printer friendly version

Why IP?

This is the first of three articles, looking at the emergence of IP protocols and why they are going to be important to the intruder detection market.

This first article looks at why IP should be considered now, and what the benefits will be. The second article will look in more depth on what to look for in an IP transmission system for intruder and fire systems, as there are many emerging products, some of which are neither more secure nor offering little in new services and products. The third and final article will look at case studies of users in Europe who have already moved across to IP for their alarm transmission and line monitoring, their reasons for change and the benefits.

So why IP for intruder systems, or perhaps more correctly the question should be put as 'Why not IP?'

IP is everywhere, it is in our corporate networks, our broadband/ADSL lines to our homes and offices, even our mobiles use IP across GPRS. Yet for our alarm reporting we use PSTN and long-range radio, both technologies going back 20-plus years. Is it not time we moved on and embraced the new technologies that our banks, retailers and governments have taken on board in a major way?

Our e-mails rely on IP as does our web searching, credit cards, banking and even defence systems, run across IP networks. Some of our most secure, sensitive and critical financial systems rely on IP. Within the security sector we assume IP as a default for our CCTV, so why not intruder systems?

In Europe, this is changing quickly. We are seeing the emergence of IP systems coming out from a number of the alarm manufacturers as well as independent systems. Unfortunately many are of variable performance, security, coverage as well as value for money. By the end of this short series of articles, the installer and specifier should be able to identify what to look for in an IP alerting system.

The benefits

So what can IP offer the intruder sector? The first benefit is cost. In many premises the change to IP has already been justified. Whether it be justified for credit cards in retail corporate VPNs or e-mails and Web browsing at home. In such cases the investment in the infrastructure has been made, the traffic cost of adding alarm traffic is negligible.

The second benefit comes with the increased security from IP. This usually comes in two parts. The first being encryption of all messages and alerts, and the second in some form of line monitoring, usually referred to as polling, this is because a confirmation message or 'poll' is sent regularly from the panel to the monitoring centre to ensure the end-end link is alive. Polling can often be as frequent as every 10 seconds for high security, or down to once per day or once per week for low security sites. Other security features such as anti substitution and authentication are also available.

As will be seen later in this article, IP is starting to bring features normally associated with high security panels within the reach of lower risk sectors.

One of the other main benefits for IP is that it offers a full two-way confirmed signal. This is true, whether the message is carried across ADSL or GPRS. Many panels today have the capability of alternate action if an alarm is not confirmed. Compare this to technologies such as long-range radio or SMS, which cannot confirm an alert has been received by the monitoring centre. Do such technologies, which rely on trust that an alert has been received, really enhance our industry and make best use of today's installation capabilities?

A good IP alerting system should also be able to carry all transmission protocols as well as the older ones. Our industry has for many years been used to 'pin alerts' and contact ID, but nearly all new systems can take advantage of the new protocols such as Sia. However, in many countries panels with higher capability have been installed, but the new features not used because the alerting mechanism cannot handle these protocols. IP can now offer cost effectively the use of these new protocols and allow our monitoring industry to often catch up with the panel capability.

The difference

In security, the alerting protocol is traditionally aligned with the carrier system, PSTN, GSM, long-range radio, SMS, etc, each having differing characteristics and limitations. IP is different, it is a protocol and therefore independent of the carrier, it can be carried over ADSL, VPN, GPRS and even PSTN and ISDN at slower speeds. IP could even be carried over long-range radio, if there was a will to bring this into the current century.

In practice, however, the two main carriers are ADSL/VPN and GPRS. This allows one important new feature of IP for security alerting - cost-effective alternate routing. Breaks in our fixed line networks are a feature in every country with varying frequency.

For a reliable security system, an alternate alerting path is becoming more of a necessity. IP allows for such dual path routing in a more cost effective way than ever before. ADSL does not usually carry call charges as PSTN does, and is therefore a prime opportunity for IP alerting with its reduced costs. GPRS does have traffic-based costs. Therefore we are seeing the growth of dual path IP diallers for alarms, which use ADSL/VPN as the prime path for polling and alerting, with fallback to GPRS if the primary fails.

This dual path signalling is providing high levels of resilience across Europe as the IP rollout is now reaching unprecedented levels. In the UK it has now been reported that over 50% of premises now have ADSL available. Combined with GPRS backup this now offers extremely high reliability, and a system that is proof against network failure and the intruder cutting the line. In rural areas GPRS on its own is also proving popular, where there is no ADSL capability.

In addition...

Okay, so IP can offer line polling and alternate routing, but installers and monitoring companies are now exploiting IP to offer a greater range of services to their users. Remote management of the intruder system is one such service. Remote access has historically been limited by the modem speed within the panel, this has often been a 300 or 900 bits per second modem, only fit for emergency usage and on small systems.

With its higher data throughput, IP can offer greater facilities from a remote site. The installer is used to linking his laptop to the panel when on site for configuring and diagnostics. With IP, he can now have the same facility from the office, at the same speeds (panel dependent). This allows reconfiguring diagnostics to be run, all without a site visit. A significant cost saving to the installer/maintainer, as well as better service levels to the user.

Features such as audio verification can also be offered across IP using VoIP. In addition, new features such as visual verification are starting to emerge.

We are used to CCTV with its high equipment costs and high bandwidth requirements. On the other side we have the new technologies of web cameras, digital cameras, even cameras within our phones. This new market is now moving into the security sector with the capability of taking a number of 'Frame Grabs', JPEGs, with good definition and sending these through to the monitoring centre in a cost effective way. No more expensive cameras, wiring and installation, of the old CCTV generation. Now visual verification of an alert can be offered to our smaller enterprises and homes at a fraction of the cost of CCTV. In addition, the pictures can be related to the alarm alert. IP is the enabler of this new visual technology, as it enables quality pictures to be sent to the monitoring centre.

Looking ahead

So the above summarises the new offerings of IP. While the diallers may be slightly more costly than the traditional PSTN equivalents, the new services of polling, encryption, remote access etc, come at little extra equipment cost, and are the same for all panels, whether large or small. We are therefore seeing the potential of what was previously the preserve of high security systems such as banks etc, now becoming available to traditionally lower security sectors, such as the SME and residential sectors. This offers market opportunities to installers, maintainers, and monitoring centres alike.

IP for alarm signalling is an emerging but fast developing market, with independents and manufacturers alike offering IP systems of varying complexity and capabilities. Chiron Technology already has over 50 monitoring centres across Europe using its systems and over 10 000 diallers in place. Others are following quickly.

The market drivers are twofold. Firstly in the new services that can cost effectively be offered in lower security sectors, but secondly market developments in many countries are forcing the adoption of IP as traditional telecoms are disappearing. The trend in the USA and Europe is for the traditional carriers and PTTs to transfer their old switched networks from PSTN/ISDN to native VoIP. The driver is to offer higher ADSL speeds and video downloads across the traditional copper. As part of this the old PSTN services are disappearing and being replaced by VoIP. Already many countries are reporting problems with the traditional PSTN alarm diallers, which do not work so reliably across VoIP.

This is increasing the pressure to move to native IP signalling for alarms. In many areas there is no choice but to move to the new IP services as there is no PSTN access at the premises. This is forcing change in developed regions, however as the technology is being developed, this offers emerging regions the chance to leapfrog and be ahead.

IP for alerting and alarm monitoring is the way ahead, it cannot be ignored. The early adopters can, however, get access to new services, markets and growth. However, as we will see in the next article of this series, there is as with all new technologies, a wide variety of emerging systems at a wide variety of prices and facilities. As with life in general, we know a bicycle is cheaper than a car, and a Mercedes offers more than a Mini. Few of us ride bicycles to work by choice, (unless you live in Amsterdam or Copenhagen).

We will explore in the next article how to choose and differentiate between IP systems becoming available, and debate whether you should look for the cheapest solution with a low feature, or a comprehensive option with new features and services.

Ian Tredinnick is the managing director of Chiron Technology.

Share this article:

Further reading: