Mikrotik can definitely get the SFP information on at least Intel cards, if not all cards that take fibre modules.
Maybe once the v7 beta is out for CHR you could email support@mikrotik.com and request it.
i use mikrotik on a native x86 (non virtualized) core 2 quad, and i have an intel pcie4x dual port sfp card. I don’t know exactly which chip is on the board, whether it’s 82575EB or 82576, but for me there is no sfp tab when I open the ether1 or ether2 interface. (these are the names of the sfp interfaces on my mikrotik)
Bonding, at least with EoIP (utilizing PPPoE links) seems wonky.. some PPPoE clients dont have any upload traffic
Downgrading is a bit off.. seems I had to select stable, then manually upload filename as it could not download properly from depository. The filename didnt match what it wanted to download, so I renamed my local copy from web and then manually copied, overwriting the partial download on the mikrotik, then rebooted.. success
will play more with V7 later once they can fix the bonding (dont want to loose my bandwidth just yet).. seemed stable otherwise..
Please review the rules of the firewall and other open services unnecessary for home users. Perhaps by adding an operating mode for home with presets.
I would be glad to see your firewall rules for ipv6.
These firewall rules for home devices already exist. Upgrade your device to latest version, THEN reset to defaults.
When you need IPv6, first enable the package, then upgrade your device to latest version, THEN reset to defaults.
It doesn’t matter if IPv6 was/is enabled/disabled in v6, after upgrading to v7 it will be enabled, and upon executing /system reset-configuration , default IPv6 firewall rules will be added.
The default configuration for any package should be installed when it is first enabled, in this case when v7 is first started, but also in v6 when IPv6 is first enabled.
Unfortunately that does not happen in RouterOS, which leads to confusion and insecurity. Please add such a feature.
looks like beta2 is out:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/t/routeros-v7-limited-beta-available/133085/1
Changes in v7beta2
capsman - improved compatibility between v6 and v7 versions;
tr069-client - address support of server CA certificates;
winbox - re-added OSPF menu;
ppp - fixed "add-default-route" parameter for PPP interfaces;
ppp - fixed OVPN authentication with client certificates;
ppp - improved handling for TLS traffic;
ipsec - enabled EAP client authentication method;
other minor fixes;
https://mt.lv/v7
This time, we are also including the CHR images for more wide testing possibilities. Please report your findings.
And with CHR images! 
https://mt.lv/v7
Great!
beta2 tested the following
capsman - improved compatibility between v6 and v7 versions;
now cap client routeros6 connect to capsman routeros7 ONLY IF
certificates are used AND layer2 communication (not IP)
without certificates it never connects
with certificates and with IP it connects and gets “ident conflict” every 5-10 seconds
ppp - fixed “add-default-route” parameter for PPP interfaces;
pppoe add default route is working now
Updated my hap ac2, and the usb lte interface is not being detected 
Probably going to have to downgrade.
hello, what is the refresh rate per second of mikrotik voltage monitoring. thankful.
Thanks for the information. We can test it now.
Hi
Is Openvpn push route support from server to client
Thanks
What kind of modem do you have ?
My main LTE modem is a Huawei K5160, that is a recognised as a “CDC Ethernet Device” in linux (used to work fine in routerOS 6).
I also have an Alcatel Y858V, that is a recognised as a “RNDIS Device” in linux and is not detected in routerOS 7. But this one I’ve never tested in ros 6.
I also have access to other QMI devices, but still haven’t tested them.
Are we going to get VTI support or at least a usable implementation of OpenVPN? I say usable because RouterOS sometimes ignores my explicit interface bindings and bring up dynamic OVPN interfaces. That would be all fine and dandy but I’m running OSPF with redundant WAN links. The horrible site to site support is the biggest shortcoming in RouterOS; you essentially cannot make dynamic routing work reliably with a non RouterOS device on the other end of the tunnel.
For anyone who’s able to test OpenVPN UDP support in RouterOS 7, is it possible to have the OpenVPN server listening on both UDP and TCP at the same time with a single router? Otherwise, if you’ve already deployed with TCP, you end up with a chicken-and-egg problem switching to UDP (if you switch the server first, all clients are disconnected until they are reconfigured; if you switch the clients first, they can’t connect until you also switch the server).