Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
dfwair
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:24 pm
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:

2.9.31 static routing bug?

Thu Oct 05, 2006 4:44 pm

I have a 2.9.31 system that was just put into production and I ran into what I believe is a critical bug in WinBox. I am running Ethernet in, Ethernet out of the box and when I was building the routes, through the box I was wondering why they were not coming up at Active/Static. After implementing the system and seeing that it was not working, I found that rebuilding the routes in the console worked just fine, but if I add the routes within WinBox, I would lose connectivity because all of the routes would show Static only, no longer Active. When I checked the settings on the route that was added through the console, I show Scope 255/Target Scope 10, however, the default settings on a new route added in WinBox are Scope 10/Target Scope 0.

Is there any reason why I should be experiencing troubles with this? I never ran into it before and I am concerned that it could pose problems if a person not aware of this bug tries to change the routes on our system.
 
changeip
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3830
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 5:22 pm

Thu Oct 05, 2006 9:05 pm

I just ran into this on 2.9.31 as well.

Using Winbox to add route shows scope 10 and target scope 0. It seemed that winbox even flickered those fields back and forth before saving them.

Sam
 
dfwair
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:24 pm
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:

Thu Oct 05, 2006 9:15 pm

I am glad that I am not the only one going crazy with this. :)
 
changeip
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3830
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 5:22 pm

Thu Oct 05, 2006 9:33 pm

I also noticed 2.9.31 bgp route filters are ignoring route-marks and announcing _all_ route tables, not just main by default. I think this behaviour changed since .30. This is injecting routes that I don't want and now have to write other filters to discard, whereas bgp used to only annouce main ? Is this preferred now or a bug?

Sam
 
dfwair
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:24 pm
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:

Thu Oct 05, 2006 9:59 pm

I have another bug altogether with BGP. I did an upgrade from 2.9.24 which was working well to 2.9.30, and then my BGP links, when built to provide full redundancy through a 3-tower loop, would cause a massive flood of traffic (6000-7000pkt/sec) on the network, which would make the watchdog on the unit at the head end of the connection's watchdog make the system reboot. Right now I have all my dynamic routing turned off and am hoping that I can put this system back in use. Right now we're lucky enough to have some good weather to keep these links up, but we need the failover before the next storm season. :)
 
changeip
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3830
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 5:22 pm

Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:03 pm

I think I have to take back what I said ... .30 was the problem, .31 fixed out filters... maybe thats the problem your having, .30 is annoucing all routes even if you told it not to I believe.

Sam
 
dfwair
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:24 pm
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:

Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:22 pm

Ahh. I will have to run the .31 upgrade then. As far as the existing issue, any Mikrotik developers looking into this? Any other reports? Any idea when it will be fixed?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], GoogleOther [Bot], sindy, slimmerwifi and 91 guests