Since this is related to a product that is meant to be run on a virtualized platform, the topic shall lay here.
What issues are there going to be if I run a CHR instance on bare metal? I have an P1 license but only a bad hardware that performs suprisingly bad when virtualized. I’m running 2 core i3 processor which doesn’t even support VT-d, so I couldn’t passthrough NIC’s. That’s where the problem is: when using vSwitches, my network performance is so bad and is peaking CPU, yes, the driver is peaking it, not CHR!
So, do you allow me to copy the image to a hard drive and run it straight?
The main issue is that it’s not meant to be run on bare metal. I didn’t try it myself, but it looks like it will refuse to run. If you want RouterOS on bare metal, you need regular x86 one.
The CHR doesn’t have all the drivers it would need to run on bare metal. It is intended to ONLY run in a hypervisor as a guest virtual machine. If your intent was to run virtual machines, you should’ve picked up hardware that has native support for virtualization. Even cheap $200 barebones systems now support virtualization, so you should be able to pick up some reasonably-performing hardware pretty cheap.
Well this is ridiculous then, the x86 licensing sucks ass and the CHR seemed to be better option with it’s flexible licensing scheme. Maybe i’ll switch vendor alltogether, too much pain in the ass with Mikrotik’s bureaucracy.
Oh, he’s just upset because he didn’t take the time to understand that CHR is virtual ONLY and didn’t get appropriate hardware to support it. And apparently it’s OUR problem. HAHAHA
Look he has a point, it would be awsome to run Mikrotik ROS on supported bare metal hardware for a once off or yearly fee. E.g hardware that is basically merchant silicon, or based on the facebook wedge etc. It would be nice for people that want a GUI, do not need SDN support and where Cumulus is too expensive. It would also mean Mikrotik would not need to manufacture “high end” hardware.
Hmm…it seems to me that you can do exactly what you’re saying. Just buy an ROS license (most people would probably do well with a level 4 license - $45) and install using x86. You just have to remember that even the x86 platform doesn’t support all hardware, so you’ll need the check for compatibility. The only downside is that there is no bare metal 64-bit ROS, but few people ever need more than 2GB of RAM, so x86 should be fine for most users.
How is the CHR license better than X86? The benefit works for virtual systems as you can move the license around. In X86 you can already move the HDD around, so there is no difference.
The license is not better. It is different. And you can move the license between the chr instances as you wish. You will not loose it by hardware damage like in case of x86.
A single licensing scheme would be nice. Something to the effect of this: You purchase X number of licenses, which are tracked through a support portal. When you install an instance of ROS (virtual or bare metal), you input a key obtained from the support portal that is linked to your account. The router then contacts the licensing server and provides the key to check for available licenses. Assuming you haven’t already used all your purchased licenses, the router retrieves a license and registers its hardware ID in the portal so you can track which devices you’ve licensed.