> /ip/route/print detail where !inactive
Flags: D - dynamic; X - disabled, I - inactive, A - active; c - connect, s - static, r - rip, b - bgp, o - ospf, d - dhcp, v - vpn, m - modem, y - copy; H - hw-offloaded; + - ecmp
D b dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 routing-table=main gateway=172.16.11.129 immediate-gw=172.16.11.129%sfp-sfpplus1.uplink.v2221
distance=20 scope=40 target-scope=10 suppress-hw-offload=no
DAb dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 routing-table=main gateway=172.16.11.1 immediate-gw=172.16.11.1%sfp-sfpplus1.uplink.v2220
distance=20 scope=40 target-scope=10 suppress-hw-offload=no
0 s dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 routing-table=main pref-src="" gateway=172.16.11.1 immediate-gw=172.16.11.1%sfp-sfpplus1.uplink.v2220
distance=100 scope=30 target-scope=10 suppress-hw-offload=no
Both BGP default-routes are installed in fib, but only one is active.
On other venders you can increase “maximum-paths” 2, to enable ecmp. I was looking through the options in ROS CLI and could not find something similar.
I thought that v7 is the first ROS that support BGP with multipath (ECMP).
This makes me a little bit angry.
Currently i use Ubiquiti Routers to achive ECMP with BGP. I moved many routers to Mikrotik because in some topics ECMP for BGP on Mikrotik was planed for v7.x - and now, this feature is not ready yet? Damn it
Edit: I stand corrected, BGP multi path is not supported at the moment.
ECMP is supported. You should look at ‘/routing/route/print detail’ to debug this.
I am here because it does apper to be working for me… in ONE case… and I am not sure how. It’s also “Almost” working in a second case - but the secondary route is still blue - even though both are stating ECMP (+ in status)
In both of these cases - they are iBGP - but i cannot confirm the trigger 100%. I can confirm that if I set nexthop to the upstream as the “Mid” router - the + in status dissappears in one of the cases (have yet to test more)
OK, for more fuel to the flames - I found why case 2 “works” - but doesnt - but does
The situation where the ECMP was running - but onlu one route was active - was only partially true. The secondary route had injected itself into the primary - so WAS ECMP - tested and was multipathing randomly.
This was due to 2 things - as far as i can tell.
The Gateway was the same - being sent via BPG (from 2 sources pointing to the same point - neither were the gaterway)
There was a ECMP Path to the gateway of each of these routes. As an aside - the ECMP route WAS NOT active (was blue) but was still an equivalent to an ECMP route.
Had added long distance static ECMP failove to part of my setup - and on one of the tails - saw this.
The router in question is 7.1.3, it’s peers are 7.1.3 and 6.47.10
The other one in question - the 7.1.3 upstream - get routes from the router above, but as a failover - also gets routes from it’s 6.47.10 companion for the router above.
In this case - there are no static routes to the downstream - but this router IS showing both sets as ECMP… ALSO, rather than injecting the 2 routes into one - they are being shown as 2 seperate active routes - like when doing static in ROS 7x (unlike the one above which was more similar to ECMP in ROS 6x)
The problem I have is that is that in the last case here - I don’t think I want ECMP - as both paths are actually going to 1 router - but one is 1 hop and the other is 2… I’d rather have failover route for if a bgp drops or ip drop or something… Either way - I got work to do.
If i can knuckle down how it works - and I remeber - will post here. Otherwise hope that rough outline helps someone figure out their ECMP.
Will MikroTik support BGP multipath UCMP? I.e. to allow us to specify the bandwidth profile for each interface? And therefore perform load balancing across the interfaces either using:
Per packet (bad idea for stability/traceroutes etc)
Yes. But i also got ECMP enabled for Routes with having only 1 BGP-Instance. Don’t know why, but that should not be possible due this feature is not implemented including v7.19.3. Had no time to check, why my routes were ECMP, but it should not.
