dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
3476
slcpd6469
join:2003-09-25
Saint Louis, MO

slcpd6469

Member

Remote CCTV access

I'm a current pissed off charter customer that's ready to jump ship to Uverse for tv and Internet. I only have one question about the Internet side. Can I remotely access my home CCTV DVR? It will be a deal breaker if I cannot. Right now I use dyndns since I have a dhcp address and I have the required ports open on my router. Is this doable with Uverse?

StillLearn
Premium Member
join:2002-03-21
Streamwood, IL

StillLearn

Premium Member

There is nothing that would stop that. The built-in router in the 2wire device can do port forwarding.

You can also tell the modem/router to pass out a particular IP address when the DHCP request for a given client. That can be useful at times when you want to access the system locally.

You can still use dyndns. However your public IP address may never or seldom change.
slcpd6469
join:2003-09-25
Saint Louis, MO

slcpd6469

Member

Thanks for the info. I heard once something about double nat'ing. Didn't know if that was an issue

StillLearn
Premium Member
join:2002-03-21
Streamwood, IL

StillLearn

Premium Member

If you want to use your existing router, I would put that router into bridge mode so that it is working more like a switch. Let the ATT gateway do the DHCP. I am not expert on that stuff. In my 2wire gateway there is a firewall Applications, Pinholes and DMZ section. The pinholes is another term for port forwarding. There is also a setting for a web server, which is what your camera setup probably is. That is probably for forwarding port 80.

dandeman
MVM
join:2001-12-05
Chapel Hill, NC

3 edits

dandeman to slcpd6469

MVM

to slcpd6469
I have UVerse HSI and port forward my CCTV DVR with no problems..

Works well accessing with remote computer or smartphone.. DVR manufacturer (Digital Watchdog »dwcc.tv/product_dvrs/dvr ··· %20Alone ) has developed Android App to use for remote smart phone access and also has their free DDNS service to register the DVR to resolve a dynamic IP to a fixed address.

I use DYNDNS SMTP service to near instant (within seconds) delivery of DVR email alerts.

For video through the cellphone network, best to have DVR doing H.264 video compression..

pcgeek86
join:2005-11-29
Fort Collins, CO

pcgeek86 to slcpd6469

Member

to slcpd6469
As others have already indicated, as long as you configure port forwarding correctly, you should be just fine. I don't know what ports your CCTV system uses, but it should be fairly well documented.

If you get the 2Wire 3600HGV unit, then you should probably put it into DMZ mode and use your own device to handle port forwarding through NAT. With this configuration, your device will get the public IPv4 address of your AT&T U-Verse connection, and you can then control which ports are forwarded.

It works fabulously for me, as I expose certain services through NAT, using my own device. I happen to use either a Linksys WRT54GL or an Asus RT-N16, but any consumer grade device should work fine.

Dennis
Mod
join:2001-01-26
Algonquin, IL

Dennis

Mod

said by pcgeek86:

If you get the 2Wire 3600HGV unit, then you should probably put it into DMZ mode and use your own device to handle port forwarding through NAT. With this configuration, your device will get the public IPv4 address of your AT&T U-Verse connection, and you can then control which ports are forwarded.

I have a 2wire 3800 series and haven't had any issues with port forwarding on it for the past two years.

StillLearn
Premium Member
join:2002-03-21
Streamwood, IL

StillLearn

Premium Member

said by Dennis:

said by pcgeek86:

If you get the 2Wire 3600HGV unit, then you should probably put it into DMZ mode and use your own device to handle port forwarding through NAT. With this configuration, your device will get the public IPv4 address of your AT&T U-Verse connection, and you can then control which ports are forwarded.

I have a 2wire 3800 series and haven't had any issues with port forwarding on it for the past two years.

I interpreted pcgeek86 as saying DMZ would be a way to let the router do the DHCP, port handling, and all without getting double NAT. That sounded innovative to me. I see that as something some might prefer to do for some reason.

You are right, of course, that the 3600HGV or 3801HGV can do the port forwarding and it would not need to have an additional router to do that.

old_tech
Premium Member
join:2013-03-31
Springfield, IL

old_tech to slcpd6469

Premium Member

to slcpd6469
I have no problems with port forwarding for my three cameras, a Cirago USB drive Network adapter, and my Ted5000.

pcgeek86
join:2005-11-29
Fort Collins, CO

pcgeek86 to StillLearn

Member

to StillLearn
said by StillLearn:

said by Dennis:

said by pcgeek86:

If you get the 2Wire 3600HGV unit, then you should probably put it into DMZ mode and use your own device to handle port forwarding through NAT. With this configuration, your device will get the public IPv4 address of your AT&T U-Verse connection, and you can then control which ports are forwarded.

I have a 2wire 3800 series and haven't had any issues with port forwarding on it for the past two years.

I interpreted pcgeek86 as saying DMZ would be a way to let the router do the DHCP, port handling, and all without getting double NAT. That sounded innovative to me. I see that as something some might prefer to do for some reason.

You are right, of course, that the 3600HGV or 3801HGV can do the port forwarding and it would not need to have an additional router to do that.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. In my opinion, the 2Wire 3600HGV web interface is terrible compared to the stock firmwares that come on some consumer-grade all-in-one router/NAT/firewall devices. If you want to go even further, Tomato, DD-WRT, and OpenWRT are all vastly superior in terms of configuration abilities, and I have a lot more "trust" in them than I do the 2Wire device itself.

That being said, I would prefer to offload as much responsibility as possible from the 2Wire, and use my own, separate device to manage my firewall, NAT port mappings, and other settings (wifi, IPv6 prefix delegation, et al.). In my situation, I have a Linksys WRT54GL with Tomato as my router, and I have disabled the wifi capabilities on it. Plugged into the WRT54GL is an Asus RT-N16, which runs DD-WRT, and acts as a 100/1000 switch and a wifi Access Point (AP).

It all boils down to a matter of preference.

Dennis
Mod
join:2001-01-26
Algonquin, IL

Dennis

Mod

said by pcgeek86:

It all boils down to a matter of preference.

Yes it does. For most consumers I say keep it simple, so that is where I was coming from. Personally I'm a fan of the Belkin N300 with dd-wrt on it because of the reasons you stated. The features are really enterprise level...it's kind of crazy. When my kids are older I might use one to control what they access and when (you can set a cron to turn wireless on and off at night and do http redirects).

Anyways for most people I have the opinion of keeping it simple. That's all I was saying.

old_tech
Premium Member
join:2013-03-31
Springfield, IL

old_tech to pcgeek86

Premium Member

to pcgeek86
PCGeek86, I have no problems with the firewall interface on the 3xxx series gateways. The whole firewall interface is built on Raccoon2 & IPTables, since the basis of the 3xxx series is based on OpenBSD.