#Onvif compliance download

There are even a few Tier 1 manufacturers that may have tested their product and passed and submitted it to ONVIF, but whos products would fail any follow-up ONVIF compliance testing. The net net is, you cannot believe the ONVIF logo appearing on pretty much any Tier 3 Asian manufacturer today, as well as some of the Tier 2 manufacturers aren't legit. These were predominantly no-name Asian manufacturers though some reputable Asian manufacturers were also tested with the same result. In the testing I mentioned above, none, I repeat NONE (0%) of cameras that the manufacturers listed as 'ONVIF Compliant' could pass the 1.x tool that the R&D team still had use of, and of course failed passage of the current generation of ONVIF compliance tools.

The ONVIF organization does no independent testing to validate the manufacturer's claims.

If you know anything about that first generation test tool, you know that it was relatively easy to make a product pass that test tool, but still be completely unable to negotiate with other ONVIF compliant devices or software.ДЇurther, if the base firmware that passed ONVIF 1.x was present in their subsequent products, they would carry that Compliance declaration forward to future generations of products without even running them through the test or publishing those part numbers or test results (because there were no test results) with ONVIF.ДЇinally, it's important to note that while the test results can't be faked per-se, it's on the honor system that the report being submitted is for the part number that was actually tested. When we queried the original manufacturer, they would point to the fact that they had tested their product on the original ONVIF 1.x tool. When I was with a previous employer, we would regularly test cameras that were declared 'ONVIF Compliant' by various OEM/ODM manufacturers, and they would regularly fail internal testing. If the market is tolerating that then the market's broken. Sure, vendors who lie on their web sites are doing bad things. Nobody goes to TCP/IP interop events any more, it just works because people have figured it out. The theory is that at some point the population of functioning interoperable implementations makes this whole game irrelevant. And it doesn't seem to correlate to how big a fish you are in the Onvif fishpond.

#Onvif compliance download

As it is, you can download the open source device manager and puzzle over it's response vs. It should be possible to pick up two random implementations and connect them. If Exaq has to list vendors it's done Onvif with, it still isn't fully baked. Imagine a world where you drive up to the gas pump and have to look up your make/model/year/configuration of car to figure out if the pump will connect to your car. I care if the implementation works reliable. I really don't care if somebody bought legal rights to flash an icon. You think you could say 'Go talk to the camera guy', but unless the camera guy is selling a new camera, he's not that excited to help.ДЄre you Onvif Compliant if you stream Video but not audio? Or you have implemented on 2 camera motion detections instead of 6? Well, according to Onvif you are, or the manufacturer of the camera can slap on the logo and say it is.ДЄs a salesperson, we want this to work and we're not saying anything to get the sale, but Onvif has created the custom Codec issue all over again. We often hear 'You told me it would work' and 90% of the time it does, however, each customer is different and has different uses for their cameras, creating issues for the VMS companies. What about motion based events, or audio? Some companies may or may not complete all the items within a certain version. Getting video to stream is a small portion of compatibility. They tell me I have some Axis, I have some Sony and Samsung. Often times, I take the information provided to me from authorized dealers to put together quotes for them. When we look to see what cameras are installed we need to take careful notes of the camera manufacturer. I work for a VMS company and we routinely take over systems of others. The issue I have with Onvif is not the lying about being compliant, which is still a major issue, but the camera manufacturers saying they are 2.0 or 2.2 or Profile 'S' compatible and only being a subset.