Please check image
It may or may not be possible depending on the available functionality of the hotspot on the RPi and on how you actually want to handle the client’s addresses.
The PPPoE server will be attached to /interface vlan vlan-id=22, and if you insist on having the interconnection subnet to the RPi also in VLAN 22, so will be the Mikrotik’s IP address in that interconnection subnet. But there is no real reason to do it this way, and myself I would definitely prefer to use distinct VLANs for these two purposes.
There is no way to avoid that the IP addresses are assigned to the clients by means of PPPoE. You can let the RPi act as a RADIUS server for the PPPoE server running on the 'Tik and assign IP addresses to the clients via PPPoE based on their login name and password it receives via PPPoE (but in that case, there is no point to redirect the clients to the hotspot’s web page as it would be redundant), or you can let the 'Tik itself assign IP addresses from a pool autonomously and let the hotspot on the RPi ask its own login name and password on a web page and eventually NAT the addresses assigned by Tik.
In the latter case, the 'Tik has to route IP traffic from the clients to the RPi.
This is the only thing that the RPI hotspot can do
Can you please check my configuration?
You can use the Mikrotik as just a switch for VLAN 22, but in that case, you cannot use PPPoE between the PCs and the Mikrotik and the PCs have to be configured as DHCP, rather than PPPoE, clients on the Ethernet port connected to the switch, given that you state that the RPi hotspot needs to act as a DHCP server to work.
With the embedded PPPoE client of Windows, there is no way to use PPPoE to establish an L2 tunnel where all clients would be bridged together at server side and use DHCP to obtain their IP addresses. This would be possible if the clients themselves were Mikrotik devices as well, as BCP is supported on Mikrotik. The Windows PPPoE client only supports L3 tunneling, where the IP address assignment must be done using PPP’s own means.
Normally it is also not desired that clients unrelated to each other would share the same L2 segment, but this can be overcome using bridge horizon or port isolation, which allows to prevent the bridge from forwarding frames between any two client-facing ports.
I don’t understand the purpose of using PPPoE and hotspot simultaneously, as the purpose of each of the two is the same, to authentify the client and assign it the service category based on its identity.
Ok my apologies. On my diagram Instead of laptop let’s change that into routers. The router will now connect on the PPPoE that’s why I need the pppoe. It’s for routers. Some of my clients dont want voucher per device they want to be immediately connected and not per device but unlimited device as long as the router and the bandwidth can handle.
Which router and bandwidth “can handle”, yours or their?
But that’s a separate topic, the main topic is that you can do either of the following to fulfil that request:
- change nothing in the setup of your site and use a DHCP client on the client router’s WAN; in this case, the client router must act as a NAT device, but it is enough that the user authenticates to the hotspot from any device connected to the LAN side of the client router. But no public addresses can be routed to the client router, as the hotspot links the authentication to the single IP address it has assigned to the client
- use PPPoE alone to authentify the routers, bypassing the hotspot completely for this kind of clients (as these are authentified by means of the PPPoE login name and password) - in this case, the client router will most likely be configured as a NAT device too, but there is a way to assign a public subnet to such a client router (quite a complex one but possible) if you have a public range assigned and you want to provide public IPs to clients