AMT - Automatic Multicast Tunneling support

Automatic Multicast Tunneling (AMT) provides a method to tunnel multicast data over a unicast network, this is protocol for delivering multicast traffic from sources in a multicast-enabled network to receivers that lack multicast connectivity to the source network. The protocol uses UDP encapsulation and unicast replication to provide this functionality.

The AMT protocol if an RFC 7450 - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7450
Both Cisco and Juniper have implementations for this protocol. Additionally, there is also an open source project in C++ that implements the AMT Relay and AMT Gateway.
https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/amt

I was wondering whether RouterOS from Mikrotik supports this protocol or whether there are plans to support it in the future.

Do you have any idea how many “add this” requests are in the queue???
If they followed them, by hypothesis, all of them, they would do yours in 20 years.

Probably it will be added soon (7.18)

More or less reliable sources, or do you just write because you don’t know what to write?

I think it's about you. Already second post in this topic without any sense...
Just wait until 7.18.

The problem is you. Why necroposting on a topic from 2022 without the official source where it is written that probably they add the function in 7.18,
otherwise you just write random things without knowing what you're writing about.

If you open a feature request ticket, sometimes MT will say something to effect that it will be in the next release…

I saw a 7.18 Alpha version, it is already int there. So it is definitely coming.

Strange, in 7.18alpha4 there is not present…

The only things added not for joke are:

Support for CEF (Commont Event Format) logging format and timestamp support for milliseconds.



/31 address support



OpenVPN Password cap increased to 1000 characters

I won't comment these stupid conclusions. Calm down and don't scream so loud.
.

I guess someone wins the lottery... :wink:

And, their AMT implementation does look simplier than PIM-SM or IGMP proxy (x2). Hopefully AMT works with WG tunnels to add multicast.

The conclusion is not stupid, someone passing by, without be one forum admin or post official sources, announces something, it’s just bullshit.
Not to mention that maybe, as already happened, they remove some features from the alpha when they publish the beta, to then reinsert them later.

When people say it's rainy in their town, you also asking officials to confirm this? And regarding removal/readding i said it will probably appear in 7.18. You are the only bullshitter here... I'm stopping this conversation.

I’m not aware of Application-level support for any of AMT, so I guess currently it relies on gateway equipment to support this? Would love to read about any deployments of this technology, sounds interesting in the context of roadwarrior VPN clients, as Amm0 suggested.

@teslasystems

this cat always screams and posts in that manner are unfortunately usual. try to not bother to much … one cannot re-educate or soften a stiff spaghetti even if it is on point

maybe “just roll with it” might be a good option :man_shrugging:

Anyway, has anyone tested this over WG? Would that approach even work over WG or over VPNs?

I’ve never use AMT anywhere, so sorry for basic question - just the concept/config scheme look simpler than other approaches to tunnel multicast over a L3 VPNs.

II will try to test it within a week or two.

Could someone clarify, what interface should be specified in ‘Interface’ field for relay side and for gateway side?

v7.18 beta 4, just like he said
*) net - added initial support for automatic multicast tunneling (AMT) interface (additional fixes);

So what bullshit are you referring to again?

@TrevinLC1997
If you can’t read, it’s not mine’s fault, and you’re the one who made a fool of yourself again.

My post is 2025-Jan-20 14:04:08

The beta4 is build on 2025-Jan-31 15:46

I wrote the post 11 days before it was build.
Not counting the day of release which I don’t know if it’s the same.

So, don’t you realize the (using the word you like and that you used in your post) bullshit you’re writing?

To make some announcements, official sources should be cited, not bullshit like you like.
Announcing new features with only assumptions gets nowhere.