October 28, 2017 at 1:38 pm #73042
It would be most helpful if there was a configuration setting that would allow the NVR to be configured to disable the internal NVR NAT and DHCP server functions. This would make the switch POE ports simply pass through data to the NVR LAN port. Doing this allows a person to have a single DHCP server on the network for all IP devices and also allows direct IP access to the POE cameras from other locations in the network.October 30, 2017 at 4:21 pm #73312
I will forward this request to our R&D team. They will discuss those requests from users in routine meetings. Your request could probably be adopted and implemented in future products/software updates.July 2, 2018 at 1:50 am #128613
is there any update on this?July 5, 2018 at 11:44 am #129292
Sorry, no update on this feature.August 21, 2018 at 4:52 am #140534
Bob, Could you give a reason why this function could not be in an update? It would make the system more standardizes. From what I’m reading on the internet the security industry most professionals don’t respect Reolink because of the so many limitation. I like your systems and although I have your equipment and have in the pass recommended it, I can not honestly continue to anymore. Help us to help sell your product.August 21, 2018 at 8:06 am #140563
It’s disappointing that after 10 months a suggestion with wide forum support doesn’t appear to have made any progress towards implementation.February 13, 2019 at 11:34 am #211650
I 100% second this suggestion. I recently hooked up one of my cameras directly to my NVR, normally I hook them up to switches elsewhere in my network. I was rather disappointed to find that it assigned it its own IP address on a 172.16.x.x network. I would MUCH rather have at least an OPTION to set the Reolink ports to act simply as a network switch and send all traffic to my router so that I can control IP assignments from there and access the cameras via IP address on my own network so I can do maintenance such as firmware updates.
(2) RLN8-410 NVR
(3) RLC 410WS
(1) RLC-C1 ProApril 2, 2019 at 10:52 am #234206
Bumping, any updates on this feature? This would make remote management of cameras attached to the NVR so much easier as I could hit them over my network vs needing to manipulate them from the NVR.
(2) RLN8-410 NVR
(3) RLC 410WS
(1) RLC-C1 ProApril 4, 2019 at 6:21 pm #235667
This design is aimed to protect the privacy of the admin in case of other person access the camera. If you don’t want the NVR assigning the IP for your cameras, you can connect the cameras and the NVR to the same router separately. They are in the same LAN if you connect in this way, and then the router will assign IP for the cameras, and then you can access the camera separately or access them under the NVR.April 4, 2019 at 8:43 pm #235711
I understand the advantage of hiding the cameras behind a NAT for security. I am already dong what you are suggesting and connecting the cameras to a POE switch separately. You are correct that they don’t use the NVR DHCP server in this case. So you are 100% correct that there is a good work around for this lack of capability in the NVR design.
I think you are missing the point however. If you were to make a simple change to the NVR software, the _user_ could have the choice. If they wanted to change the default setting for this, they would be able to save and _not_ purchase a separate POE switch as I have done. There is a great little 8 port POE switch in my NVR that I am not able to use due to this design choice in the NVR.
I’d much rather see this feature be added, than having your engineers continually redesign over and over the perfectly fine GUI for the Android mobile App. You can see from the responses of your forum participants that after two years, there is still a high level of interest in adding this capability.April 14, 2019 at 11:11 am #242486
It’s such a shame that a user would have to purchase a POE switch or multiple POE injectors to work around this no-brainer option. Sure, it might be slightly less secure to put the cameras on the same network as other devices, but that should be our choice as the users. Very disappointed to learn no progress has been made towards fixing this.July 5, 2019 at 6:35 am #298462
I agree with this proposal.
If the NVR’s LAN port is connected to the LAN network, the NVR’s PoE port strongly desires to be bridged without going through NAT.
This is because an RLC-423 / Wi-Fi camera that can not connect to the PoE port and RLC-410 / RLC-420 / RLC-422 that can connect to the PoE port may be mixed and accommodated in the NVR (RLN 8-410).
For me, I can not use the NVR PoE switch because of the NVR NAT function, and I need to prepare another PoE switch!July 5, 2019 at 10:33 am #298545
I’m sorry about the design of our NVR. Thank you for your suggestions, I will collect them and forward to our R&D people. If you want to connect the PoE camera to a PoE Switch/injector, you can refer to the below standard to pick a suitable PoE injector/switch.
For Reolink RLC-423, RLC-423S, you need to make sure the PoE injector/switch is 802.3at compliant (48V).
For other Reolink PoE camera models, make sure the PoE injector/switch is 802.3af compliant (48V).
1. Do not purchase passive PoE injectors as they won’t work very well.
2. We recommend that you use the PoE injector/switch of high quality.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.