Alright, so to note: The current setup is Analog Pelco Cameras, on Pelco 16 Channel 8000 DVR's running their dumbed down version of windows with a netscreen firewall -- the goal for this company was to move to IP cameras in the long run by recommendations anyhow. While it would not be financially reasonable to replace all cameras (over 250), it would be reasonable to replace the full DVR system if it were an improvement (hardware and software). I noted budget is not an issue -- but my comment regarding cost effectiveness still stands. The client is willing to pay for a high end system, from a personal opinion buying something more aggressive than a Juniper netscreen (though I personally like sonic wall since the netscreen doesn't have fallback IP) for a system that seems broken feels like a bandaid on a bullet wound. Those DVR's run 7000+ decked out, not including the expenses for cameras. We willing to have casino quality if it is just that, casino quality. In regards to the software, Pelco verified it cannot run anti-virus while recording. If anti-virus is needed to run, the recording shuts down as the framerate is unrealistic. This is a limitation of the software then, if needed. Of what I know, ports 80 and 9999 (not through 9999 -- my apologies if that was mis typed) are required open. The scenario worked like so: Speakeasy verified worm activity on the static IP, and we shut down the unit and verified the virus -- Pelco came out, wiped the system clean (disconnected), reinstalled fresh, reinstalled the router (verified) -- system received a worm, again, within a few days. The process continued twice by Pelco representatives. It is not a full version of windows that can be maintained in the same way, a limiation we're not happy with either. I'll take the blame that there are more experienced windows users than me -- but as a reminder, I didn't set this guy up, I'm coming in near the end -- so blaming me for the weakness in this system is unfounded. Regardless, Pelco verified the limiation in their software, and I'll agree this is a reason why we've shyed away, and continue to shy away, from a windows setup. Lack of updates, lack of patched software -- all a limitation of their application -- and I'll argue, a continual frustration with Windows in general. ...So I feel like half the feedback here is targeted towards helping me find alternative solutions or teaching me improved methods, and the other half protecting the Windows OS from being bashed as a insecure box compared to Mac and Linux. Regardless of what side you're on, if you want to boast windows, pitch me a software package (or hardware solution), the current stuff isn't staying in this fashion. As previously noted, no filtered IP's, VPN not preferred. I appreciate the emails and positive support from both sides of the camp -- it is being read, thank you. This is the best information we've received so far, and we've contacted as many people as we could here in San Francisco. Please continue to send me informative posts and emails.