2. With the proxy-arp it works fine

I wish it could just be fixed with ether1-long-poe-in like in the old days : )

I got a feeling that the issue here is that the POE port doesn't deliver enough power to the AC

My ultimate goal is to monitor the traffic real-time and apply firewall rules to prevent access to and from specific ip destinations.

The only devices I care about being on are in this list

Will there be any complications using different model antennas

ATTN everybody!
I now have found a solution. Will post it shortly. But it works only if no bridge is configured in RouterOS Could be a ROS bug...

The queues in RouterOS only limit egress traffic

That's the whole point - the line is not 50/50 symmetric

We did not choose an interface but global - that's not an interface

I have just reproduced the error again. i will post details in a moment please bear with me. i am not going insane after all

why does creating a bogus default route on the main routing table otherwise solve my issue?

Where is this super simple magical VPN tick box.

ESP need not be forwarded as if there is NAT at at least one end, it cannot be used.

it will work with IKEv2 (for IKE(v1), you would need to forward also UDP port 500).

2404-2408-2412-2417-2422 for C

I guess most of you have already noticed that <TAB> key does not move focus from one input field to another.

And double click on an input field does not select the text.

has anyone heard anything from Mikrotik yet, shell we hope for ROS 7?

I guess most of you have already noticed that <TAB> key does not move focus from one input field to another.

so even if the cable works with the PC, it may not with the Mikrotik

/system interface

the dhcp client went red

I've never found any issue to be actually fixed by moving the IP settings from the slave port to the bridge.

How do I upgrade to 6.x? Net install?

I'll remove fasttrack from the input chain when I see a verification in an official MT document.

This is just the beginning, not the end

does not have one. Checked the board carefully

Please read carefully before reply.

IM posts are temporarily ON,,,,,, just click on the users name on the left hand margin to send message

As others mentioned, switch shouldn't be doing that.

and that enables the auto 20/40 mode.

Yes, Multi-layer-switches can route at wire speed - MLS ....

I removed switch1-cpu from switch vlan and everything is working as expected.

Blocking other based on dynamic address list

I also faced this issue. Maybe last messages of the following post can help you.

If you want to route at wire speed on the switch YOU will need to look at other brands.

One obvious cause may be that we do not get the 1 Gbps from our provider

- change MTU to 1492 both in PPOE connection and in Bridge

During these periods the other groups have less than 330 Mbps.

The problem I see is why I CAPS master is unable to get an IP from the DCHP

I have no access to the ISP modem, and neither does their useless tech support.

/interface bridge vlan
add bridge=bridge-oam tagged=bridge-oam untagged=KKHOME_VLAN_100 vlan-ids=100

I don’t see this condition in my setup.

Cable modem is a Technicolor TC4400-AM

So, do you believe my NAT rule will otherwise have the intended effects?

recursive routes are not recalculated (or something) and all traffic still goes via another uplink

Mikrotik are supposed to be bringing out a Netpower 16P

and not a single word on routerboard.com.

...or MPLS if you prefer.

this requirement is relevant for the bridges on the active network path between the two devices running LACP

Ναί

on the radios, protocol-mode on the bridge between the Ethernet port and the wireless one must be set to none

something that MikroTik, with its RouterOS firmware, seems not to do too well.