Thx for info. I will stick as I have it now and will see how it is with ROZ7 when I get to some newer model.

OK, thanks. Found this in manual: "Currently, CRS3xx, CRS5xx series switches, CCR2116, CCR2216 routers and RTL8367, 88E6393X, 88E6191X, 88E6190, MT7621 and MT7531 switch chips (since RouterOS v7) are capable of using bridge VLAN filtering and hardware offloading at the same time, other devices ...

Yes, the configuration has changed from some version. Now what ports are in switch is configured under a bridge. Anyway you can still configure things under Switch section and configure the switch directly. So as I understand it: Switch - configure pure switch chip on L2 and all is in HW Bridge - ne...

Hi all, was reading some docs, forum, but still no clear for me when there is benefit of VLAN filtering. So mainly let's refer to the below manual: https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/VLANs+on+Wireless There is noted: "VLAN filtering is not required in this setup, but is highly recommend...

Hi,

is there any plan to introduce newer / refresh mAP models with 2.4 and 5 Ghz WiFi?

Regarding upgrade to v7. Yes, the preparation is needed in general, that is right. But my point is the official position of Mikrotik. There is difference if the migration is supported officially or not. For example v7.10 supports migration, but 7.11 not etc, For me it seems that migration is support...

So 6.49.8 is now the latest and only version supported with v6,

How is the upgrade supported from v6.49.x to the v7?
Can I upgrade to the latest 7 version or do I need to go with some steps?
Do you have some date when v6 is out of support?

Thanks for info.

I do actually, from home user perspective, like myself, if you have complete control of your network clients and you don't expect elite hackers as your home guests, as I wrote at the end - no concern The concern may depend on a user. You may have more trusted devices as PCs, phones, servers you mai...

@optio, Amm0 I guess you understand it wrong from my perspective. It is not that you do segment network because of mDNS, but you already have segmented network and want to use mDNS now. The network segmentation has it reason and in some aspects it increase security. Now you have new devices using mD...

I really do not understand why someone is still fighting this with false or misleading arguments here. If you do not see benefit or use for yourself then OK, do not use it. But other users see some value in this feature. mDNS works in local subnet and it can be fine for major home users or simple se...

Wrong. 239.0.0.0/8 are defined to be per interface in RFC2365, so there no need to look at mDNS RFCs. Wrong argument. The same you could say about IGMP proxy - so no need to look for IGMP RFCs. There are many other vendors (with Cisco too) providing such feature at some level. It maybe called diffe...

@Kaldek > "mDNS as a standard is not meant to be reflected or repeated. ..." If you check RFC for mDNS, you will see it counts with reflection, gateways even if it itself does not define proxying. > "Mikrotik *could* add an mDNS reflector into ROS, just like they have added UPnP. Howe...

@DarkNate You are little bit arrogant, aren't you? That you are expert in multicast routing does not mean that everyone else must be too. Good for you, but call anyone else lazy-bum? Not everyone needs to know multicast routing even if they work in IT. Mikrotik sells wireless APs on consumer market ...

I see mDNS proxy/repeater as valid feature request and understand why many people want such feature. But do not understand why some people fight against it so dogged. During decades networking evolved - we have switching (L2), routing (L3), VLANs, private VLANs, VRFs, VPNs etc. and all tends to sepa...

But that is conceptualy wrong. You want to have different VLANs, but your router can't do it. Therer is another simpler scenario and you do not need VLANs. Use port isolation on the switch: - go to ACL pane and configure - from: 2, 3, 4, 5 - Redirect To: 1 And thats it. Port 1 is to the router. All ...

It's limitation of switch chips. The documentation has been update by mikrotik team. https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Switch_Chip_Features#Port_isolation Warning: Switch chips with a VLAN table support (QCA8337, Atheros8327, Atheros8316, Atheros8227 and Atheros7240) can override the port isolat...

When testing some configuration I've found the issue below: 1. configured VLANs for untagged and tagged traffic -> it seems working fine (details in post: https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=155103) 2. configured port isolation - all ports forward-to port1 -> it does NOT work Tested o...

Thanks for feedbacks, I got some time for testing and got kind of working configuration, at least for me. I did not verify all possible aspects, but below is my config. VLAN tab: vlan 10 on ether1, ether2 and switch1-cpu ports vlan 0 on ports ether1, ether3 and ether4 Port tab: VLAN header set to 'l...

Hello guys, I want to use hAP lite as simple switch with tagged and untagged traffic (possibly with port isolation), but the configuration is little bit cryptic for me. I've followed - https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Basic_VLAN_switching Other devices with built-in switch chip - https://wiki.m...

I would say that MikroTik has good products for many people. For consumers it is great product. You pay for a gear and then you can run it several years with updated RouterOS version and without any additional cost. And in fact the issues are fixed in time. There is not many vendors doing this. The ...

I can see problem with web server over https. After file download it gets unaccesible.
Anyway I've enabled http over CLI and that works.

Right, it is legitimate request. In my case this does not impact me, but with bigger amount of devices it is problematic and risky.
If it is serious then better to say 'upgrade', details will follow later or release the details immediately.

@R1CH: Yes, it was not here. Probably they needed to wait for 6.40.9 to ne released too. The the information was added to both. I do not see problem to release more information later. Maybe it is about to give people some time to upgrade before releasing details. @chechito: Are you serious with your...

I guess there is no big difference in underlying switching functionality. The device contains switch chip, what has to be programmed and in fact does not matter what OS does it. It is more likely what the producer implements and to what market is the product focused. 1. SwitchOS (I have old 250 vers...

Hi, I got modem Vodafone (Huawei) K5160. It is lte modem and identified as 12d1:1f1e, then switched to 12d1:157f as lte modem. 1. the mode works with x86 CHR version 6.38.7 well in KVM (for testing purposes) - the modem is identified as 12d1:1f1e - then it is switched by RouterOS to 12d1:157f - impo...

Hi otgooneo, regarding 1/ I've thought that when general purpose CPU is involved so kernel is used for handling this traffic. Do you know how is done and how is it possible that CPU can do fast path without kernel? Or what am I missing? regarding 2/ thanks for kick off. I see it now as hw switch bak...

hello, the RB2011UAS-2HnD-IN is my first mikrotik device, so sorry if I will ask any crazy questions :D I read manual and have played with it, but I'm unsure with some topics. 1. fast path - I understand it in way that packets can be routed in hardware (switch chip) and CPU is not used. Because in t...