Hi, I'm seeing a weird issue of which I'm not sure whether it's a bug or if I'm doing something wrong. Here's the situation. There's this bungalowpark where I enabled wifi using a RB750 and some RB751U-2nHd. Two of the three 751's are connected via Powerline, on is connected via WDS. I'm seeing traf...

Ok, so I found out that MT-Delegated-IPv6-Pool shouldn't be a prefix, but a poolname. Correct?

That would be a shame, because you cannot statically define a prefix for a client. But Delegated-IPv6-Prefix isn't supported. Will it be supported?

Hmm. I must be doing something wrong then. My Mikrotik still hands out prefixes of its own pool instead of what Radius tells it. See debuglogging and configuration below. If someone can enlighten me, please do. :) Thanks. Radius reply: 13:08:57 radius,debug,packet received Access-Accept with id 18 f...

Mikrotik support has let me know that you can't convert backup files to a readable config. What a sucky and useless feature, this backup.

Hi,

My RouterOS box became unreachable via the shell. (I can login, but don't get a command prompt.) I do have a backup of the config, but that seems to be binary data. Is there any known way to convert that to a readable config?

Great, thanks for DHCPv6. Any idea when Radius and DHCPv6 can work together?

BTW: I've got a working DHCPv6 on Mikrotik now. All I need for it is support for Radius. Can't really tell who gets which prefix now.

I now, and I've seen that. But I do not see any requests on Radius when doing DHCPv6. So it might not be implemented yet.

Is it correct that I cannot do DHCPv6 and Radius?

Somewhat documented now: http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Setting_up_DHCPv6

No dhcpv6...

It would be cool if Mikrotik had some kind of bugtracker, wouldn't it?

Normis has said this is planned for 5.8, I'm planning on holding him to that!

http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:IPv6/Pool

'Secretly' downloaded 5.8 and I managed to get DHCPv6 working. Cool.

dhcpv6-PD and that is being tested

I would happily help with the testing!

No dhcpv6...

It would be cool if Mikrotik had some kind of bugtracker, wouldn't it?

Normis has said this is planned for 5.8, I'm planning on holding him to that!

The bugtracker, or dhcpv6?

No dhcpv6...

It would be cool if Mikrotik had some kind of bugtracker, wouldn't it?

I'd recommend setting localpref on the incoming routes. The route with the highest localpref wins.

I've tested the RB1100 with a two full feeds for some time. But the CPU load was about 80-100% percent in my case. I switched to a x86-box, which works fine. (Celeron @3Ghz IIRC). So I'd advise you to get a x86 box.

47 chain=nlix_peers_in address-family=ipv6 invert-match=no action=jump jump-target=local_pref_150

Hmm. It seems that you must add a new rule specific for ipv6 to make it work..

Hi, I was looking into the issue that my peering-routes aren't prefered over my transit-routes, and it seems that the set-bgp-local-pref action I defined on my peers_in-routing filter isn't applied. Peer definition: 14 E name="XXX" instance=default remote-address=XXX remote-as=XXX tcp-md5-...

So is the BGP memory leak fixed? I'm still running 4.13 that came installed on our RB1100, but it's leaking memory running BGP. We're taking full routes from one peer and just default route from another. So about 350k prefixes. Memory use seems to creep up... And now I'm wondering should I just go ...

Hmm. Support says the higher CPU load is normal due to changes in the processing of BGP updates. I don't know about you guys, but I'm not really confortable with a router constantly running at 80-100% cpu..

IPv6 seems to work now.

However, my IPv4 full table peerings cause massive CPU usage (80-100%). I'll email support with more info.

This is a setting in the underlying Linux kernel. I've informed Mikrotik about this last week. The problem is that some kernel-developer thought it was a smart move to set a max of 4096 ipv6 routes. So if there are more than 4096 routes in the active routing table, it looks like you have them, but t...