Old firmware to be made available in the download centre

[joseph_1979]

I have seen various requests in this community and reddit whereby customers have requested old firmware versions, maybe following a bad upgrade or an upgrade which failed to provide the desired outcome. Contacting support to get the previous firmware may take days and this cannot be the case for security. Therefore it is recommended to have the old firmware of the cameras also available in the download center.

[joseph_1979]

@joseph-chircop_497308027822318 Reolink Administrator..........Please take note. Thanks.

[Reolink Fiona]

@joseph-chircop_497308027822318 Hi there, I will try to talk with our product team about this. Some old firmware is not posted considering the wrong upgrade. So some specific versions may need to contact support to get.

[joseph_1979]

@reolink-fiona For battery operated cameras they need your support team to make it available for download, but others can be freely added on the website. Of course if it is known that the firmware is buggy then it should be excluded. This saves requests to support team and even allow customer to restore their cameras quicker. I guess that the software engineers did implement a check of the firmware against the hw before the customer applies the upgrade as otherwise it was cause more issues. The less you off-load the more efficient the customer care will be.

[user_616972055773192_616972055773192]

@joseph-chircop_497308027822318 for example, I just updated my NVR and the firmware broke funcationality to access cameras across subnets. Ridiculous. I can't find the older version to fix my problem without opening a stupid ticket.

[Crimp On_62210811129]

I agree. It is a common practice to provide access to previous versions of software and let the user decide which version to install (and live with the consequences).
For example, I have a Netgear WiFi router which updates firmware fairly often, yet every firmware version since the first one in 2016 remains available on the support web site.

[joseph_1979]

@crimp-on_62210811129 We need to wait until this is implemented if acceptable to Reolink.