I would already be very happy when they put an optional v6 BGP package into v7 until they have found the resources to complete the v7 BGP…
Are you sure it’s really as simple as adding some userland code and v6-stype BGP would magically work? I would be quite surprised if that was so.
also doubt that would work. guess if it was THAT simple, they might have provided such a workaround or implemented v6 “bgp code” straight to v7
but v7 AFAWK has been a complete rewrite based on a newer kernel (of course)
btw @MikroTik Support:
please look into security related ticket SUP-103257
I guess everything can be made more complicated than it needs to be. All I know is that standard Linux systems can route and can do BGP without any kernel modifications and with BGP running as a simple user process. And when making drastic kernel updates like version 3.x to 5.x, the same BGP user programs (quagga, bird) still work!
Once upon a time, MikroTik BGP was based on Quagga.
When MikroTik was called out for not giving back to the community whatever patches they made to the GPL software they used back then, instead of doing the right thing, the opted to re-invent the wheel writing everything from scratch.
And with BGP, they opted to re-invent the wheel twice, and both times it has been a disaster.
Honestly, I’ve lost all hope for MikroTik.
I still use v6 for small BGP deployments (for how ever long this can last - with new hardware not supporting v6), and for large deployments (ie full tables) I had to turn to proven solutions like Cisco.
How long can someone wait for a vendor to get their act together? It’s been a decade waiting for a working BGP. Enough is enough.
MikroTik culture struggles with pride. However, humility is bringing them out and I hope to see them do better. There is a great community here and something to build on.
Huge bug in script compiler: after two calls “” executes all functions defined in the script.
to find out how I got there:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/t/can-somebody-explain-how-this-script-works/163411/5
to quickly test the bug:
{
:local test1 do={:put “test1”}
:local test2 do={:put “test2”}
:local test3 do={:put “test3”}
:local test4 do={:put “test4”}
:local test5 do={:put “test5”}
}
@mikrotik
suggestion to move 6.49 into LTS to reduce user confusion.
Custome Design not work in webfig..
Are the RouterOS 6.4* releases vulnerable to CVE-2023-32154?
New version v6.49.8 has been released:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/t/v6-49-8-long-term-is-released/166879/1