I have a strange problem with Mikrotik Hex model RB750Gr3
I have gigabit internet on fiber and 5g network connected to my Mikrotik but I can’t really use more than 250 Mbps. Only if I reach full bandwidth can I activate fast track, and since I can’t use it as pcc and load balance with fast track activated, What should I do to fix this problem? According to the tests, the processor is not used more than 50% of the time, what is the reason? What is the limit?
CPU in hEX Gr3 is not exactly speed monster. It’s got 2 CPU cores (with 4 threads altogether but I don’t know how ROS utilizes that). And the gotcha: all packets of same connection are handled by same CPU core/thread (processing may move between cores, but there’s no parallel processing). And windows file transfers are single connection (AFAIK MS went ahead implementing multi-connection SMB transfers but it’s a new feature and not sll servers and clients support that), so all traffic hits same CPU core. Similarly single HTTP/HTTPS file download or (plain old) FTP and many more. Torrents are not affected (that much) as torrent clients communicate with many peers and processing of those connections is nicely spread over all CPU cores, but each individual connection is still affected.
And that’s what you’re seeing.
And a side remark: using PCC/mangle does not entirely disqualify fasttrack … just the fasttrack rule (which marks connections for fasttracking) has to be adjusted so that it only affects connections which don’t need mangling. Or create accept rule(s) which deal with connections requiring mangling and place it/them above fasttrack rule. I’m not saying that in your particular case this would help though.
@soheilsh have you seen the test results on mikrotik website?
Routing 25 ip filter rules 512 byte 265.2 Mbps
Your test results confirm that. This device is not suitable for your needs.
And the Hex refresh is roughly double of that, 498.1:
https://mikrotik.com/product/hex_2024#fndtn-testresults
still half the speed you want/need.
You need either (looking ahead) a RB5009 at around 3 Gb, $219:
https://mikrotik.com/product/rb5009ug_s_in#fndtn-testresults
or a hap Ax3 (as router), 1145.2, $139:
https://mikrotik.com/product/hap_ax3#fndtn-testresults
An Ax2, if you want to save a few bucks, is almost there, 912.9, $ 99:
https://mikrotik.com/product/hap_ax2#fndtn-testresults
I was just looking at the hap lite tc test specifications. Its speed is very close to hex. It’s really stupid. Hex has a 2-core, 2-thread processor, but hap lite has a single core with a low frequency!
I don’t know how this is a problem, but I was shocking by MikroTik. If I install the same hex on OpenWRT, the load balance speed is similar to PCC, giving me gigabit speeds.
Is there a way other than pcc that I can do two 500 Mbps internet links with hex link aggregation?
No, not when device is running ROS. You’ll simply have to accept that ROS is not the most performing OS on many of supported devices.
They are different architectures and hAP lite just might be using CPU which does more per core snd CPU cyle.
with Fasttrack you can get Full Speed with the 750GR3
and with 7.18beta this is also working with IPv6
In some use cases fasttrack can’t be used. E.g. in case by @OP.
Hard to assess if PCC vice ECMP is more useful without knowing the ISP particulars. ( speaking about need for mangling etc.)
really? 7.18beta pcc work with fasttrack?
if you really want significantly better performance you must go to next tier of MikroTIk devices like RB5009UG+S+IN
i know is more expensive but It is what it is
a halfway option is hAP ax²
both options offer very good price to performance ratio
Not suitable for a country whose currency has fallen against the dollar.
No I am saying since Vers7, ECMP is now automatically applied and is actually a more favourable load balancing approach IMHO.
It automatically provides load balancing when one has multiple WANs and one does not designate any distance difference between the WANs.
The real power is if one of the WANS lets say in a four ISP setup, is not available, ECMP will automatically distribute the load between the three other WANS.
To approximate the same thing in PCC is way more complex in comparison.
Where PCC comes into play is if there is much disparity between the ISPs in terms of throughput as the ECMP will not favour the larger throughput WAN and thus the available bandwidth will not be used in a reasonable proportion. With PCC you can modify the number of times in a cycle, the router goes to a specific WAN ( to ensure a larger bandwith ISP) sees more sessions compared to the lesser bandwidth ISPs. There is also some issues with banks needed to see sessions from the same ISP from a user etc… Although it may be less of an issue now than before.
One can achieve better load balancing granularity by bandwidth based load balancing but that is a step more complex than PCC…
As per Tomas - A sticky connection
• A sticky connection is a connection, that once
established through one interface, will always go out
that exact interface.
• This is required, because when we switch to a second
link, we only need to switch new connections.
• In PCC, this is done automatically. Using bandwidth based load balancing
however, this has to be done manually which implies a second layer of mangles
One then uses traffic monitoring to trigger an action above a certain traffic threshold → move sessions to next WAN ( via changing the routing table by changing routing mark )
Similarly one uses traffic monitoring to trigger an action below a certain traffic threshold —> move sessions back to this WAN ( via changing the routing table by changing routing mark)
What do you suggest now? What should I do? I don’t want to replace the hex, I want to fix the problem.
I consider this problem a cat and mouse game on the part of Mikrotik to buy a new device.
@MKX for the version 7 ECMP it uses L3 hash policy as depicted below.
Can you explain these further??
Is there a practical reason to consider L4 or L3 inner( what the heck is L3 inner) ( maybe one works better for consistent interactions with banks etc. )
…
I don’t have any experience or knowledge of ECMP. The terms you’re asking about sound similar to some terms from (L2) bonding (which I believe I understand well enough), but I’ve no idea whether they are actually similar or not. So I’ll pass this one.
Well the problem is not understanding the specifications available on the product pages or coming here to ask for assistance prior to purchasing.
In either case there is no way around the limits of using the routers with firewall rules in place to 1gig or close to your ISP without acquiring the correct product.
In your case the best approach is the hapax3, if budget is the issue.
The hex you have makes an excellent managed switch you can use on your network and/or as a backup router and/or travel router…