MikroTik

sup5

I am sitting between the chairs with Mikrotik Hard- and Software: On the one hand I get an extremely flexible and cheap product. Also software updates are regulary and bugs are often resolvend in a manner of weeks (occurence of the bugfix in rc) On the other hand the quality of Hard- and Software se...

sup5

Upwards facing ports always are collecting dust.
And don't tell me everyone is putting dust-caps on unused ports...

sup5

How does the discussion about beta firmware relates to rf irradiation issues? The regulatory authority claimed (in my case) that some sort of bad/wrong rf besides the main signal is being radiated by the device. I think this kind of issue is not fixable with firmware. It seems to be an hardware rela...

sup5

I received a similar letter from the german regulatory authority (BNetzA), which says that the SXT-ac must not be sold, handed over or imported. The german letter referred to findings of the above mentioned spanish authority. I sent this german letter to MikroTik several weeks ago, but a statement o...

sup5

But still, it would be nice to investigate the issue the OP raised. Bugs always should be considered checking.

sup5

It would be nice to have the option NOT to restore or backup MAC-addresses on HW-interfaces (Ethernet and Wireless).
Restoring MAC-addresses of logical interfaces like bridges, EoIP, VPLS and the like is useful though.

sup5

3.Is it possible to use CAT.5E cable to link with 10GBASE-T? A: No. The standard bandwidth of CAT.5E is 100MHz, and CAT.5E is designed to transmit signals below 90M. 10 Gigabit signal transmission requires a CAT.6A patch cable. 10GBase-T will work even with Cat5e as long as the distances are short....

sup5

Uhm, none...

sup5

Maybe pulling one VLAN trough the slower link and two VLANs through the faster link.
Then make a 3x bonding out of all three VLANs.
That would make up for a 2:1 load balancing, which roughly meets the 50/32 ratio.

sup5

When an ARP entry is present in the ARP-table, one can surely assume that a given IP address is being used.

sup5

You might create a temporary workaround by setting up an EoIP or VPLS tunnel over the wirless link.

Both tunnel types support fragmentation and reassembly

sup5

you should probably try to segment your networks in order to increase security and stability.

It is not best practice to host more than 200 clients per broadcast domain.

sup5

I think, you got your subnet masks wrong.
VRRP-Interfaces always should be configured with /32

sup5

Please paste the wireless configuration as well as all used device types (AP and Stations) including their full product name.

sup5

It works, if you set it up properly:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=122904

sup5

It seems they are missing galvanic isolation. Do you even electric? :) Galvanic isolation is broad term for anything what physically isolates two circuits while maintaining signal transmission between them. For example every gbit poe port must have galvanic isolation to separate power from signal w...

sup5

Mikrotik devices simply are NOT fully 802.11af/at compliant.

They might be compatible to some switches, yes.
But they lack the support of all requirements.

It seems they are missing galvanic isolation.

sup5

108.59.107.117.141.153 6C:3B:6B:75:8D:99 76.94.12.124.6.8 4C:5E:0C:7C:06:08 simply a DEC <-> HEX conversion. But I agree with you: There should be some kind of generic OID for PTP-links, because monitoring them is a PITA right now! Anyhow, you can try to change the MAC-Address of the WiFi-Interfaces...

sup5

Ignitnet 60 ghz solutions have the 5 GHz for backup I hope that MIkortik in near future develope a similar solution For that price, why not just put a second link with a couple of SXTsq Lite5? Because that means: 1) add another router (i.e. HexPoE) to each site to maintain the redundancy functional...

sup5

Antonsb I hope you are true

And I hope to see a version with integrated 5 Ghz backup
+1 Can't be to diffilcult

Seems to be already prepared in WAP60G and LHG60G. Just missing the Amplifiers and Internal Antennas.

sup5

Today I opened the WAP60G. It seems that 802.11ac Wave2 2x2 MIMO already has been prepared on the PCB in terms of missing amplifiers and antennas/connectors (labeled CH0 and CH1) for the 5GHz band. Have a look at the pictures below. So it could be possible, that we would get a future RB-LHG60G5HPacD...

sup5

Is there any chance to overcome 3000 meters?

sup5

I made quite good experiences using PLC stuff. If done right it works better than WiFi under certain circumstances. I once lived in a flat, where plain wifi was nearly impossible between rooms, due to overcrowded spectrum in 2.4 as well as 5 GHz bands. The only possiblity without putting in new netw...

sup5

PWR-Line devices don't work this way.

They work more like WiFi using OFDM. -> Many small QAM carriers.

HomeplugAV200 uses OFDM carriers between 2 and 32 MHz.
Newer HomeplugAV standards extend to 85 MHz or more.

Quality Brands will apply a PSD-mask to their devices to circumvent the 27 MHz ham band.

sup5

Hello, Question; With RouterOS 6.42 i saw w60g > status: MCS: 9/10/11. Now with RouterOS 6.42.1 i only see MCS: 8 or lower. Is this a bug of feature? jarod Seems to be a feature. http://rfmw.em.keysight.com/wireless/helpfiles/n7637/Content/Main/802.11ad%20Concepts.htm MCS8 is more than enough to ca...

sup5

That's the product specification.
Get another routerboard, if you need more speed than FastEthernet allows for.

I'd recommend the HAP ac.

sup5

Imagine, you're left with the non-DFS channels 36, 40, 44, and 48. But you want to setup a WiFi-System using 80MHz Channel Bonding. As simple as in the 20MHz-channels-setup you'll evenly distribute the four primary channels. But with 80MHz you have four options sharing the same Bonded-channel: Ceee,...

sup5

Just use the Keepalive-Feature.
A unreachable tunnel-endpoint results in a non-running Interface state.

sup5

I'd like to see a bare distance vs. throughput/MCS table in order to be able to estimate possible use cases.

sup5

You need to use SRC-NAT to rewrite any connection initiated from the router to one of the Public adresses of the route Subnet.
In order to save addresses, I would abuse the very first address of the prefix, which is unusable within standard ethernet (Network address)

sup5

So now you should find the cause within your network.
I suspect you've got multiple links to your internet gateway and forgot to configure a VLAN on one of the links

A simple STP-topology-change would never bring any services down, if the network was set up properly.

sup5

I guess, the 'station router' is a non Mikrotik-device?
Then you cannot achieve transparent bridging. Thus the MAC-adress of the clients will be MAC-NATed to the MAC-address of the 'station-router'

sup5

@webfixnow: It might be the case that the wap-60g alters your (R)STP Topology (you might have forgotten to configure a VLAN on a fromery blocked link). Set the STP Protocol-Mode on the bridge of both WAP-60G to "none" and try again. @Normis/Mikrotik: according to the default-configuration script thi...

sup5

As a general rule of thumb:

Always inform support about bugs. Do not rely on the forums.
Shrink the setup to the bare minimum in order to exhibit and reproduce the bug.
Add Diagrams and PCAPs etc.

Any bug I informed support about so far has been fixed.

sup5

Briefly explain, what you are trying to accomplish.

sup5

After a quick conversation with support, this issue was resolved within a few days in the latest release candidate:
What's new in 6.42rc35 (2018-Feb-26 10:46):
*) bridge - fixed MAC learning for VRRP interfaces on bridge;

sup5

Have a look here instead:
http://docsis.org/forum

sup5

I cannot contribute to this issue, but still I am curious:
What's the point in adding twelve LTE-Modems to a router?
Better coverage by using multiple ISPs?
Load distribution?

sup5

The Dude Client is broken after updating to 6.42rc24: Please wait while updating: "Bad http response from cloud" Where is the download for the windows-client? Edit: It seems like the Dude-Client tries to fetch this URL: https://upgrade.mikrotik.com/routeros/6.42rc24/dude-6.42rc24.tgz But it just thr...

sup5

you need to assign the ip-address of your loopback-bridge also to your ip-unnumbered interface: example loopback: address=1.2.3.4/32 network=1.2.3.4 ether1: address=1.2.3.4/32 network=5.6.7.8 this way arps asking for 5.6.7.8 will be sent out on ether1 if you want to route 2.3.4.5/24 to 5.6.7.8 add a...

sup5

Ran into this issue, too. Solved it by using a loop-cable on the router: ether1: ip-address of router vrrp1: slave of ether1 with virtual-ip address ether2: slave of the bridge containing all other needed ports exept of ether1 loop-cable between ether1 and ether2 Anyways. This is very undesirable! E...

sup5

HT MCS in .ac device is not adjustable

It is adjustable as soon as you downgrade the wireless band to 5GHz-A/N.

sup5

Will you also offer a Standalone CO-Module without the CPE-Module? Hallo Sub5, the the ALL4780 is a specific Bundle with Co and CPE inside the Box. Only Point-to-Point. Special Firmware who supporting max. 150MBPS. Only this CPE is working with the Slave CPE. THe ALL4781 is Standard VDSL for German...

sup5

These x86 Mikrotik Routers commonly are rebranded Axiomtek Network-Applicances eg.: http://www.axiomtek.com.tw/Download/Download/NA-820/NA-820.pdf http://www.axiomtek.com/Download/Spec/en-US/na550.pdf These arrive with their own quirks like occasional issues with Jumbo-Frames and MPLS-Fornwarding/De...

sup5

normis, i show you it by pictiures. [...] Suppliers of the Mikrotik say that such situation not only at me one. There might another problem: Why does your registration show a TX-power of around -35 dBm, while it only receives at about -70dBm? This is a loss of over 35dB (factor 5000)! Something see...

sup5

I think it will be needed to implement pseudo-interfaces in RouterOS. These pseudo-interfaces will be unremovable and greyed-out interfaces which connect the cpu with the switch-chip. [...] That is the bridge interface itself, isn't it? At least for bridges where there is only a single connected sw...

sup5

I think it will be needed to implement pseudo-interfaces in RouterOS. These pseudo-interfaces will be unremovable and greyed-out interfaces which connect the cpu with the switch-chip. This way we could: - monitor the amount of traffic traversing the CPU-port (i.e. to monitor oversubscription of the ...

sup5

I guess this will painfully raise the price to the level of its competitors like Cisco, HP, Extreme etc.

sup5

Since Mikrotik devices do not have hardware based traffic forwarding (ASIC / FPGA and the like) everything needs to be done in software. Thus control and forwarding are both handled by the CPU. This makes these devices so cheap. The only exceptions with hardware-acceleration are Layer-2 forwarding u...

sup5

Will you also offer a Standalone CO-Module without the CPE-Module?

Search found 315 matches