Open Enterprise Security

Just returning from my trip to Las Vegas for the ISC West trade show.  I was pleasantly surprised to see a lot of attendees there in spite of the economy.  I spoke to several people in their booths and they said the positive of this was that the people attending the show were very serious about security and video surveillance.  In other words, not as many "looky loo's".  Interestingly, just this week I saw where ABI Research reports that even in this economic downturn that the video surveillance market still shows a 10% growth.

 I don't know if it was just my observation but I did feel there were many more vendors this year offering managed services.  Which, in this case refers to monitoring a video surveillance network for the health of the network itself (cameras, DVR/NVR, encoders, etc.)  I still profess that the industry is quickly moving to adopting a hosted model of video surveillance, thus providing opportunity for people who don't want to invest in an IP network (and the support and maintenance of that network), yet have a need for video surveillance.  I'll be interested in comments about this topic as I get wide responses when I bring this up. 

 Along the line of hosted video surveillance, the reason I think this is becoming more of a reality is because the network providers (such as Alcatel-Lucent, Motorola, Ericsson) are all investing in network infrastructures specific to the unique characteristics of streamed video.  And of course this potentially leads into a discussion of network convergence and voice/data/video - which is where physical security as a whole is headed (i.e., integrating video surveillance with access control with building management)...but that's a topic for another day. 

 To bring this back to the whole idea of the network, you can look at any of the network provider websites (those I mentioned above and more) and you will find references to video surveillance.  At Sun, these have been some of our most powerful partners.  I'm excited that with their network infrastructure to support the streaming video and Sun's underlying infrastructure for servers (NVR's once you add a partner ISV's video management software) and our unique approach to data lifecycle management that brings the current high price of storage for video down to ridiculously low price points, we have one of the most compelling offers in this space today.  (Send me a note:shereen.fink@sun.com if you want more information.)

To set the stage for this discussion, you may want to visit another blog written by Darrell Jordan-Smith (VP of Global Communications and Media Practice at Sun).  Specifically, his blog entry addressing network capacity.  Darrell discusses the issue of the network not keeping up with the demands users are putting on it for services.  This speaks directly to video surveillance and the demand this unstructured, volumous data puts on the IP network. 

Video surveillance has benefited from the advances in the processor chip to process and manage data.  But ONE of the bottlenecks that occurs in traditional environments is when video surveillance data is transferred to storage.  The network hasn't kept up with the processor.  Frankly, this is where Sun has brought significant value in technology that the IP video surveillance market benefits from...the Sun Fire x4500 (code name Thumper...soon to be upstaged by Thor...the Sun Fire x4540).  The x4500 and x4540 are refered to as data servers.  These are servers with a significant amount of onboard storage: 12TB/24TB/48TB.  I mention this because these data servers play a huge role in IP video surveillance.

Here are the data points from the x4540 website:

At a Glance Dual Quad-Core AMD Opteron processors 48 integrated SATA disk drives onboard Scales from 12TB to 48TB in a 4U rack space Highest throughput rates (2.0GB/s from disks to network, 3.0GB/s to memory) Twice as compact and half the cost of competing systems Incredible prices: $1.20/GB, including server Runs Solaris OS, Linux, and Windows operating systems For those of us who don't speak in terms of 'bits and bytes' on a daily basis, this is a translation to IP video surveillance terms: I refer to the Sun Fire x4500 and x4540's as a 'NVR on Steriods'.  (With Sun's software partners running their applications on these data servers, they act in a capacity of a NVR: Network Video Recorder.) With DVRs/NVRs traditionally coming with 1TB of onboard storage (I have seen some with 8 and 12 TB - but still....) at 12/24/48TB of storage, they have no camparison on the market today.  This means a security director can store months of data (versus days or weeks) on a device that allows instant access to the stored data. The throughput claims of 2.0GB/s from disks to network, 3.0GB/s to memory play an important role in video surveillance - addressing the 'bottleneck' issue.  In the Sun Video Surveillance labs in Colorado, we're actually seeing impressive results in testing with upwards of 120 cameras on these data servers and showing only 20% utilization rate of the box.  (Try that with a traditional DVR/NVR...) The price should have caught your eye...it is extremely competitive in a market where storage (not to be disrespectful) is an afterthought - but quickly becoming mandatory in some environments.  The footprint is another interesting consideration.  As video surveillance moves to the IP network, it means 'moves to the data center'.  Not many data center managers had planned for racks of servers to support video surveillance.  Already security personnel are facing that not-so-pleasant discussion with their IT personnel.  When you tell IT management they can put 48TBs of storage in a single 4U rack unit to support your video surveillance network, you will get their attention (trust me on this one). There are other network issues related to bandwidth and sending video data over that network.  That's a whole other topic I hope you return to read later.  I have been investigating the bandwidth issue and am finding the communication providers (network equipment providers/manufacturers) are all over this topic.  I'll show you some examples next time...

I had the incredible opportunity to visit Hanoi, Vietnam a couple of weeks ago to train our Asia/Pacific sales staff on Sun's offer for the video surveillance market.  The trip alone was an experience I'll never forget.   I was old enough during the Vietnam war to remember the daily news stories about the events taking place both in Vietnam and on U.S. soil related to this time in history.  So, visiting the country of Vietnam held a certain personal interest to me.  But, since this was a business trip, I'll stick to the topic at hand...

 My audience represented countries from all over the region including India, Australia, Vietnam (of course), China, Singapore, Korea...and the list of opportunities for video surveillance were incredible.   Depending on your involvement in the industry, you may know that this region is predicted by the pundits (i.e., Frost & Sullivan, JP Freeman, IMS - among others) to be a strong growth area for IP video surveillance.  Of course, the shear size of a country like China drives a lot of that.  Their size, compounded with their 'Safe City Project' designed to bolster security in around 660 cities  (to include deployment of vdeo surveillance cameras and networks) accounts for a significant amount of the projected 47% compound annual growth rate through 2012 (Frost & Sullivan's estimates). IMS Research has stated that "The Chinese market for video servers (video encoders) used in security applications increased by a massive 60% in 2007".

It was exciting to discuss opportunities the sales teams had uncovered - anything from airports to railways to telcos wanting to host 'video as a service'.  And, with some of the economies in the region also predicted to have heavy growth potential (I read Vietnam is one of the fastest growing economies themselves) I certainly see potential for investment in the underlying security infrastructure - including video surveillance. 

 Another view of the industry the countries in Asia takes is from the manufacturing perspective - which also becomes a contributor to the growth in the economy.  A good portion of the video surveillance equipment (cameras, DVRs, encoders, etc.) is manufactured in countries such as Tiawan and Korea.  An article from asmag.com has several interesting points on this topic including: "Taiwanese surveillance equipment makers...acheived 27 percent annual revenue growth during the first half of 2007.  Average earnings growth was 41 percent." 

 Now, I do have to acknowledge the references I have made here are prior to the recent global economic downturn.  So, it's anyone's best guess how that will affect the video surveillance market.  It's something I'm watching with extreme interest. And would definitely welcome comments from all of you!

Just stopping in the middle of a busy day to share a fun thought with you.  Recently, my colleague Mark pointed out an article in the LA Times related to video surveillance.  The general message in the article is regarding the use of surveillance cameras to catch (and penalize) drivers who run red lights at an intersection - or more specifically - don't stop completely at a red light.  Mark took a different view of this article and calculated the revenue opportunity this particular situation creates for the city of LA.  Here is what he wrote to me:

"A recent LA Times article (May 20, 2008) reported that the city of Los Angeles issued more than 30,000 photo tickets last year at just 32 camera-equipped intersections.   80% of these were for illegal right turns. Those tickets were for $159 each.  The other 20% were for running a red light.  Those tickets cost $381 each.  The grand total revenue to the City of LA?  $6.1 Million Dollars or $190,687 per camera!"

Brings a whole new perspective on 'return on investment'.  Oh, in case you're questioning the math, here's what Mark provided in support of his assumptions:

The Math:   $159 x 24000 = $3,816,000
                     $381 x 6000 = $2,286,000

As a side note, I know who the City of LA uses for some of their video surveillance storage...(wink)

Enjoy your day!

Recently a colleague asked me whether I had seen any research regarding the risk of not incorporating video surveillance (and specifically IP video surveillance) into a security plan.  To date, I haven't seen any research in that respect.  But the question does set the stage for some interesting debates.  I took a quick glance at the American Civil Liberties Union website and found a discussion titled: "What's Wrong With Public Video Surveillance?"  Here is a summary from that site:

"Four Problems With Pubic Video Surveillance

1.  Video surveillance has not been proven effective...the real reason cameras are usually deployed is to reduce much pettier crimes.  But it has not even been demonstrated that they can do that.

2.  CCTV is susceptible to abuse

-  Criminal abuse

-  Institutional abuse

-  Discriminatory targeting

-  Voyerism

3.  Lack of limits or controls on cameras use

-  A concensus on limits for the capability of public CCTV systems

-  Legally enforceable rules for the operation of such systems

4.  Video surveillance will have a chilling effect on public life"

That site reference again if you would like to read the details.  I encourage you to do so as there were some very interesting examples given for each of these reasons.  I haven't seen much in the way of research or statistics myself related to crime reduction or deterrence as a result of having video surveillance cameras in place.  So, they have a point that it isn't evident that there is proof crime is deterred. 

On the other hand, I've watched various programs and news reports with a different point of view now that I'm involved in the video surveillance industry (imagine that) and I get the sense that video data does have value for post-incident research.  Two specific examples come to mind right away.  The first is a news report from MSN titles "Boosting for Billions".  The video shows clips from shoplifting activities and focuses on 'boosters' (professional shoplifters).  While the ALCU has a point that the presence of the video cameras obviously didn't deter the behaviour, the data captured certainly served as a tool to investigate the problem as well as learn the methods used by the criminals.  The assumption then is that it helped to build a case against repeat offenders as well as (again, an assumption on my part) implementing preemptive measures against the methods used.

 Another example I have is from a television documentary showing a confusing railroad crossing where the traffic light leads a semi-truck driver into the intersection (by turning green at the same time that the railroad warning signal is triggered by an oncoming train).  Without video from the cameras at the intersection, it would appear that the truck driver was at fault.  But after closer investigation of the video from multiple angles, it is clear that the traffic light and the train signal are not in scynch - thus putting the truck driver in a life threatening situation.  (Update - the truck driver and pet dog survived the crash.)

 In closing, I'll share with you a comment from an IT manager at a major city in the U.S. regarding the video surveillance network they have in place.  He claimed that the citizens themselves had asked to have more video surveillance coverage once they realized the value of the existing implementation.

Certainly shows that there will always be two sides of the debate regarding "do you or don't you deploy video surveillance?".

If you're reading this, I would like to point you to the comments that have been submited to some of my posts.  In particular, I hope you take the time to read those from Jon in the UK.  I don't know Jon personally, but I am quickly learning to appreciate his level of knowledge and I sincerely appreciate the time he takes to respond.  If you haven't done so yet, take a moment to review his comments.  You'll be glad you did!

Now for some random thoughts for this week.  First, I've been considering how video surveillance will fare in the 'green environments'.  In Sun's case, our video surveillance infrastructure, based on our x64 server line and storage products addresses the 'need for green' through the reduced power requirements and footprint, our lifecycle management methodology of using less costly storage meda for long term archival and using tools to conserve energy by shutting down disks not in use.  I've included an interesting statement from a colleague regarding this topic.  He is a senior engineer in our video surveillance lab. 

"If energy conservation became part of the design requirements, we could cite the use of DTPower for spinning down disks that aren't being used, and cite the use of tape because tape in storage uses no power.  We could even cite the use of solid state storage that uses 1/7th the power of SATA disks ...   The latter idea invites the use of the [Sun Fire] X4540 where a portion of the 48 SATA disks could be used for short-term storage (say 7 days), the balance of the disks for, say 30 day or more storage, external common storage (using a J4400 or J4500) to add the number of days on disk, and tape archive for long-term storage that is also scalable to the number of years required to store content.   Sun offers a unique solution that includes an ability to incorporate storage solutions that are transparent to the end-user.  Adding energy conservation to that capability makes it that much more compelling in my opinion. " 

My colleague's comments may be a bit more technical for some audiences, but hopefully you get the gist of his thoughts related to 'green'.

Another random thought is focused on the idea of 'smart cameras'.  Just what is it that makes an inanament object smart?  We have smart phones, smart cards, now smart cameras.  Off to my trusty wikipedia as a reference to find the scoop on smart cameras.  I'll admit to you that I did learn a lot just reading through this one site.  The component list was far more extensive than I had even begun to realize:

"A Smart Camera usually consists of several (but not necessarily all) of the following components:

• Image sensor (matrix or linear, CCD- or CMOS)
• Image digitization circuitry
• Image memory
• processor (often a DSP or suitably powerful processor)
• program- and data memory (RAM, nonvolatile FLASH)
• Communication interface (RS232, Ethernet)
• I/O lines (often optoisolated)
• Lens holder or built in lens (usually C, CS or M-mount)
• Built in illumination device (usually LED)

A video output (e.g. VGA or SVGA) may be an option for a Smart Camera."

I have always referred to the IP camera as another device on the network, but until now I hadn't really realized to what degree that is true.  These are certainly devices that are mini computers with a virtual eye.  Even more interesting is this list of applications for smart cameras (still from the wikipedia site):

"Typical fields of application are:

• automated inspection for quality assurance (detection of defects, flaws, missing parts...)
• non contact measurements.
• part sorting and identification.
• code reading and verification (barcode, Data Matrix, alphanumeric etc.)
• web inspection (inspection of continuously flowing materials such as coils, tubes, wires, extruded plastic) for defect detection and dimensional gauging.
• detection of position and rotation of parts for robot guidance and automated picking
• unattended surveillance (detection of intruders, fire or smoke detection)
• biometric recognition and access control (face, fingerprint, iris recognition)
• visual sensor networks "

 Here are some interesting sources of real life smart camera uses such as a "vision-based traffic-monitoring and control system" found at the visionsystems site and the article the San Francisco Chronicle regarding 'smart' cameras in Richmond.

Enjoy the rest of your week!

I can't resist sharing this recent story with you from IpSecurityWatch.com titled "Video Storage To Exceed 3.3 Exabytes by 2012".  I've been around the computing environment for a long time (how long I have stopped admitting but suffice it to say in my younger days I was keypunching and loading tapes on a mainframe to run jobs).  I never thought I'd see the day when it would be predicted that a particular industry application (video surveillance) would require exabytes worth of storage.  For that matter, I remember the days when exabyte wasn't a word yet (or, maybe it wasn't used much then). 

Enough about age...let's talk video storage...being an employee of Sun Microsystems, it doesn't take a rocket scientest to figure out that this type of headline would catch my attention (and that of many of my colleagues).  And, going beyond the headline to consider what this really means stirs up quite a debate.  Just today a group of us were discussing this topic and there were varying views.  One:  the majority of surveillance data is worthless and doesn't need to be stored.  Two:  but, who is to judge what 'worthless' means?  And, does time factor into that too?  It may seem worthless at the time that an incident occurs (a child wanders off from a public playground) but what about later - if that child is reported missing and days later that video at the public playground might provide some clues?

I just came from a meeting with a team working on an RFP for a state entity that is moving to all IP video surveillance - quickly.  And, they require storage of the video data for 365 days.  You can imagine the discussion that started in that meeting.  I'm still hoping to find solid evidence of a mandate or policies establishing requirements for video surveillance data archival.  I hear references all over the board and for all kinds of reasons.  The police chief at a large city in the U.S. says they will be keeping data for 7-10 years because of the Freedom of Information Act yet I haven't found a direct reference to storing video surveillance data.  I've heard of a port authority in Europe requiring 20 years of storage for their video surveillance data, yet a colleague in the U.K. tells me there are restrictions on the amount of time video surveillance data can be stored - something like a few days, I think. 

The bottom line in all of this, to me, is whether people coming from the security side of this discussion really understand the ramifications of storing data of this nature (video) for long periods of time.  There are questions related to accessibility (how often and how quickly do you need access to the archived data), the cost of storing data on disk (very, very costly - especially compared to long term storage options such as computer tape), the security of that data...just some things to consider. 

Now, a shameless plug for Sun's approach to video surveillance and the lifecycle of the video data.  There is a new data sheet on our website titled "Sun Open Video Surveillance Data Sheet" (download it from the right hand column) that takes you through Sun's three-tiered approach to storing video surveillance data.  This approach is designed to address the issues I raised above related to accessibility, cost control and data integrity. 

Enjoy and have a great weekend!

In my previous post I referenced the video surveillance infrastructure in the United Kingdom.  Below is an interesting clip from YouTube that provides a documentary of this infrastructure.  Included is a review of how surveillance played a part in the 2005 terrorist attack in London followed by theft and fraud detection at bank teller machines.  Definitely food for thought.  Enjoy!

When considering the reasons for implementing video surveillance systems, I view those to fall into three basic categories: mandatory requirements from governments or controlling agencies, customer service/marketing and safety/security. This leads me to believe that it may be more a matter of whether one desires to have video surveillance capabilities or are demanded to do so.

Let me give you some examples that have lead me in this line of thinking.

Mandatory

Casinos are required to have surveillance on their premise. To date, those have been analog networks that are still VCR-tape based. I found some interesting references to these environments in an article from Casino Connection. The VP of corporate surveillance for Resorts International Holdings (who own Resorts Atlantic City, the Atlantic City Hilton, the Las Vegas Hilton) told the reporter for Casino Connection that gaming tables have  “approximately four to 10 cameras watching” and “regulations mandate every slot machine must be covered by camera coverage.” Along those lines, I recently found a document dated February ,1 2008 issued by the Colorado Limited Gaming Control Commission that provides Internal Control Minimum Procedures (ICMP) for Colorado casinos. The following is a quote taken from that document:

“Any casino issued a license on or after February 1, 2008, is required to install a recording system that is totally digital and that meets the requirements outlined in this section. All Licensees shall have in place digital recording systems that meet the requirements of this section no later than July 1, 2009.”

The ICMP mandate continues on to specify the type of cameras, where the cameras are to be placed (in the gaming area, cashier stations, vaults and counting rooms, for example) and the duration the video is to be archived.

In the retail sector, convenience stores in Toledo, Ohio have actually formed an alliance called the Midwest Retail Association to contest a recent ruling requiring the installation of IP surveillance networks in stores 'smaller than 5,000 square feet selling food and beverages” (reported in the June 2008 issue of Security Director News).

Customer Service/Marketing

In some instances, video surveillance is being turned into a revenue-generating or customer satisfaction tool in contrast to the traditional cost center mentality. A sales team I work with that covers a global airline recently responded to an RFP for a surveillance system that would monitor customer traffic at the ticket counter. The requirement included analytic capability to determine the number of passengers in the queue, compare that against a pre-defined agent|passengar ratio and send notifications to management of when the staffing should be adjusted to meet customer demand. I liked this one since one of the most difficult parts of travel for me is the whole 'hurry up and wait' characteristics of getting from one place to another. Nice to think that someone is proactively trying to address this pain point.

Another example is, once again, from the same June issue of the Security Director News (can you tell I find this publication valuable?). This example leans more toward the revenue-generating mode I alluded to. An urban shopping mall in Bellevue, Washington uses “an embedded video analytics appliance with an on-board camera” to count the number of shoppers. The primary reason for doing this? To establish the value of the retail space to the tenants of the shopping center. Certainly, if you're a business looking for the best location for your shop, you're willing to pay a premium price if you are guaranteed thousands of prospective customers passing by your doors on a daily basis.

A couple of months ago I spoke with a security director responsible for several automobile auction sites. These were high end vehicles – often fleet cars from leasing agencies. With the advent of the IP video surveillance network in his environment, he was considering how to leverage the web-based infrastructure and security offered by the IP network. His plan is to one day provide his elite customers access to the video feeds so they can view the traffic on the auction yard and see for themselves the volumes of customers viewing their inventory.

Another interesting conversation I had relative to the use of surveillance for customer-satisfaction was with a private jet service. Their goal is to have a service person meet their customer at the security gate within 20 seconds of their arrival (in a limousine, I'm sure (smile)). The idea is that the camera would be set to detect the arrival of the vehicle at the gate and send an alarm to the on-duty personnel. Additionally, this premier jet service wants to have personnel waiting in the hangar when the door to an arriving plane opens. In order to do this, they need advance notice that the jet has landed and is taxiing to the hangar. The tool? Video cameras installed on outer buildings that can read the writing on the aircraft to help identify the plane as one of their customers.

Safety and Security

Intuitively, safety and security would seem to be the primary reason for installing video surveillance and would appear to fall under the 'mandatory' category I've described. But, I've found that not always to be the case.  Even when there is a mandate or regulation to provide security in a particular environment, it isn't necessarily required that the security be video surveillance.

A case in point would be the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) who has many mandates surrounding security in and around the U.S.  I can't quote it specifically, but I know of one such mandate that requires the scanning of all cargo, packages and luggage coming into and moving around the U.S.  It doesn't specifically call out video surveillance as a means to do this scanning, but I could see an application there.  I also have found a reference to the DHS providing grant money to law enforcement agencies to provide protection of it's citizens. In some cases, those agencies choose to use a portion of those funds for video surveillance networks. A case in point includes the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department. In an online blog, PolicyBeta, the author discusses the investment the DC police will make in upgrades to cameras in the downtown area, idicating they will “use $630,000 of DHS grant money.”

We all know that sometimes the need for protection provided via video surveillance is based on a particular event. An example in my home town is the upcoming 2008 Democratic Convention hosted in Denver, Colorado. The Denver Post reported on December 11, 2007 that the Denver police hoped to install additional cameras in strategic locations with enough sophistication to "capture images as detailed as faces and license plates” and to ultimately be the eyes for the officers already planning to be the 'feet on the streets'.

The final example I have for this post is the reference the BBC News  has in their article Britain is 'surveillance society'. I've always heard that there is a plethora of cameras in Britain and have heard numbers all over the board. Now, I have a source I consider to be reliable stating: “There are up to 4.2m CCTV cameras in Britain – about one for every 14 people.” Hmmm, disire or demand?

As with any major shift or trend in an industry, it's interesting to watch the change in the overall landscape of that industry.  The traditional analog-based landscape is made up of experts in physical security.  Just last week I spoke with a gentleman whose title is Director of Security at a firm specializing in research services.  Included in his past resume is a long stint as a member of a U.S. law enforcement SWAT team in the mid-west.  (He shared with me that he believes he has lost some hearing after being so close to gun shots while on duty.)  The traditional integrators also come from this area of expertise (physical security).  They bring a wealth of expertise in securing and protecting environments from public places to private enterprise and government entities.

With the movement to the IP network, there are new participants entering the landscape.  Some you would expect to be interested in video surveillance on the IP network.  Others that surprise even me!  I'll discuss this more in future posts.  But, suffice it to say that some of these new entrants are those traditional players who have extensive expertise in IT (information technology) and the data center.  These are the software and hardware engineers who design and build network infrastructures that are prevalant around the globe.  And, of course, companies such as Sun Microsystems whose DNA is built on IT and the IP network.

You might want to check out what the Lund University, School of Economics and Management, is doing to study the phenomena resulting from the convergence of physical security and IT.  I am a participant in that study (it's a five-year program and we're two years in).  Check out their website to get their perspective on the marketplace and how alliances are changing.   (Page down on the site to see the reports they have published thusfar.)

My primary contact at the university conducting this research is Paul Pierce (paul.pierce@hermes.ics.lu.se).  Hopefully, I can entice Paul to post some comments regarding his research!

Recently, I had a conversation with the security director of a medical center who still has VCRs and video tapes supporting his analog camera network.  His response to my question about how he researches suspect events is what prompted me to start this blog on video surveillance.  He shared with me what he does to investigate a security breach or incident such as a slip and fall within the medical center property.  Basically, he and his colleague pop some popcorn, grab a coke and sit down in front of the VCR - sometimes for 8 hours - and watch video tapes until they find what they are looking for.  He went on to share that every Monday and Wednesday he swaps out the VCR tapes in the machines around the building and stores them in a bank of file cabinets in his office.

Disturbingly, this scenario isn't all that unusual.  Although the video surveillance industry is experiencing a convergence to the digital IP network, 90% of the WORLD is still on traditional analog networks.  But, this is an incredibly exciting time in the security and video surveillance industry.  As Sun's global industry manager focused on video surveillance, I have spent the past two years studying the fast paced convergence occurring in the video surveillance industry; specifically, the movement from traditional analog video surveillance networks to digital IP-based networks.  

As a result of my time spent on this topic, I have had the pleasure of working with an extremely dedicated team of individuals to align Sun's investment in technology associated with the surveillance industry with the needs of the industry. The result?  The development of Sun's Open Video Surveillance solution.  And, happily, what Sun has to offer addresses not only the needs of the security director at the medical center, but also those who have dabbled in the hybrid networks (DVRs (digital video recorders), integration of analog and IP cameras, extended storage requirements, etc.) who are ready to fully embrace the digital IP network.

My plans for this blog are to inform as well as provide a forum for interested parties to exchange information and pose questions for me to respond to.  So, your challenge is to try and stump me with your questions!

 Hope to hear from you soon!