Yes, we would like to see this and /127 supported as well. MikroTik says no need because we have /32 but /31 and /127 are so standard in terms of router support, it makes MikroTik seem like the odd ones out if they do not support it.
It is great that /127 is supported, I assumed it would be in the same boat as /31. I did know they are separate RfC’s but they have a similar purpose, so I wouldn’t say it is “completely unrelated”. Or are you saying that the Linux kernel somehow does not support /31 but supports /127?
I think /31 support is important. As much as I push for IPv6, the world is still operating IPv4 and will be for a while. I’ve run into the problem more and more where we have to use Cisco or Juniper due to lack of official /31 support. (many orgs do not want to use the /32 workaround)
What does this even mean? Are you adding features on the v7 status page just to say it’s not going to be supported?
And why should we stop asking for features that are not supported? Isn’t that the whole point of asking, because we obviously want the feature.
A better answer would be: “yes we aim to add this feature in v7”
Or “no this will never be added because of x or y”
That way we will know if it’s worth investing time in routeros.
It says /31 is not supported right now - the fact it is on the list suggests that /31 support is potentially intended for a later release. The red boxes on the left have been turning green as we move further through the v7 beta releases. I assume the point of that page is that when the rightmost boxes are all green, we may be getting closer to a ROS v7 stable release?
Plenty of things don’t support /31 addressing, even Windows being one of them
While it is useful for PtP links is this really such a huge problem? In my books it’s more “nice to have one day” but there are many more things which should be a priority over /31.
Here’s a big part of the reason - in North America at least, MikroTik is often viewed as a tinkertoy router solution. /31 support is something that any half decent router is expected to support. MikroTik not supporting that just means a lot more “see, told ya so, this MikroTik thing is garbage, they don’t even support /31, Cisco is way better”. It is hard to convince them otherwise when, aside from MikroTik, the only major router vendors that do not support /31 are vendors who make routers that are mainly intended as firewalls, such as Check Point.
Since it’s supported (works) one way already 