Have you even tried?Please bring IS-IS ipv6
*) route - fixed gateways of locally imported vpnv4 routes;unfortunately no BGP/VRF local route leaking updates...
Well, this is indeed off-topic, it has nothing to do with script snippets.I can't continue to comment this in my topic, this on this topic is off-topic in... my topic.
That never existed in v6 either. There was just a workaround where you could establish bgp session between vrfs on a single router and then redistribute. In theory you already can do the same in v7 too.inter-VRF route leaking via RD with import/export on ROSv7 like it was useable in v6
I am on RouterOS v7.12.1. I think this MT documentation on best path selection is confusing me since I can't see any "BGP instance". I can only see BGP instances in ROS v6.
https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... neInstance
Hate to tell you, but your "inside source" is not trustworthy.but MikroTik decided it was a terrible idea to support these three on the ASICs.
ip route print where x.x.x.x in dst-address
Show your bfd config.Adding and specifying allowed address-list under bfd configuration doesn't help neither
But when i configure bgp session with ip which is configured directly on interface, the bgp and bfd is up
There's been some confusion with the naming, actual tx actually shows the value of the remote tx interval. But actual tx is actually picked the highest value as it should. Will be fixed in one of the next versions.BFD is working, but I think desired and actual TX/RX intervals are not working.
Maybe you didn't actually upgrade, since since beta10 do not have "copy" routes anymore and BGP attributes are there for bgp vpn routes.beta 10 : BGP VPN4 have same problems as before 7.9 ; type "copy" routes, and no BGP attributes
Security by obscurity is not the way to go. Proper firewall is necessary for both ipv4 and ipv6 to protect the LAN devices.IPv4 has NAT and devices are not accessible from anywhere on the internet
Don't call something a BS, if you are bad at searching
That is, pardon my language, bullshit on their part.
If they don't support it, then a) document that somewhere
:execute change was a mistake for this beta and will be fixed in the next beta.And still a -1 to the :execute changes here.
https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... s-Networkswe are currently having issues to advertise networks that are not static assigned within the /ip address or static routes from both ends using eBGP.