I changed wlan1's MAC address, but this doesn't' fix the problem. 5Ghz still randomly disappearing. Log is clean.
You can mount two CRS112 in 1U right? Since they're exactly half U?
An important difference - cAP AC has separate antennas for each chain /4/ and better wireless performance for that! hAP AC2 has 2 combined antennas for both frequencies!
!) dot1x - added support for IEEE 802.1X Port-Based Network Access Control (CLI only);
Do you still need to set the RG into bypass mode or should I reset that to defaults, too?
So, would I apply this same configuration on the SWITCH? What would you recommend for the access points?
I have also tried to manually decrease the TX power on the radios in the cAP-ac units, but when I do, I get an error that the feature is not supported.
We're in 2019 and mobile operators sell 50GB/month for 5€, who needs hotspots anymore?
In any case the distance is now down to 1000m, from 2000m.
So the 60Hz should work fine, but I am still offput by the difficulty in people managing to aim the bloody things.
i would do a netinstall and the attempt a restore from backup.
So the solution from picture attached below is not possible to achieve, right?
Fixed in 6.42.12, 6.43.12 and 6.44
# Web: https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=143620
It seems fine with me.
But all the complains about ARM are wireless related, right? A pure router (a true CCR) could do well, couldn't it? The 4011 has some problems with the FSP+ ports - but they are chipset related, not CPU related. Or I am missing something?
This option somehow "checked" even DHCP server has it "unchecked" so if you forgot to uncheck then static reservation broadcasts it.
The beta with iPhone fixes is not public yet. Please wait a little bit. it's being released today.
I have a CRS109-8G. With ubiquity the result is much better.
Last night I purchased CRS328-4C-20S-4S+RM switch. I am doing something terribly wrong?
Before the update, antenna gain was 2. After the update, antenna gain is 3.
I would like to replace both of the switches in building 1 & 2 with a CRS MikroTik switch. Is there any way to setup Auto-Voice VLAN in MikroTik switches to function in the same manner as Cisco using Vendor MAC codes?
I expect you probably just want to apply the firewall rules to traffic that will be crossing trust levels, such as private to public interfaces--in other words, routed traffic. If that's the case, then you should not configure the bridge to use the firewall.
Honestly the best way around this is just good filtered power and high quality redundant DC adapters.
If you need QoS then Queue Tree should work with fasttrack.
MikroTik should not allow nv2 to be selected on 802.11ac hardware. It is clearly broken, why even give the customer the option of being disappointed?
But I still cannot ping for example 10.0.1.40 from Router A. I still get a timed out response on this attempt.
TCP sessions should be able to last days without a router breaking them.
How can we make both R1 and R2 config stay in sync?
Anyone have some last things for me to try?
/ip neighbor discovery-settings set discover-interface-list=none /ipv6 nd set [ find default=yes ] disabled=yes
I was told that this product won't be coming to the UK as MikroTik have no interest in marketing this product in the UK.
For roaming just go with ubiquity.
I am sorry ... I can not find this menu in Mikrotik ???
Version 6.44beta61 has been released.
rb4011 - improved SFP+ interface linking to 1Gbps;
Ether1 as wan or lan? I thought that the 10gb link with the switch would be plenty sufficient
Here is my config, I use protocol and port as criteria to mark connections.
Have done this, the device works fine outside of capsman.
I don't know what you mean with don't use flash directory. Normally, I click on download and install.
L2TP ? But i use IKEv2 now
So is there any firewall rule for IPSec exclude ?
Should this topic be moved to Useful user articles forum?
Can I port forward two devices with the same port?
Is it possible that the rogue DHCP server doesn't have default route set to your MT's address? Probably yes as you had to add additional IP address to MTs LAN interface to establish connectivity to it. So you probably have to do SRC-NAT as well...
Changed to another one, the problem still exists.