Posts made by Crimp On_62210811129

Worse than that for me. Android app no longer connects to ANY of my cameras: Argus (original), RLC-4105MP, RLC-420-5MP, TLC-510WS.
NONE of them will even connect.
The Windows Client still works, but the Android app is now officially "broken".

My experience is the same as yours. I find it very frustrating. I have also noticed that Clear and Fluent motion recordings are not identical as to when they begin recording. I have asked for two changes:

1. Make the FTP motion file match the motion file on SD Card. (and both SD Card recordings match)
2. Allow the user to specify the number of seconds of prerecord and post record**. (within some reasonable limits)

** Imagine this scenario: There is a lot of traffic down my street. If the actual street is part of the 'detection zone', there would be 100's of recordings of cars going by that I have no interest in. I have set the detection zone to be when someone enters the space close to my front door. But, I would like to know how they came to be at my front door. Did they park at the curb (UPS, Amazon)? Did they walk across the yard (mailman)? So, let the recording start maybe 5 seconds before the person enters the 'zone' and keep going another 5 seconds after they leave it. (or 10 seconds, whatever).

So far..... nada.

I have RLC-410-5MP and RLC-420-5MP cameras in addition to the RLC-510WA. My suspicion is that engineering resources are allocated to new products and 'latest' products. The older cameras just "do what they do." If the customer doesn't like it, he should buy something else.

My guess is "no" and that PIR sensors already detect objects moving "up or down". It is the "straight on" issue that PIR cannot handle.
PIR sensors are a standard, mass produced module that seems to be "it does what it does, takes almost no power, and is cheap."

There is another entry on the download page for RLC-510WA/410W that has an update from Jan 19, 2022.
Which update applies to a specific camera appears to depend on the specific hardware part number of the camera.

While I find the new user forum an improvement over the previous forum, it is disappointing that the link to "support" at the top of the page returns "Oops. the page you were looking for doesn't exist."

Perhaps the problem is that this link is spelled with lower case "us" when the correct link is capital letters "US"?

Thanks

Should have pointed out that WiFi 6 is "backward compatible" with previous WiFi standards. A typical customer may have very few devices that are capable of 802.11ax, and the network will continue to support all existing connection types.

None of the Argus battery cameras are compatible with WiFi 6. 2.4G/5G WiFi, 802.11a/b/g/n (does not mention 802.11ac or 802.11ax

New software was released Jan 13 for the RLC-510WS (Beta). Release notes states "Optimized FTP function."
Alas, this is not entirely correct. Ever since the firmware was loaded on my RLC-510WS, it no longer uploads motion files using FTP to my FileZilla FTP server.
It appears that Reolink changed the default from 'ordinary' FTP to 'encrypted' FTP. Since all the cameras and the FTP server are on my local LAN, I saw no reason to encrypt FTP transmission.

So, back to the previous firmware.

Would help to know which model of Reolink camera.
On the RLC cameras, the 24/7 hourly schedule is the first place I would check.

My guess: People will be ice skating in.... (that place) before Reolink releases a camera with PowerLine built in. That's not their 'niche'.

A substitute would be either:

• Comtrend PG-9172POE Powerline Ethernet +PoE Adapter ($70US) which bundles Powerline and a PoE injector into one box, or
• A Powerline adapter plus a PoE injector (these are really cheap).

The cable tester provides another check as well. Is the label on the patch panel accurate. My soccer group moved into an office complex that had been wired by the previous tenant. There were jacks in every room, but the patch panel had no writing on it. My first task was to go around with the cable tester and mark each jack on the patch panel.

The patch panel may say the cable terminates in the NW corner, but is that really where it goes?

I also used a telephone circuit for the same purpose. Plug it into the remote jack and then stick the speaker into each ethernet jack until a tone shows up on one of them. Would work with your bare wires. (Search Amazon for 'circuit tester'. Their #1 seller is under $30.)

T568A refers to the way individual wires in the cable are located within the RJ45 connector. As long as each cable is terminated the same way at both ends, it is possible to mix T568A cables and T568B patch cords. There are many articles on the web describing the differences.

Typical wiring installation has the same type of connector on both ends of each cable, i.e.:

• Cables embedded in the walls typically have an RJ45 jack on each end.
• Cables used to 'patch' between pieces of equipment typically have an RJ45 plug on each end.

What the post "sounds like" is the house wiring ends in a patch panel on one end (RJ45 jack) and was not terminated on the other end (where you crimped on an RJ45 plug). It may be a bit awkward to gain access to the back of the RJ45 jacks in the patch panel to visually confirm that pins 1-8 have the same color/stripe as the RJ45 plug.

Reolink uses the 802.3af standard for Power over Ethernet (PoE). (search for a Wiki on Power over Ethernet) They also use 10/100 ethernet (probably a bit less expensive components than 10/100/1000 and since the cameras output no more than 20mb/sec, there is no need for gigabit ethernet capability.

I can't guarantee that this is the problem, but when the camera gets power using a regular ethernet patch cable but not when using the house wiring, that is where I would look first.

Is this camera defined in the app using IP address or UID?
As far as I am aware, the app "finds" the camera using the Reolink cloud and there is no requirement to open/forward ports (or anything).
This RLC-410 ("W"?) is connected directly to the local network, correct? (not connected to an NVR)

I agree with Fiona that FTP is based entirely on the server IP address. When the server is on the LAN, FTP will not attempt to access the internet.
(caveat: I have no NVR. My individual cameras FTP motion recordings directly to the LAN FTP server.)

On the cameras, there is an option in the FTP setup to "Test" the FTP settings. Took me several tries to get the FTP logon information/password/directory parameters correct.
Should be relatively simple to do a "Test" with a live internet connection and also without a live internet connection.

I think it has been this way ever since the forum software package was changed. I actually prefer the new forum package. There is probably no reason for staff who monitor forum posts to look at links.

Am I the only person who clicks on the "support" link at the top of the forum page and gets this:

I believe you are entirely correct. The power and reset cables are not waterproof. What I did when mounting RLC cameras outdoors was drill a hole in the wall either behind the camera mount or close to it and stuff all of the cables through the hole so that they are inside the wall, and caulk the hole. (I also do not mount cameras where they are directly exposed to rain.)

I would not be comfortable mounting Reolink cameras where the power and reset cables are exposed to the elements

I believe under Profile... Settings (gear symbol) there are options for what notifications to receive.

I got myself confused when setting up email notifications from my Reolink cameras. (I do not have a NVR. All cameras record to SD cards and I use the Windows Client to view them.)

On the camera email setup, I use one email account to send messages to a different email account. (I know it is technically possible to send email FROM myself TO myself, but wanted the convenience of knowing that ANY email FROM this particular email account was going to a camera notification.)

Every email service uses a different 'port' for the smtp connection. GMail uses 465. Yahoo appears to use a variety of ports. (Search for 'Yahoo smtp port').

Maybe the NVR is somehow "different"?

Reolink makes quality products, but software updates are few (and far between). Chances of something this fundamental being changed are slim to none.