Carrier Controls Giving
You Headaches?
CCN was revolutionary in its day. Today, it's a proprietary island that's increasingly difficult to support and integrate. We can help you bridge to the modern world.
Talk to a Carrier SpecialistThe Carrier Controls Challenge
Carrier Comfort Network (CCN) was one of the first true building-wide controls platforms. It worked well — maybe too well. Many buildings are still running CCN systems installed 20+ years ago.
The challenge is that CCN is a completely proprietary ecosystem. Everything — the protocol, the controllers, the software — is Carrier-only. That made sense in 1995. In 2024, it's a liability.
The Protocol Problem
- • CCN protocol is completely proprietary
- • No native integration with BACnet systems
- • Getting data out of CCN requires gateways
The Obsolescence Problem
- • Legacy Comfort Controllers no longer made
- • i-Vu servers running outdated software
- • Parts increasingly scarce and expensive
The Integration Problem
- • Can't connect to building analytics platforms
- • No easy way to add non-Carrier equipment
- • Limited mobile and remote access options
We Know Carrier Controls
From legacy CCN to current i-Vu Pro — we understand the full Carrier ecosystem and how to integrate it.
Supervisory Systems
- ComfortVIEW — Legacy workstation software
- i-Vu — Web-based interface
- i-Vu Pro — Current enterprise platform
- i-Vu CCN — CCN-to-IP bridge
Controllers
- Comfort Controller — Legacy unitary
- i-Vu TEC — Thermostat controllers
- i-Vu CCN Router — Network integration
- Open controllers — BACnet/LonWorks
Protocols
- CCN — Carrier Comfort Network
- CCN-over-IP — Modern transport
- BACnet — Open controllers
- LonWorks — Some integrations
Equipment Integration
- Chillers — 19XR, 23XRV, 30XA, etc.
- Air Handlers — 39M, etc.
- Rooftops — 48/50 series
- VVT/VAV — Zone controllers
Understanding CCN
CCN (Carrier Comfort Network) was an innovative peer-to-peer network protocol. Every device on the CCN bus can communicate with every other device — no central controller required.
This architecture was ahead of its time. But it also means:
- • Tight coupling between all devices on the network
- • Difficult to troubleshoot without CCN expertise
- • No straightforward way to add non-CCN devices
- • Integration requires specialized gateways
CCN Integration Options
Getting data out of CCN — and into modern systems — requires bridging the gap:
- → i-Vu CCN Router — Carrier's own gateway to IP
- → BACnet Gateway — Third-party CCN-to-BACnet
- → Niagara Integration — CCN driver available
- → Controller Replacement — Swap CCN for BACnet
The right approach depends on how much CCN infrastructure you have and your long-term plans.
i-Vu System Considerations
i-Vu (Original)
The original i-Vu was Carrier's web-based front-end for CCN systems. It provided graphical interface and trending but kept the CCN backbone.
Challenges:
- • Runs on aging servers
- • Java-based interface issues
- • Limited modern features
- • Security vulnerabilities
i-Vu Pro
Current Carrier platform, based on Niagara 4. More capable than legacy i-Vu but still tied to Carrier ecosystem.
Considerations:
- • Carrier-branded Niagara
- • Can integrate CCN via router
- • BACnet support built-in
- • Carrier licensing required
ComfortVIEW
Legacy workstation software from the 1990s. Still running in some buildings because "it works."
Challenges:
- • Windows 95/98/XP era software
- • Serial communication only
- • No web access
- • Finding working hardware is difficult
Open Controllers
Carrier also makes "open" controllers that speak BACnet or LonWorks. These are much easier to integrate.
Options:
- • i-Vu Open controllers
- • BACnet MS/TP and IP support
- • Can coexist with CCN
- • Integration with any BMS
Upgrade Paths
Breaking free from CCN lock-in while preserving your Carrier equipment investment.
i-Vu Pro Upgrade
Best for: Heavy Carrier equipment investment
- • Upgrade to current i-Vu Pro
- • Integrate CCN via i-Vu CCN Router
- • Modern web interface
- • Stay in Carrier ecosystem
Pros: Native Carrier support
Cons: Carrier licensing, lock-in
Niagara + CCN
Best for: Vendor independence, mixed buildings
- • Niagara supervisor (JACE or PC)
- • CCN driver for integration
- • BACnet for other systems
- • Open platform flexibility
Pros: Flexibility, no licensing
Cons: CCN driver complexity
Full Migration
Best for: Long-term planning, renovations
- • Replace CCN controllers with BACnet
- • Keep Carrier equipment (chillers, AHUs)
- • Any BMS platform
- • Complete protocol independence
Pros: Clean slate, future-proof
Cons: Higher upfront cost
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I keep my Carrier equipment and change the controls?
Absolutely. Your Carrier chillers, AHUs, and other equipment don't care what BMS supervises them. We can integrate them via CCN or replace controllers with BACnet alternatives.
Is CCN completely proprietary?
Yes. CCN is a Carrier-only protocol. However, there are gateways and drivers that can bridge CCN to BACnet or integrate with platforms like Niagara. It's not an insurmountable barrier.
What's the difference between i-Vu and i-Vu Pro?
Original i-Vu was Carrier's web front-end for CCN. i-Vu Pro is their current platform based on Niagara 4 — more capable but still Carrier-branded and licensed.
How long can I keep CCN running?
With proper maintenance and parts, several more years. But the parts supply is shrinking and expertise is getting harder to find. We recommend planning for migration even if you're not ready to execute.
Do you provide remote support?
Yes. With secure remote access to your i-Vu or CCN network, we can handle most programming and troubleshooting remotely. We travel for hands-on controller work when needed.
Ready to Break Free from CCN?
Whether you want to integrate your CCN system or migrate to open platforms — we can help you find the right path.
Schedule a Consultation