RouterBoard:
1-2 USB port’s (makes way for serial ports, modems, storage and a lot of other goodness).
A simple way of using external leds for power, cpu and trafic (just a little pin connector, parallel with the existing leds).
Maybe some I/O ports (GPIO) for temperature use and controlling stuff and using it with the watchdog in ROS. (an ex. use is that it can see if the power is down (running on a UPS) then if the power is not back in a couple of minutes it will start a generator and switch the power from main to generator power or maybe use it as a burglar alarm… it can be used for alot of things).
A battery or capacitor for the clock. And maybe a way to connect to the BIOS from the network (just an idear for tower installations).
RouterOS:
More IPv6 (DHCP client and server, AUICCU, torch)
Be able to PXE boot via ROS with a TFTP server.
And mounting SMB/NFS partitions for extra storage…
A way to automatically dynamically set the limit-at and max-limit, to detect noise in the links (lowered throughput) to keep shaping/queueing/priority control in all situations, including Wi-Fi, ADSL, congested links with unknown bandwidth and unknown drop probability. Compensating for ATM overhead (example: ADSL). More documents explaining better when packets are dropped and why, in the MikroTik queues. Better shaping techniques…
RouterBoard:
Yes, we need USB ports.
Better ESD protection on ether1 of all RouterBoards.
RouterOS:
Error statistics on ethernet ports. It’s not that hard to do with Linux. Look at the output of ifconfig.
Improve the functionality of Webbox. Allow the custom branding tool to replace ALL Mikrotik brand references. This is important if you want to improve sales to the OEM markets.
Other MT product
R2H. The R5H is a great start but we need a comparable card for 2.4GHz. We sell more XR2 cards than XR5 cards in the USA.
Something to compete with Ubiquiti ns2 and ns5.
I agree with the above posters but personally I am not so concerned about the TFTP or IPV6 functionality.
In addition I would like to see Mikrotik’s IPSEC implementation improved and brought to the same level of functionality as Cisco, Juniper and Fortinet’s. In particular I would like to see Mikrotik support “Route Based” tunnels, this is when an IPSEC tunnel is terminated as a virtual interface and routes can then be used to simply send traffic via this interface.
This makes it easier for newbies to understand IPSEC, allows cleaner routing, allows easy use of OSPF over IPSEC links and allows much easier cross-vendor VPN’s.
I have described this before on these forums, and have had a number of other people on this forum also support the changes.
There are a number of other changes to IPSEC I would like to see around the naming conventions Mikrotik has used, but these are not critical to the level of functionality they just improve the user experience.
Percent base shaping may solve this problem . for example we have a 10Mbps link which is 100%. then we limit something to 10% of it which is 1Mbps . when 10Mbps goes 8Mbps then 10% is 800Kbps .
Excellent idea. The max-limit can simply be taken from an average value calculated during transfer, collecting statistical information, an automatic algorithm can know when and how fast to lower the max-limit to achieve priority control.
802.11n support (just in v4-beta for the time being)
USB ports on routerboards (I agree completely!)
a mikrotik designed outdoor case for routerboards (because trying to mount a routerboard in any old case really does suck.
a better way of backing up router configs (no way to re-assign config sections from one wireless/eth card to a new one if one dies)
data, speed, time & session time based billing options in user-manager for those countries where we have to pay for data and speed.
one or more wiki articles (by mikrotik staff) explaining how QoS works & how to implement it so we don’t have people constantly complaining they can’t use it/it doesn’t work. - https support for the ‘fetch’ command
better write-to-file support for developers (beyond 4000~ chars)
I would like a high port density or cPCIe backplane platform. Support for current generation ds3 and t1 cards and oc cards, like those from imagestream.com,but they are pci not cPCIe .
I want to run MT as a routeswitch, on every port in the DC!
I hope you know that there are a lot more frequencies there, than standard channels (1-11 or 1-14). Do you propose we name only the channels that Do exist in the official channel lists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels)?
A really stable and reliable actual version of RouterOS, without any new features.
Of course, statistically my short term expirience might not be so significant, but when I try to extrapolate the small area of functions I checked in detail (hotspot), and the two problems I detected already, one of which I consider serious, effectively making the production use of hotspot-advertising impossible, makes me think, how many unfixed (or undiscovered) problems are in other modules, still ?
And I have the impression, that it needs a really expirienced user, better to say network specialict or systems admin, at least, to proof to Mikrotik, that there is a bug.
This is simply my own expirience, because first of all getting responses like “I can not see how this is possible”, “upgrade your browser”, “change the network card”, “you are just the first one reporting this probelm” etc. before a problem is seriously evaluated.
Mikrotik should be happy to have a first-time report, to take immediate action before other users are violated by the same bug, too !
I can accept the argument, there might be a lot of wrong bug reports. BUT:
Then simply ask for detailed info. Or read the problem description carefully, at least.
And, as a preventive action, quite a lot of “effects” reported here in the forum MIGHT be real bugs. So it could be the duty of one of the moderators, to evaluate in more detail, just before few other people report the same problem.
My very own private opinion as an old and expirienced SW-engineer from Germany is, that nowadays SW is like a brand new Mercedes-Benz: A lot of gimmicks, many more than in the old models. But in the past, the Mercedes cars simply ran and ran and ran and ran and … without stopping
if seriously - many bugs that are reported are actually tested.
Also, if user writes to support he/she usually gives more information about the problem at hand and can provide supout.rif files, so we can see important parts of configuration and stuff, what happened on the router.
And there are a lot of - this feature does not work reports, but at the end - it is not configured properly, it works as designed, but user misunderstood the information etc.
And normis have written countless time - prepare detailed description about your problem and contact support at mirkotik.com
There are far to more frequencies in a list than actual channels, and we usually use channel fequencies only, but if one mistakenly chooses frequency that does not match channel he easily can end up with no connection, as some wireless cards refuse to connect if not on proper frequency.
After all, on wifi it is common to talk about channels, not frequencies. So, if you just put channel numbers in parentheses as QpoX suggested, I would be happy, and I am sure, lot of other users will be too.
I have a few suggestions that haven’t been listed yet.
RouterOS requests:
Finish v3 documentation before v4 is out of beta.
DHCP6 for IPv6? Might not be needed RouterOS 3.18 just added recursive DNS server option to IPv6 auto-config.
IPv6 over PPP/PPPoE.
OSPFv3 (for IPv6) viewable/configurable through winbox.
A method (linux top/ps?) to view what is causing the router to run at 100% CPU, so you can take corrective action.
I have tried to create a supout file on a maxed out router, but it sometimes takes 10-15 minutes for it to finish. I normally just reboot it.
RouterOS wishlist:
Ability to change text of userman pages. I want my company name instead of Mikrotik. Perhaps template files similar to Dude Language files would be a solution.
DNS names instead of IP addresses in NTP Client, web-proxy parent proxy, email server, etc. I want to be-able to change IP’s for the domain name and have all routers use the new IP address.
Routerboard wishlist:
more gigabit options other than rb600 & rb1000.
PCI-Express based multi-port gigabit cards.
mini-pci-express slots on routerboard (rb800?)
MIMO cards
A mips-be (or faster) cpu with 6 -12 100Mbit ports + 1 gigabit uplink port.
Some of these might get announced at Prague, and we will see the products by summer.
DHCPv6 and RA are different things. RA is stateless configuration and should be more than sufficient. However it would have been nice to have the added rdns functionality. Instead RA isn’t working at all anymore in 3.18.
This brings me to the top of my wishlist: Lads, you need to do better testing of releases. If a release is 3.XX it should be thoroughly tested and nearly bug free. Each and every release since 3.0 has been broken in one, the other or the third way. 3.X has never been as mature as 2.9 and I’ve used Mikrotik since 2.8. If you need to push a release out there, that has one or two issues or lack of testing, clearly mark it as RC releases. The community will be happy to test it for you and tell you what’s broken. RC releases between the main releases is fine. But do not mix alpha/beta and production within the same release naming. That is how it “feels” currently.
Absolutely. PPP/PPPoE with IPv6 (IP6CP negociation and DHCPv6).
Also, please add here a way using PPPoE relaying, similar to DSL bitstream services, so that connections can be sold to resellers with their own backhaul. This would have higher priority than IP6CP/DHCPv6, because if implemented the terminating PPP server could take care of this instead.
I just wanted to buy my first ROS license. Not a problem, I thought, they accept credit cards.
But: This is the fist time I have been confronted with this strange procedure regarding the authorization code. Actually, I am not in my home country, so I have real difficulties to call back to my credit card company for this procedure to complete.
Solution: None. Actually I can not buy.
It would be great, you would add PayPal for instance, as a payment option. I would be happy now to pay a few cents on top, to use their simple service and complete a fast purchase from you.
.
