I did not turn aggressive mode on BartoszP … I am asking a question of why my issue is not understood by the poster referring to the RFC … capiche BartoszP?
Yes, you did.
Capiche is quite not too friendly beginning. Isn't it? Is it my low level of literacy in English or I just "improperly smell" Don Mozerd "asking" for help? 
In Italian, said that way, it's an insult.
Let's get straight to the point, just the facts:
- @mozerd has a problem; in fact, he's the only one complaining about that exact problem.
- @mozerd took it upon himself to resolve the issues with his ISP ("causes the problem for me and my ISP").
- The problem occurs with a specific modem: the "Rogers XB8 Cable Modem."
- @mozerd contacted support.
- It's unknown whether @mozerd contacted the manufacturers of the "Rogers XB8," that they should be the ones to solve the problem (which, I repeat, apparently only affects that model now).
- @mozerd is frustrated because he's not getting a response from support, and is taking it out on forum users.
- @mozerd had some discussions, which apparently led both to verify that RouterOS was working properly.
- @mozerd refused to provide details on the forum, such as configuration and pcap.
- @mozerd demands more attention than is due from forum users.
- I'm not surprised that soon, almost by chance, another recently registered user starts complaining about the same thing... perhaps with the same hardware... and the same ISP...
"He who has ears to hear, let him hear"
Except, it was working in 7.22, and in 7.23 it's not... That does not point to the ISP modem being at issue.
But if up to now from 7.23alpha no other incompatibilities with other devices have emerged for the same problem (at least it seems so),
if "all" the others work and "this one doesn't", regardless of RouterOS or not, for me the cause is the device that doesn't work, which has a poor implementation.
This reminds me of a recent issue where RouterOS was strictly compliant with the standards,
but they had to add something for devices that didn't follow the standards...
It was about the MTU, if I remember correctly...
How many people try/run testing channel? Majority waits for stable release. Then things go fast.
However it could be as is the Mozerd's configuration the only one on the Earth that suffer from 7.23 or are there more such problems?
Yep, that is evident enough.
IIRC it was about DHCP option order in DHCPv4 assignment. MT changed order to sorted accoring to option number and apparently some DHCP clients were upset because they expected to get options in some non-sorted but particular order.
Yes, standard doesn't say anything about option order, so MT was technically correct ... but they had to revert the change never the less.
Not necessarily.
If ROS starts to observe more strictly certain standards it might break things with other devices who do not choose to do so.
Not saying that's what's happening here, just indicating it IS possible.
There was a discussion lately on CISCO switch dated circa 2015 that does not work anymore as expectred as MT's DHCP server obeys rules more strictly and do not answer to wrong requests.
Noone even tries to ask CISCO for software upgrade for these devices.WHy? It's easier to whine about changes to Mikrotik as they keep old gear working for free.
CORRECT, its not a modem problem nor is it my configuration … the problem is 7.23rc.x period.
From ROS version 6.48 and all the way through to RoS version 7.22.3 my CCR1009 had no issues connecting to the rogers PON Network.
The other major difference is that from ROS version 6.48 and all the way through to RoS version 7.22.3 each and every upgrsade in RoS Software and Firmware my cable modem did not need to be restarted.
The upgrade from RoS 7.22 to RoS version 7.23rc.x forced me to restart my cable modem and when I downgraded back to RoS 7.22.x I also had to restart my cable modem … that is a VERY big change in behaviour.
Have you tried 7.23beta also?
No … only the rc build …
Would be another clue to know the first exact public version things broke for you.
I do not see the value in running a beta of 7.23 at this time … I have provided more than sufficient evidence of the issue … What does irk me is that that Mikrotik requested in an email that i supply them with a support.rif file that created this specific issue which I did but they have not had the courtesy of informing me of their analysis <> its been over 2 weeks …
Your specific problem might be of less importance than other problems. Do you have a specific reason for your upgrade?
If MikroTik is implementing a more strict implementation, I only can praise them. Assuming it is because of security reasons. But at the same time I can imagine you being frustrated.
My advice, just wait untill support gives a respons. And be patient. Untill such time, don't upgrade (yet).
Not a specific reason but As a techie I like to test things out and be uptodate
Psst, hey you, yes you, come here. I have something for you. 