbor's backyard 70' away, but I do care about 5-50' out. Currently the street light bulb is out which is creating a bit of a problem beyond about 20'.
There's so many things to consider here:
Yep - motion blur is huge for capturing moving vehicles and running perpetrators. I definitely understand now the importance of color too - seeing what color a car is and what color a person's clothes are is huge too, and it's worth sacrificing some depth of field for that in certain circumstances.
For my needs, I think #1 for me is the AI detection and be able to tell that a person or vehicle is on my property, and to get push notifications. Even if the person is a blur, this could very well prevent something from happening in the first place if I combine that with 2-way audio for warn away after seeing the video where the 2 guys are creeping around people's car's.
One other thing I have to add is that I found that Hikvision isn't using Google's Firebase Cloud Messaging for push notifications on Android. Hikvision is actually using their own proprietary push notification service. This causes battery life issues as there's always a network connection open from your device to their servers in addition to Google's, in addition to having to worry about devices doing battery optimization and dropping the network connection the app makes.
There's so many things to consider here:
Yep - motion blur is huge for capturing moving vehicles and running perpetrators. I definitely understand now the importance of color too - seeing what color a car is and what color a person's clothes are is huge too, and it's worth sacrificing some depth of field for that in certain circumstances.
For my needs, I think #1 for me is the AI detection and be able to tell that a person or vehicle is on my property, and to get push notifications. Even if the person is a blur, this could very well prevent something from happening in the first place if I combine that with 2-way audio for warn away after seeing the video where the 2 guys are creeping around people's car's.
One other thing I have to add is that I found that Hikvision isn't using Google's Firebase Cloud Messaging for push notifications on Android. Hikvision is actually using their own proprietary push notification service. This causes battery life issues as there's always a network connection open from your device to their servers in addition to Google's, in addition to having to worry about devices doing battery optimization and dropping the network connection the app makes.
Last edited: