Just recently started making the switch from analog to IP cameras and so far we love them. However, I am stuck on an existing residence where the wiring is as follows:

IP Camera 1: wire ran straight to Camera NVR that has built in PoE, no problem
IP Camera 2: same thing
IP Cameras 3,4,5: the cat5e wiring is ran to an unmanaged switch (1) nowhere near the NVR, but there is a cat5e wire from this switch to where the NVR resides. There is another unmanaged switch (2) at this location.

Question: Can IP cameras 3,4, & 5 wire into the first network switch (1) and be seen on the NVR via the "linking" single CAT5e line from that switch into another switch(2) and then 3 patch cables into the POE NVR Ethernet ports?

Isn't there a way to make this work? I'm just not familiar enough with them.

Product: HIKVision DS7608 NVR, HIKVision IP bullet cameras(5), Trendnet 24port gigabit unmanaged switch (both switches)

If its on the LAN and its all the same subnet then I dont see why not.

The internal NIC of the NVR is set up on a different subnet - that's causing some issues. The NVR Ethernet port itself is on the same but the camera inputs are set to that different subnet. Is there anyway to address the cameras on the homes network subnet or am I stuck in using the one set by the NVR's interface card?

This is probably something that should be explained in the manual (which doesn't seem to be available online for the model you state).

For example, on the NVR manuals I've read, when there are built-in PoE ports you cannot hook up a switch to them - so if there's 4 PoE ports on an 8-channel DVR (which seems to be the case with the model you're using), you can only ever have 4 "local" cameras connected via that method anyways.

All other cameras must be connected through the NVR's primary Ethernet interface where they will be a part of the "home" network - which will, of course, be on a separate subnet.

Also, aren't you going to need PoE to those final 3 cameras? You'll probably find buying a small 8-port (with 4-port PoE) switch cheaper and less messy (fewer power supplies, less wiring) than buying 3 separate PoE injectors. Then, hook up one of the free non-PoE ports to the main switch the NVR's connected to, and follow whatever procedure is required to add the "remote" cameras to the NVR's software (since they may not be auto-detected like "locally" connected cameras).

Switch (1) is not plugged into switch (2), is it? They both connect to the router or device that does the routing functions. As I understand it, cascading switches slows the system.

I think a single branching tree should be OK - like have a primary central switch to which any and all sub-switches hook up to. But I probably wouldn't add a third level.

I have a total of 6 switches in my home network due to necessity, all of them connecting directly to the primary switch (and as many devices as possible also hooking up to that primary switch), and I definitely don't see any kind of slowdown or packet loss... and I'm moving many gigabytes around between devices every day.

Of course, realize that the link between switches will be a throughput bottleneck, so network infrastructure must take planned usage into account.

Thanks Daniel for this insight.

Yes, this NVR has 4 POE ports and 4 non-POE ports. Are you saying that if I use ports 5-8 (non-poe) that I may be able to manipulate the IP addressess of the cameras to match the home network's subnet?

Should the PoE that I would add be after the 2nd switch or before the first?

Ernie, yes I am cascading - MODEM - ROUTER - SWITCH 1 - SWITCH 2.

Thanks guys

Ah, I didn't know it also had 4 non-PoE ports (and presumably a 9th network port). You see, the spec sheet I found for the DS-7608 at [Link: hikvision.com] only indicates 4 PoE ports and a 5th primary port, which would lead one to believe it's designed to be configured in the manner I indicate.

But if the version you have has 8 ports... then I don't know exactly how it was designed to work. That's where the manual comes in. :-)

Also, that's not what I mean. Unless the NVR is designed weirdly, subnets are a red herring since you'll be connecting the cameras where they SHOULD go in the first place, and whatever DHCP server is managing that network will control the IPs appropriately (either your main router for the home network, or the NVR for its local ports).

First you need to find out if the non-PoE ports will support an attached switch and, if so, it would be simplest to put the final 3 cameras on their own completely separate PoE switch and then use a dedicated line back to one of those local non-PoE ports.


In the above situation, you wouldn't touch any of those switches whatsoever.

But if the warnings I read in other manuals hold true and those ports are only intended to connect to a single device, then you'll need to hook the extra cameras up to the main home network and the NVR should then be able to manage them though that interface using the home network's default subnet. Since other models from this company appear to operate that way (there's one version of the 7608 with only one network port period), I suspect this one will be able to as well - especially if it also has the ability to manage cameras remotely over the internet.

As for the PoE switch and the existing switches, you haven't indicated how those two switches are interconnected or what their purposes are. Regardless, you'd want to hook the cameras up to the shortest path back to the NVR. So if the NVR is hooked up to the home network on switch #1, then that's where your little PoE switch should connect so camera traffic isn't routing needlessly through capacity-limited links between switches.

Also, going back to your original post:


That's definitely NOT how it will work. If multiple cameras aren't able to be wired locally, then with the vast majority of NVRs you are supposed to ignore the local camera ports and connect them to the main network. The NVR most likely won't be able to auto-detect the cameras like it can on its local ports, but there should be a method and instructions on how to add them this way.

Thanks so much - I'll be out there tomorrow and have a tech support number that actually gets a live person. I'll report back what I find.