If this doesn’t work we might have to move to the sweat lodge. 
Peepeep in a sweat lodge 
cuisses de grenouille
Whatever I can do to help. 
Reading one of my posts basically is a sweatlodge by itself
3 Likes
4 Likes
First, I want to thank Carverofchoice for a profoundly gracious contribution to this question/issue. Not many people would take the time to post such a comprehensive and informed perspective. Truly, thank you. You must be from my [boomer] generation where we don’t just “give up” because its hard.
However, my thanks does not mean that I am any closer to a solution though. A few deeper questions from a systemic perspective - 1) why has Wyze not implemented an “auto-reconnect” regime for cam disconnected time > a centain [user defined?] threshold, 2) Why do hundreds of very similar complaints remain unresolved, 3) why is there not an architecture schema of Wyze tested network devices capable of “multi-cam persistent live view” on the same network, 4) why are minimum specs not published by Wyze that would “perform” according to the number of cams one could select for durable live view, and many other seemingly basic questions?
Not to contradict the spirit of my lead-in statement but I started my question in this post with “has anyone found a way to view 9 cams reliably” and it seems like the answer remains “that’s just not possible.” Surely someone has found a string of commands and consumer level devices when connected and configured in a certain way would allow one to RELIABLY see 9 cams on a PC on their own network.
Still frustrated. Thanks all the same Carverofchoice.
I’m still soliciting thoughts on solutions.
1 Like
Just to quickly clarify, I am not in any way saying it’s just “not possible” to stream 9 cams reliably. I stream 9-20+ cams very regularly, both 100% locally and also through the internet, as do many of my friends.
Example: Tiny Cam from today that ran for more than an hour while I was working:
That was local.
I also regularly stream 9 or more on the Web Portal, sometimes for more than a day straight before I close the browser when I come back to my home office computer the next day. This was also today:
I also regularly use Docker Wyze Bridge to pull RTSP streams locally and organize cams in any configuration I want and with various apps, including my Synology Surveillance station. My Docker Wyze bridge is currently disabled because I am in the process of loading a new server (to take the strain off my NAS) and will be merging all my cams into Home Assistant. So, I can’t show that screenshot right now while it’s disabled.
I can stream 9+ cams for hours or days at a time. In theory, so can anyone.
I think your router seems to be high-enough quality to handle the bandwidth and number of devices locally for Tiny Cam, the App, and something like Docker Wyze Bridge. I even used to have an ASUS router and I was able to regularly stream TinyCam through it too, so I know some ASUS routers are capable of doing well with local streams. There are certainly other settings and protocols in the router that could impact it (QoS, MMS, device isolation, and many other things can make a difference). I would recommend checking and seeing if your router has any of those settings turned on. If you are using a “Guest Network” then Device isolation is probably on by default or forced to be on. That will prevent you from having local streams. You could take a Networking app on your phone and have it analyze if you are using a WiFi channel that is congested and whether there is a different/better channel to try switching to. Maybe that will help your cameras to have a better stable connection to the router without as much interference. You could try very temporarily disabling any firewall settings on your router and see if things connect stably at that point. If they do, then you may know that the firewall or auto-blocking features may be part of the problem (don’t forget to turn the firewall back on soon after your test).
For what it’s worth, I am currently using Wyze Mesh Router Pro, but I have also had success with the non-pro, and I have also had success with an ASUS Mesh router in the past too.
Depending on how tech savvy you are, you might consider looking into running something like Docker Wyze Bridge or Scrypted on your computer and then being able to pull the RTSP streams from those into something you can just view on a browser.
Another alternative is to do similarly to what you were thinking earlier:
But that isn’t working for you for some reason. I don’t know what kind of computer you are using, but note that Bluestacks is a HEAVY resource hog, and using too many instances at a time COULD possibly account for part of the issue, as could how the computer is connected to the router and how it is distributing everything between the instances.
I still think the problem has something to do with your home network in some way because many of those methods work for me and others, and we are also using Wyze. If I were in your position, I would at least TRY a different router (borrow or buy) and see if that made a difference. If not, I would return the router during the return period…but if it does work better, then you’ll have an answer that the issue might have to do with your router. I personally would consider looking for a better ISP that offers more Upload speed, but that’s a minor issue when it comes to our conversation about streaming locally, and I understand that sometimes our hands are tied when it comes to ISP monopolies in certain areas.
I hope you can figure something out. Just wanted to clarify that it is absolutely possible to stream 9 or more Wyze cameras at a time reliably (since I do it a lot). It absolutely is possible and it does work…the main thing is figuring out what is different about your implementation specifically that is making the streams unreliable. 
I do wish you the best in that endeavor though!
I was born in a year where some classifications label us Gen X, some label us Millenial, Some label us Cusper, or a go-between, some label us Xennial, I am not sure I fit into either Gen X or Millenial anyway, and I am good with not having a clear label. 
I am ME!
4 Likes
and Tony is him
(has a nice ring to it 
)
1 Like
What’s the secret to getting multiple cameras to work in a docker image?
I have 13 Wyze cameras that all work fine in groups of 4 in the Wyze app.
In the web UI of the mrlt8 docker bridge, it can barely load snapshots for even two or three of them, mostly timing out and failing to connect. No luck loading live video at all. This is with docker installed on a Windows 10 Pro desktop PC with a core i7, 32gb ram, and gigabit ethernet.
Only 100mbps internet, but the Wyze app is going through the same ISP and groups of 4 cameras stream without issues.
A really good router is the main thing.
Also, have Docker Wyze Bridge running on a device with sufficient resources. I had a friend with tons of cameras who tried to run it on something like the Home Assistant Green Box (along with several other dockers), and IIRC, it couldn’t handle everything he was trying to do, so I believe that he loaded it on a separate computer and has everything working great now. So it needs enough processor, RAM, and good network card. Note that if it is done through a virtual machine, sometimes they can limit resources or stress the machine it is on.
Some people find it works better to just use docker Wyze Bridge to get the stream, but then view them through another program instead.
Thanks for the feedback.
It’s hard to imagine that my Desktop PC with a core i7 and 32gb running docker has insufficient resources considering so many other people seem to be running it on minimalist hardware like raspberry pis.
Perhaps my router could be an issue. I have four Google Nest routers in mesh. I recognize that AC2200 isn’t the latest tech anymore.
But the performance is just fine in the Wyze app which is what confuses me…
Both your PC and router seem to be good enough IMO.
I currently have my docker suspended as I bought a new mini-PC that I want to convert to portainer and migrate all my dockers to when I have some spare hours to figure out the best way to do all of that, so I can’t easily check right now and see what other options I might suggest, but I do agree with you that your PC and router are “probably” not the issue here.
Thanks for all your advice - I’m making progress. Not sure what changed, I’m having much better luck today.
Now, on the PC where I have docker installed, I am able to access RTSP streams of my cameras in VLC Player on localhost (127.0.0.1) and they run successfully.
My next challenge is accessing the RTSP streams in VLC on another computer on the same network. However when I try to do that replacing localhost with the IP address of my PC where docker is installed the stream isn’t able to connect.
Any hints to point me in the right direction?
Figured it out! I had multiple network connections and was using the wrong one.
1 Like
I currently have 6 wyze cams (4 pan v3, 1 v3 and 1 floodlight pro).
I was looking for a way to display all the cam on a big screen tv all at once with live feed and cam across wyze bridge docker.
Install wyze bridge on a separate system (running ubuntu server OS not desktop). Got the pan v3 and V3 cams to works, (floodlight currently not yet support).
I tested with just 1 cam (v3) and the live feed on the wyze bridge is substantial delayed (6-15s) compare to the wyze app. The wyze app will see ~300ms delayed on wifi, ~400 - 500ms when on mobile network. Did you experienced the delays when running the wyze bridge?
I also try to copied the link and play it on VLC still getting the same delays.
Is this because the wyze bridge is acting as a relay? And the video feed is not directly from the cam to the player?
did you see any delays on the feed from wyze bridge docker compared to the wyze app?
For anyone who has been struggling with this on the new web portal specifically, and has OG’s involved, WyzeSeth just indicated that the new OG firmware should help with this. Thought some of you would like to know: