I have a 2.9.31 system that was just put into production and I ran into what I believe is a critical bug in WinBox. I am running Ethernet in, Ethernet out of the box and when I was building the routes, through the box I was wondering why they were not coming up at Active/Static. After implementing the system and seeing that it was not working, I found that rebuilding the routes in the console worked just fine, but if I add the routes within WinBox, I would lose connectivity because all of the routes would show Static only, no longer Active. When I checked the settings on the route that was added through the console, I show Scope 255/Target Scope 10, however, the default settings on a new route added in WinBox are Scope 10/Target Scope 0.
Is there any reason why I should be experiencing troubles with this? I never ran into it before and I am concerned that it could pose problems if a person not aware of this bug tries to change the routes on our system.
I also noticed 2.9.31 bgp route filters are ignoring route-marks and announcing all route tables, not just main by default. I think this behaviour changed since .30. This is injecting routes that I don’t want and now have to write other filters to discard, whereas bgp used to only annouce main ? Is this preferred now or a bug?
I have another bug altogether with BGP. I did an upgrade from 2.9.24 which was working well to 2.9.30, and then my BGP links, when built to provide full redundancy through a 3-tower loop, would cause a massive flood of traffic (6000-7000pkt/sec) on the network, which would make the watchdog on the unit at the head end of the connection’s watchdog make the system reboot. Right now I have all my dynamic routing turned off and am hoping that I can put this system back in use. Right now we’re lucky enough to have some good weather to keep these links up, but we need the failover before the next storm season.
I think I have to take back what I said … .30 was the problem, .31 fixed out filters… maybe thats the problem your having, .30 is annoucing all routes even if you told it not to I believe.
Ahh. I will have to run the .31 upgrade then. As far as the existing issue, any Mikrotik developers looking into this? Any other reports? Any idea when it will be fixed?
