Community discussions

MikroTik App

Search found 10 matches

by danh@tbc.net
Thu Nov 20, 2008 8:58 pm
Forum: General
Topic: OSPF issue with 3.15+ Works fine with 3.13
Replies: 10
Views: 4224

Re: OSPF issue with 3.15+ Works fine with 3.13

Both are NTP synchronized. We had the problem with the clock running too fast under 3.15, but it was doing the same thing under 3.16, where the time and date bug was fixed.
by danh@tbc.net
Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:16 am
Forum: General
Topic: VRRP on VLAN interface
Replies: 3
Views: 1814

Re: VRRP on VLAN interface

I can confirm that VRRP on VLANs does work under 3.x at least starting with 3.13. (Can't say about earlier.) We're running it on 6 VLANs with OSPF running between the two cores and the rest of our network. Fail-over takes about 10 seconds.

Dan
by danh@tbc.net
Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:18 pm
Forum: General
Topic: OSPF issue with 3.15+ Works fine with 3.13
Replies: 10
Views: 4224

OSPF issue with 3.15+ Works fine with 3.13

We are having an issue with OSPF under 3.15 and 3.16. The log files follow. We have two matched routers that we upgraded to 3.15 last week. This morning at 2:00, I downgraded one to 3.13, and upgraded the other to 3.16 due to this problem. The first issue: 05:59:29 route,ospf,info OSPF: Invalid cryp...
by danh@tbc.net
Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:04 pm
Forum: General
Topic: OSPF and PPPOE nightmare!
Replies: 42
Views: 18639

Re: OSPF and PPPOE nightmare!

I'm chasing an issue similar to this. I've implemented summaries on our Cisco PPPoE servers, and now they simply put out one supernet address for the complete PPPoE Pool. However when I try to do it on the Mikrotik server, I get the summaries propagated back into the routing tables, BUT every PPPoE ...
by danh@tbc.net
Wed Nov 05, 2008 10:19 pm
Forum: General
Topic: VLAN And NAT - Can't seem to get the rule right in 3.x
Replies: 1
Views: 654

VLAN And NAT - Can't seem to get the rule right in 3.x

I have this working fine on a box running 2.9.39. Basically we have a single interface with multiple VLAN interfaces enabled on it. VLAN 1 is connected to another network where we monitor the switches. We have an address (10.1.x.x) on that subnet. In the 2.9.39 box, I have a masquerade rule set so t...
by danh@tbc.net
Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:01 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Override PPPoE Radius queues for specific networks
Replies: 4
Views: 3281

Any chance of that option in the future?

It would seem to be a nice feature for those of us who want to offer special services like remote backup or priority access to our VoIP server.

Thanks

Dan
by danh@tbc.net
Wed Oct 11, 2006 6:05 pm
Forum: General
Topic: Override PPPoE Radius queues for specific networks
Replies: 4
Views: 3281

Override PPPoE Radius queues for specific networks

A little background: We are using PPPoE over wireless for a long time. We use radius to set speeds for the customers, and it works very well. We are expanding our network to include customers off of fiber connected buildings. Now the issue: We want to provide a "short-cut" routing path to specific a...
by danh@tbc.net
Sun Jul 31, 2005 5:34 am
Forum: General
Topic: 2.9 OSPF problem
Replies: 3
Views: 2041

OSPF and MTU's

OSPF has a basic assumption that the MTU on both sides of the link is the same. If you reduce the MTU on one side, the OSPF HELLO packet will be received, but the response with the same MTU will receive a fragmentation required ICMP message. If I remember correctly, this breaks the OSPF specificatio...
by danh@tbc.net
Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:21 am
Forum: General
Topic: 2.9 OSPF problem
Replies: 3
Views: 2041

Found it

Dumb OSPF mistake. Mismatched MTU caused the problem. Once I fixed that, it was fine.

Side note, when I downgraded to 2.8, log output showed an error about MTU mismatch, but under 2.9, no such error.

Thanks

Dan
by danh@tbc.net
Wed Jun 15, 2005 9:02 pm
Forum: General
Topic: 2.9 OSPF problem
Replies: 3
Views: 2041

2.9 OSPF problem

We just upgraded to 2.9rc5 on one of our sites. We have a routerboard220 connecting to a PPPoE connection going to our own Cisco router. The Cisco runs OSPF fine to 2.8 units. In the 2.9 unit, from the Cisco side, I see it stuck in the "INIT" state. From the logs on the Mikrotik side, I see it send ...