If the ports are excluded from the switch, are they connected with each 1Gbps to CPU?

Ok, thanks. Are all other ports independent ?

Yep, ports 5-8 (as well as the two SFP ports) are direct-to-CPU ports.

If the ports are excluded from the switch, are they connected with each 1Gbps to CPU? No, the CPU has a single 1Gbps port on the switch. "Excluding" a port from the switch essentially just creates an "internal" VLAN on the switch to carry traffic between the switch port and the ...

No instruction to run under QEMU? Is it possible? Already try on my FreeBSD boxes, no success. qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -hda chr_6_31rc14.img Is a very quick and dirty minimal configuration that should get you up and running. This will expose a single default emulated Intel NIC with guest-onl...

This still doesnt justify the multi-threading incapability of RouterOS. We need PPP and simple queues multi-threaded otherwise even 1000 cores is a joke. Have patience.. All signs that have been revealed until now point to RouterOS v7 being a complete game changer for the CCR lineup. Until then, wh...

Those are very normal temperatures for the CCR1009. I wouldn't worry in the slightest. From my experience, it appears that the fan control software tries to keep the CPU temperature in the mid 50s. If you don't even need to spin the fans to achieve this, you must be in a very favourable environment....

I dont know what will be the use of 72cores when RouterOS cant even utilize 36 cores already. PPP-No multi-threading Simple Queses- No multithreading What would you do with a 72x core router if you wont be able to use it as a Broadband Access Concentrator ? 10Gbps-capable IP core/MPLS P-router? It ...

What about traffic flow? In 6.29 broken it. Please fix it.

The change log for the most recent 6.31 RC appears to have disappeared, but last time I looked at it earlier today, it included a fix to restore the previous "birectional" traffic capture behaviour for traffic-flow.

This is fantastic!

I dare ask, does this mean we might get access to 7.0 earlier than expected for those willing to submit to a very rough "development" stream experience?

2x CCR1036-8G-2S+ running 6.29.1 w/ NTP package installed (client enabled, server disabled) 1x CCR1016-12G-1S+ running 6.27 w/ NTP package installed (client enabled, server disabled) All those configurations crashed for me and were not rebooted by the watchdog (required hard power cycle; thank god f...

Did anyone else see any TILE-based RouterOS devices go unresponsive at leap second insertion today? (00:00 UTC) Three of my CCRs (one running 6.27 and two running 6.29.1) became unresponsive at 00:00 UTC on the dot. LCD screens were also unresponsive, and I equally couldn't get any output via serial...

When I asked Janis about CCR1072 availability at the AU MUM, he reckoned it was 2-3 months away at most. That puts us in the July-August range if he turns out to be correct. Apparently Mikrotik had to redesign the SFP+ interfaces because they found that older modules would not function properly in t...

simply why mikrotik command line not support redirect output to a file as linux command ">" to great output file or as ">>" to update exist file ? Sending command output to a file is possible. Just use the file parameter, as in the following example: [admin@Mikrotik] > /interfac...

Hello All Does anyone know if fastpath is supported on VLAN interface? It isn't currently supported as of the latest official release (6.29.1). However, lucky for you, fastpath support for VLAN interfaces was added to the latest RC for 6.30 just yesterday! (starting in version 6.30rc17) If you want...

eight Gigabit Ethernet ports ( Ether1-4 are in a Switch group ) is the description for CCR1009-8G-1S-1S+ can i delete this switch and use all 8 ports to connect to 8 different subnets with different ip addresses ? Yep. Ports 1-4 will appear as normal ethernet interfaces in RouterOS (i.e. as if they...

We have made a quick fix, released as v6.29.1 to address two issues that we found after releasing v6.29: What's new in 6.29.1 (2015-Jun-01 13:30): *) fixed vpls bridging (introduced in v6.29); *) fixed problem where some CRS could not be reached (introduced in v6.29); If you use a CRS or VPLS, plea...

IMG-Error_BGP-VPLS.jpeg

Confirmed. I can reproduce this on my BGP-signalled VPLS setup.

VPLSes which are set to auto-attach to bridges result in an invalid port being added to the bridge when the VPLS comes up.

Adding the VPLS interfaces manually to the bridge works fine.

It is hard to say for version that will be available for masses, but right now it is [admin@MikroTik] /routing route> :put [:time [print where 192.0.128.1 in dst-address] ] DST-ADDRESS GATEWAY DISTANCE AS> 0.0.0.0/0 10.5.101.1 0 S 0.0.0.0/0 10.5.101.1 1 D bY 192.0.128.0/17 10.5.101.1 20 D bY 192.0....

Currently in RouterOS v6.x implementation there is no faster way.

Out of curiosity, how much of a performance improvement is expected for route lookups in RouterOS v7.x? (if you happen to know)

I'm going to see if I can find some spare hardware and generate some logs for Mikrotik so we can get a confirmed fix in upcoming versions. Sounds good! Did you end up filing a support request about this? I'm happy to do so if you haven't, just don't want to create duplicate work for the support team.

I hit this very same bug yesterday when bringing up a BGP-signalled VPLS on a CCR1036-8G-2S+ running 6.28 on an OSPF-routed backbone. I was going to spend time today labbing up a simplified setup to rule out any more complex underlying cause with my network, but you've saved me the trouble by boilin...