Quote:
What’s new in 6.0beta2 (2012-Apr-19 16:33):
*) “/ip address set” and “/ipv6 address set” commands did not work properly; (2012-apr-16 14:26):
*) fix eoipv6 tunnels, tunnel-ids in packets were shuffled;
*) fix dynamic simple queues;
*) fix /ipv6 firewall connection-state matcher, was crashing router;
*) fix traffic generator, was crashing router when generating traffic on bonding interface;
*) fix wds interfaces;
*) downgrading to v5 was losing wireless interface configuration;
*) fix queue byte and rate statistics;
*) fix ethernet port order on all boards;
v6.0 includes many changes, we suggest it for testing environment until you are confident that it works with necessary configuration.
Please, submit all reports to support@mikrotik.com (include suppout.rif file).
for me, it’s not fixed avg-rate is still ~8 times lower than actual rate
queue is yellow, means avg-rate is > 10 Mbps maybe, it’s now in kilobytes, not kilobits?..
I used to have the Queue tree working in 5.14 but when l upgrade to 6.0beta2 it all became inactive
and i now only have global.
Can someone show me how this is done in 6.0
Thanks
I am experiencing sub-optimal performances. IPv6 runs better than IPv4 (40Mbit/s with IPv6, 20Mbit/s with IPv4 on a single TCP connection over a 120Mbit/s link). Tested on RB750G and RB1100AH, RB1100 and RB1100AHX2. I noticed Rx drops on bridge interfaces and on gigabit ethernet interfaces.
I am a total noob.
How do you decrease the power of the AP? And what is a good value?
I have connected an ASUS N16 as another AP and can get double the internet speed connection accessing through that but accessing internet using the MT router AP I get terrible speed.
Please advise
One more GUI bug…
Seems to be more than just the extreme numbers. Many standard rules does not have anything…
MikroTik do you want a supout? or is this enough?
System is RB800 v6b2 with 2 Radios and the system clocked to 1200Mhz.
IPv6 Firewall seems to be missing its functions… I did a firewall test against http://ipv6.chappell-family.com/ipv6tcptest/ and my normal stealth just went refused and they found port 135 as open. And my computer responded to ping.
Our X86 platform with ROSv5 has huge problem with high latency and slow packet transfers when active PPPoE clients reach over 800. We found that reason of issue is simple queue rules. Therefor we have tryied ROSv6beta2 on this platform.
Our peak hour load is 1200 queue simple rules, 1200 pppoe active sessions, 200mbps download / 70mbps upload on WAN1, 100Mbps download / 50Mbps upload on WAN2.
Testing result:
CPU usage was very good. When ROSv5 CPU usage is 30%-40%. When ROSv6 CPU usage is 15-25%.
Latency is better than ROSv5. But I`m not sure. Because we could not tested it when active clients reach to max.
Very big issue that router reboots suddenly, when active clients reach over 800. But I`m not sure. Because there is no error log, just rebooted suddenly few times. I know exactly that issue depending on router load. Load can be queue simple rules, pppoe sessions and total traffic load.
Chupaka, thank you for the report about the changelog. It has been fixed.
We are researching the rates problem, hopefully they will be fixed at the next version.
TKITFrank, thank you for the both reports!
About IPv6, what do you mean that firewall missing its functions?
Which of the rule does not work?
pateutz, contact support with the attached support output file.
alexspils, more information is required about your problem.
I have created new security-profile at 6.0beta1 RB532, upgraded RouterBOARD to 6.0beta2 version and security profile is saved.
avg-rate is still ~8 times lower than actual rate 
