I’ve noticed an issue that might be related to the following threads:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/t/rb450g-openwrt-metarouter-strange-problem/32210/1
http://forum.mikrotik.com/t/reopen-metarouter-ospf-fail/34668/1
Currently playing around with 2 metarouter instances on an RB1000 and 2 metarouter instances on an RB1100 (both running v4.9).
I have the interfaces setup as static interfaces, bound to ethernet interfaces on the RB1000 and RB1100 like so:
/metarouter interface
add comment="" disabled=no static-interface=ether1 type=static virtual-machine=vm1 vm-mac-address=02:4C:44:51:2A:86
add comment="" disabled=no static-interface=ether2 type=static virtual-machine=vm2 vm-mac-address=02:FD:20:37:29:05
add comment="" disabled=no static-interface=ether3 type=static virtual-machine=vm1 vm-mac-address=02:9A:C7:DE:17:6F
add comment="" disabled=no static-interface=ether4 type=static virtual-machine=vm2 vm-mac-address=02:0F:03:19:4D:EF
I then add an ip address (I’ll use examples here to indicate) to the RB1000 and VM1
RB1000:
/ip address add address=192.168.1.1/24 interface=ether1
MetaRouter1:
/ip address add address=192.168.1.2/24 interface=ether1 comment="fiirst MetaRouter interface is also ether1 on RB1000"
So far everything looks good, and if I plug into that port and ping to 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2 I get responses from both.
However, 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2 can’t see each other, nor get a response.
I don’t see any arp lease appear for either of the 2 when trying to get a response either, they don’t even see each other in the mikrotik neighbours list.
Is this a bug, or am I mis-interpreting how the static metarouter interfaces should be used?