Please implement TACACS autentication.
We can’t get your equipments certified in a ISP without that feature.
1+
Yes! +1, pretty please?
BUMP - I originally posted this: Wed Mar 21, 2018 3:28 pm
Please increase Simple-Queue limits - they max at 4,294 Meg (aka 4.294 Gig)
ROS Simple-Queue - please increase the possible maximum limits and thresholds.
Currently on v6.41.3 and v6.41.2 (don’t know about older versions and I have read nothing in newer versions) ,
The current maximum possible value for “Max Limit” and “Burst Limit” and “Burst Threshold” is “4294M”
The Simple queue will not accept any higher numbers.
This presents a huge problem. I have multiple 10-Gig networks and on some networks I must use bandwidth limiters which are much faster than the built-in restricted values.
An example of need: 10-Gig physical Internet connection (using CHR) - Purchased Internet speed need to be maintained by my network equipment. Problem - the Mikrotik ROS will not accept any values greater than 4294M in any of the Winbox Simple-Queue fields
North Idaho Tom Jones
Tom, did you write to support@mikrotik.com ? Because this looks not like feature request but like important fix 
No this is just established standard functionality hitting limitations as technology proceeds.
The queue mechanism uses 32-bit values (variables) and so the values are limited to 2^32
In fact practical limits are lower because “buckets of data” have to be calculated to be transmitted on each timer tick
and when the datarate gets so high the buckets become very large and those bursts could hit other limits or not play
along with others as nicely as you would like.
So it is not as easy to fix as you might think.
I suspect the simple-queue maximum value settings are going to be a bigger and bigger problem in the near future. - because of the new Mikrotik 40-Gig interfaces and newer/faster CPUs.
I can’t help but wonder how much of the 64-Bit CHR software actually uses 64-bit instrustions.
Many 64-bit CPU instructions use fewer CPU clock cycles compared to a 32-bit set of instructions doing the same software function.
If Mikrotik is gonna compete in the router throughput world with the other guys in the faster than 3-Gig enviornment, they need to do everything possible to gain every speed/function/feature advantage possible.
I think I will write to Mikrotik support.
North Idaho Tom Jones
EXTRA TAB CHANGE!!
The mere fact of viewing any of the parameters ACTIVATES the parameter and this is WRONG.
All entries should be blank and if you want to offer default settings, GREY THEM OUT.
Suggest putting an apply button or something.
This is not consistent with the rest of the filter rules.
Right now I call it the DANGER DANGER TAB. 
Huh… Any more details? What do you mean saying ‘Activates’?.. Why can’t you ‘deactivate’ it back?
Sorry chupka, I am just a beginner. I didnt know I was changing router settings just by looking at the paramaters in the ExtraTab.
In my limited experience when I clicked on the little arrow tabs, I thought I was simply viewing the default parameters in those selections.
I did NOT REALIZE that I was activating those parameters.
This is not consistent with how we apply items elsewhere in winbox.
Thus suggesting that the default entries be grayed out and one has an implement button when one wants to turn grey into white.
Or it is like every other
Or add a warning at the bottom of the EXTRA TAB. Stating, opening these items ACTIVATES them.
If you do not want them activated CLOSE after viewing.
The same with TCP Flags and ICMP Option in Advanced tab.
Also, DO NOT OPEN Bridge → Filters, there are 4 tabs and ALL OF THEM are like EXTRA! xD
As I stated, I am new to mikrotik.
To have to rely on intuition vice standard methods is a ridiculous way of setting up programming the router.
Every other selection I make on the router is checking a box, typing in a selection, pulling a selection from a pull-down menu.
I am not saying its wrong, just that from my perspective its bad design and terrible for the non-expert.
Would it hurt that much to have a fixed text at the bottom of the EXTRA TAB…
“CAUTION: Opening up the parameters via the arrow icons, activates the parameters. If the entries are not modified, the default settings are accepted”
OR
“NOTE: Up facing arrow icons indicates an ACTIVE parameter”
If I could add an image here, and not from an URL, I would post one to give you an idea. 
EDIT, posted in elsewhere for viewing here… the llama cannot be stopped.
Well that was less than useful… argggg Lets try that again…
I’ve posted a message on the forwarding protocols area, linked from here:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/t/feature-request-bfd-for-static-routes/119494/1
BFD support for static routes would be extremely useful. Basicly, a static route would have an attribute to use BFD to check gateway availability. It’s much better than check-gateway because it’s a standard and it will help both a Mikrotik router and a router from a different manufacturer to detect a link down event.
I think it’s simple to implement, even!
A new added feature I would like to see (when using Winbox to a client Mikrotik) , would be the ability to Tools–>Telnet–>Select (*) telnet and also select a port # to telnet to (and the same for SSH).
Example: Lets say a client Mikrotik has a natted LAN IP address of 192.168.1.1/24 and there is a web server on IP address 192.168.1.20 (possibly not running a non-standard port).
Normally, you can do a telnet to IP-Address:Port# , and when it connects, you can simply type in “GET /” to verify the web server is running. However, if you can’t telnet to an alternate port, then it becomes much harder to test out port - which might require a TCP/IP port forward on the outside WAN interface to the inside - then originate you telnet to alternate port from another machine.
Lets say you have a web server locally connected to the same network as your work station - try this: Telnet ip-address:80
At connection , you might not see anything - however type in this: GET /
And you will get some web server information so that you know it is actually running.
North Idaho Tom Jones
I agree that selecting port in Tools->Telnet should be possible, but until it happens, you can do it from Terminal, it already works there:
/system telnet address=192.168.1.20 port=80
-Will be great in /ip hotspot active see directly what “user profile” are using without using address-list
Those units that have multiple PoE out ports under ‘Health’ menu the option to read the amps - watts of the input. Thus we can see what the total consumption is for attached devices AND this unit itself.
For many battery/solar operated units it’s quit handy to see what the ‘real’ average power consumption is for a given actual setup.
(It would be even nicer if under ‘graphs’ a graph could be displayed for the last 24 hours of voltage amp/Watts consumption. Sometimes it is o so handy to know when batteries where charged (= high voltage) and when not (low voltage). The total power consumption also gives us a power budget over a 24 hour period. Power consumption depends on radio usage and that depends on actual data throughput. With a graph we can see if our actual power budget (batteries! Solar panels) are actually up to their task.
It is possible add something like Web Aplication Proxy / redirector for HTTPS (SSL/TLS) trafic? Mikrotik will be able DNAT or redirect HTTPS(generaly SSL/TLS connections with SNI) for specific URL to another IP. It will be usable for hiding more HTTPS servers with diferent URL behind one public IP, or for very simple HTTPS (SSL/TLS) load balancing.
The woobm is awesome, but it lacks the ability to paste. Please add a “paste” button.
Sorry Normis, and no disrespect to you, but what does influence this list? People screaming for proper vrf seperation, IPSec VTI Support, DHCP Option 82 Snooping in ROS, Proper BNG Features, IPv6 Needs alot of fixing, BFD (YMMV), BGPv4 MIB and many others.
But yet Kid Control turns up on a CCR??
Confused :S