X86_64 ROS - 64bit Mikrotik

karwos · Tue Jul 25, 2017 7:29 pm

Guys is there any real *benefit* from running CHR in x86_64 native environment?
I know VM puts some overhead, but c'mon, that's not 2006, It's 2017 when most of hardware, including CPUs and NICs have hardware virtualization support.
Overhead is small nowadays, I am running two BGP servers and they are just work perfect in CHR.
Plus, you can also monitor your CPU/mem usage, and add some additional , low-priority tasks like DDOS monitoring or anything you like, and mirorr all traffic inside VM kernel, no need to occupy switch space.

Plus you just dump your VM image for backup/restore schemas. I think VM is *correct* future, unless you forward really huge amount on traffic, but then you already need specialised routing or MPLS asic for that ...
Also you just use vmxnet3 driver (if not passthroughing), and don't care about underlaying hardware in most of cases.

I just think that there's just more advantages than disadvantages of this way.

my 2 cents.

gdo · Wed Jul 26, 2017 1:08 am

Think Mikrotik

Chupaka · Wed Jul 26, 2017 10:39 am

I am running two BGP servers and they are just work perfect in CHR.

what traffic do you have on them?

BGP without full view works perfect on any RB hardware

Kreacher · Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:45 am

Hello to all,

I was ready this thread very carefully and also "between the lines" and must now please enter that discussion about the x86_64Bit, because there are some things
about that must be spoken if you are talking about MikroTik and x86_64Bit. (Only in my opinion)

I company rules, from who given, dictated or written, all employees of a company should and must follow! And this is surely not on at MikroTik in Latvia so,
because we all have wishes, demands and/or needs that could be "easily" solved out by a x86_64Bit router software, it means that this must be not seen
on both ends of that discussion. And yes, I respect the standing point of MikroTik Latvia and perhaps their partners or suppliers, but for sure it will be fine
to get in deeper zone of this forum thread. At first I want to say thanks to MikroTik to give us a forum and podium to discuss this out and that freely and on
the other side because I really know many of us are in business contact with MikroTik and their complete product portfolio and being not only home users.

But then money comes into the game play and the company MikroTik must also see what they will get from their clients and customers, for sure it sounds
nice to get hands on a MikroTik RouterOS x86_64Bit version, but is it worth to play then with the whole company security? Who gives them a promise that
only one copy will be used or if someone will be installing one system and copy it over and over and over only with one License code? What is then? Who
cares then on their business and an their income or plain on their money? For sure getting hands on a copy will be fine but how many users will then trade
over P2P networks this registered copy then?

I personally think x89_64Bit would be a really hammer smashing into the whole market and many router and firewall vendors must find then a way to answer
that! This could be a game changer, a cash cow and many things more for Mikrotik and for sure also us. But please also think on the other side of the business!

At this moment you will be able to see many changes in the market, AES-NI support here and there, Intel´s QuickAssist (QAT) is out and drivers are there for
Linux, DPDK (enabled software) could be transporting more then 3x the amount of IP packets then normal, and this using the same platform for sure. Multi-CPU
core usage and HT technology will be then doing the rest to get closer and come to a really routing champion device. HotLava is producing multi Port NICs with
original Intel Chipsets and that will lets gain up the entire port density of many routers for sure.

As for the memory lag and speed, this must be given both, the speed and amount must be matching right to that units, but with 64Bit no problem the most of us are
thinking. I mean really if there is not enough amount of RAM you can get surely into pain, but on the other side if the RAM is to low clocked the entire router system
can be saturated and you will be owning a freezing or lacking router then! Getting or producing huge packet losses or packet drops will be the result of that behaviour.

At this time we will see many existing and new platforms on the market for any kind of suitable cases and segments, all four areas will be served and sorted by only one
platform, for home playground, over SOHO market, entering the Pro area and ending up the enterprise zone. This could be a game changer for many of us. mSATAs and
SSDs will be able to hold big user manager DBs and/or TheDUDE Server instalments.

Home environments:
Helor Intel Celeron 1037U (dual core)
Jetway NF9HG-2930 (Quad core)
Plain routing, OpenVPN

PC Engines APU2C4 (Quad core)
Plain routing, IPsec (AES-NI)

SOHO market:
Jetway JNF592-Q170
Qotom bare bones
ASUS Q87T mini-ITX
Higher demand routing, AES-NI (IPsec) and OpenVPN

Pro´s area:
Supermicro C2358, 2558 and 2758 Series
Advanced routing, AES-NI, Intel QAT, Multi-Core CPUs

Enterprise area:
Supermicro Intel Xeon D-1513N3, 1523N3, 1533N3,1543N3 and 1553N3
Advanced and enhanced routing, AES-NI, QAT, DPDK and Multi-Core CPUs

Virtual (Multi-Router) VM installations:
Lanner FW-8995 and FW-8996
Many router instances on one device with many ports

Unleashing the full potential and power of Lintechs PowerRouter v3 or the OcmaConnect Routers should be also fine to see what is going on that site.

All can be feet with a regular Linux Kernel and drivers are out mostly or nearly for all devices such as NICs and other things. For sure it might be nice to see a 64Bit
platform from RouterOS, perhaps not at these days but in the near future would be glad to hear about, because there are many things that will be able to realize with
MikroTik´s RouterOS. And with an watching eye to an ARM Fork or support it would be nice to see RouterOS on SolidRun ClearFog Base or Pro boards or on the
TurrisOmnia routers too.

Chupaka · Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:07 pm

Who gives them a promise that only one copy will be used or if someone will be installing one system and copy it over and over and over only with one License code? What is then? Who cares then on their business and an their income or plain on their money? For sure getting hands on a copy will be fine but how many users will then trade over P2P networks this registered copy then?

Well, License fees are very small MikroTik's income part compared to RouterBoards sales

So actually nothing will happen to the business =)

karwos · Wed Jul 26, 2017 5:48 pm

I am running two BGP servers and they are just work perfect in CHR.
what traffic do you have on them?

BGP without full view works perfect on any RB hardware

total ~800k routes
CHR 6.37.5
vmxnet3 driver and PVSCSI driver
Connection tracking ON, few queue trees, 1k simple queues, couple of firewall rules (filter and mangle)

current traffic 850 - 900mbit, usage for each core:
core 1 - 990mhz
core 2 - 1241mhz
core 3 - 1322mhz
core 4 - 727mhz

Total 4280MHz out of between 16800MHz and 17600MHz avaiable (total 25% usage)

Stats for 300-350mbit of traffic:
core 1 - 615mhz
core 2 - 1678mhz
core 3 - 542mhz
core 4 - 386mhzz

Total 3221MHz out of between 16800MHz and 17600MHz avaiable (total 19% usage)

If using carefull delta-estimates, this machine would be able to route total between 5GBit and 6GBit of traffic, in current configuration
Suits for me

If Mikrotik would implement SR-IOV would be also significant less I guess, also add Vmware guest tools would be helpfull.

Kreacher · Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:47 pm

Well, License fees are very small MikroTik's income part compared to RouterBoards sales

And there for I was speaking from a total game Play changer!
- Linux Kernel and drivers are easily to get hands on and from the vendors side they will often be there
- Intel´s QAT Linux driver is ready to use for compression the data packet flow (both end situation)
- IBMs TPM SDK is OpenSource TMP Modules can be used for signing License IDs
- DPDK is there from Intel (netmap-fwd) speeds up to 3x the TCP/IP packet flow
- AES-NI as the integrated VPN Hardware support (IPSec)
- Intel NICs comes with good Linnux driver support
- FreeRadius, OpenLDAP and Tripwire Server integration
(ok license fees must be paid than)

Ok fairly the entire RouterOS must be written new, and this will be a real bunch of work, but what is then of this will be done?
You sell then license fees more then other things I guess, or am I wrong with that meaning? But my only concern was to think
about the entire licenses cheating by installing that in a VM and safe the money for that. Do you mean really that this will be
not a disaster for all the hard work of recoding and testing? Ok for sure this can really be.

guilhermeramires · Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:00 pm

But the one million dollars question is: This workaround to get x86_64 working on version 638.7 makes the system really works on 64 bits or its just a flag and fake data read?
If yes, I need to remember Janisk reply about memory addressing speed loss and consider that it does not worth if you do not need to use more than 2GB.

Chupaka · Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:29 pm

I need to remember Janisk reply about memory addressing speed loss and consider that it does not worth if you do not need to use more than 2GB.

as I can see, Janis was talking about PAE on x86 (32-bit) speed loss, not about 64-bit speed

PortalNET · Fri Nov 03, 2017 2:40 am

Hi boys

i have some doubts regarding the x86-64 architecture...

but first things first, is it just me or there seems to have a bug on all versions of mikrotik x86 that cannot read RAM memory available correctly? or is it just some versions or Memory RAM modules that does not display it correctly?

i installed mine 6.39.3 bugfix with 4GB ram hyperfury ddr3 1333mhz , and on memory only detected 1886mb memory..

then i uploaded the all package 6.31 x86 to folder and hit downgrade on system packages and installed 6.31 version.

went on system resources hardware and enabled multi-cpu and also hit tab x86-64 architecture... and my RAM memory reading on the mikrotik went up from 1886Mb to 3663MB total memory.. ok that seems a more realistic number of the memory insterted so i shutdown the PC, and plugged in another 4GB memory module with total 8GB ram, and rebooted the machine but still only detects 3663MB ram.

upgraded it back up to 6.39.3 bugfix version.. and readings on RAM now still 3663MB prior to the 1886MB intially...

aldo on system resources print i now get x86-64 architecture showing on the CPu..

  uptime: 12m
                  version: 6.39.3 (bugfix)
               build-time: Oct/12/2017 11:24:56
              free-memory: 3615.3MiB
             total-memory: 3663.0MiB
                      cpu: AMD
                cpu-count: 4
            cpu-frequency: 3817MHz
                 cpu-load: 0%
           free-hdd-space: 462.0GiB
          total-hdd-space: 462.1GiB
  write-sect-since-reboot: 2000
         write-sect-total: 2000
        architecture-name: x86_64
               board-name: x86
                 platform: MikroTik

Anyways i did further testings such as bandwith testings i wanted to check the internal cores max speed with all 4cpus available

so first bandwitdh test showed 13.5Gbps on UDP but only one CPU is used topped at 100% all other 3 cpus at 0% workload showing running only on 25% capacity

i did a second test on TCP mode and bandwidth test showed max troughput of 22.4Gbps again 2 cores only used leaving other 2 cores at 0% workload showing on mikrotik 50%

i am wondering if there is any limitation of the cores... because load is not sync , is there a way to distribute load on the 4 cpu cores?

doneware · Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:49 pm

i run x86_64 on an older server, "loaded" with ram. the main idea is to be able to host KVM VMs. it worked quite reasonably with just one VM running.

[bat@cloudtik] /system logging> /sys reso print 
                   uptime: 3d5h38s
                  version: 6.41.1 (stable)
               build-time: Jan/30/2018 10:26:14
              free-memory: 22.0GiB
             total-memory: 23.4GiB
                      cpu: Intel(R)
                cpu-count: 16
            cpu-frequency: 2266MHz
                 cpu-load: 0%
           free-hdd-space: 3663.5MiB
          total-hdd-space: 3766.4MiB
  write-sect-since-reboot: 484656
         write-sect-total: 484656
        architecture-name: x86_64
               board-name: x86
                 platform: MikroTik

now i have some more, but they just get all stopped suddenly, and i don't know why this happens. the VMs have 512MB-1024GB RAM each, and some negligible amount of hard disk image hosted on HDDs. so far i wasn't able to correlate this issue with any event, and i'm curious whether anyone may faced similar issues. The VMs use virtIO networking, each of them has its dedicated virtual ethernet that is routed (e.g. not part of any bridge).

Cal5582 · Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:08 pm

So ive been able to get this working, but i am unable to select wireless frequencies on my mikrotik wireless cards when x64 is enabled but if i revert back to 32 bit it works fine. It acts as if it cannot find the scan lists for my country. any suggestions?

nostradamus · Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:50 am

So ive been able to get this working, but i am unable to select wireless frequencies on my mikrotik wireless cards when x64 is enabled but if i revert back to 32 bit it works fine. It acts as if it cannot find the scan lists for my country. any suggestions?

the same issue with yours, it seems wireless not working under 64bit, my card chipset is QCA9380

Cal5582 · Wed Mar 14, 2018 5:19 pm

I'm using a QCA9880 R11e-5HacT for my 5 Ghz.

DanielJB · Fri Mar 30, 2018 8:05 am

there is a reason why RouterOS on x86 supports only 2GB - the speed of memory addressing. With high/low setups you would lose 5 to 10% of performance.

The cost of PAE is way lower on modern x86 processors, since they have such large TLBs (as are optimised for much larger datasets with 4KB pages), and all the processors are highly-optimised for the larger pointer size used in PAE anyway. I suspect Mikrotik don't enable x86-64 kernel by default as they are using an older kernel with vendor drivers that have some build/integration issues, so PAE may be a good lifeline until RouterOS v7.

So, just enable PAE for now. It's a big win for many cases, not only since the kernel can optimally size many network related hashtables, but also because there is less pressure (therefore page reclaimation) on various pools.

Finally, going CHR means lower uptime, as there is more configuration, performance overhead and patching for security issues due to the VM host. For maximum single-stream throughput on critical infrastructure, I cannot wait to recommend native x86-64 RouterOS.

Cal5582 · Tue May 01, 2018 5:44 pm

looking under the wireless package file it looks like the file structure is the same for 32 bit and 64 bit drivers as far as i can tell and theres even a 64 bit driver file so im confused as to why wireless is disabled for 64 bit router os. i mean i can go back to 32 bit, but with ddr3 being so cheap secondhand theres really no reason not to use 8 gigs of ram. I use this in kind of a homelab setting to test changes before they ever get implemented so i know im not the typical user, it just seems strange to have 90% of the functionality already implemented and hidden behind a simple flag and not use it when even atom boards have been 64 bit for the last 8 years or so.

Cal5582 · Thu Sep 06, 2018 6:20 pm

just wanted to note, that other than wireless this seems to work. currently using 6.42.7 and capsman with a few caps to cover the wireless issue.

samrock · Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:33 am

+1 for official support of this....

Wish I would have noticed this thread sooner.. I just spun up an new x86 on a Dell PE1950, Guess I need to go downgrade it and smash the x64 box!!

jmginer · Mon Sep 24, 2018 12:30 pm

+1 for native implementation to allow +2GB RAM in x86

Takv · Tue Jan 29, 2019 11:44 pm

+1 for native x86_64 implementation

enzain · Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:45 am

Need x64 os and EFI support now ...

rzirzi · Tue Feb 05, 2019 8:03 am

Need x64 os and EFI support now ...

EFI or AHCI disk support at x86 - PLEASE!

nishadul · Mon Feb 11, 2019 12:30 pm

It seems that krzysztof manually changed architecture-name: x86 to architecture-name: x86_64 only in post.
he also 'changed' free- and total-memory

now just look at 'Extra packages' links in Download page. this .zip contains everything including 'system' package (which contains the kernel, I believe )

X86 link:
https://download2.mikrotik.com/routeros ... 6.38.3.zip

CHR link:
https://download2.mikrotik.com/routeros ... 6.38.3.zip

now find the difference

so seems like 'x86_64' is just a flag somewhere in the file system

by the way, I have old good RouterOS virtual machine which was installed when no CHR existed:
Code: Select all
[admin@TestPlace] > system resource print 
                   uptime: 1w1d2h51m41s
                  version: 6.39rc38 (testing)
               build-time: Feb/24/2017 08:46:35
              free-memory: 21.7MiB
             total-memory: 88.4MiB
                      cpu: Intel(R)
                cpu-count: 1
            cpu-frequency: 2933MHz
                 cpu-load: 0%
           free-hdd-space: 58.8MiB
          total-hdd-space: 99.2MiB
  write-sect-since-reboot: 394778
         write-sect-total: 394778
        architecture-name: x86_64
               board-name: x86
                 platform: MikroTik
in some early v6 versions there was a checkbox under 'System -> Resources -> Hardware' for enabling 64-bit mode. looks like they removed it and created the CHR as a separate system

Hello,
ROS X86 6.38.3 is supported 64 bit?

Chupaka · Mon Feb 11, 2019 2:39 pm

Using that 'hack' - yes

Takv · Wed Mar 27, 2019 9:32 pm

Waiting to see Mikrotik staff come and says something ·"official".

Come'on Mikrotik! Bring us the official support! You have nothing to lose!

Steveocee · Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:02 pm

I can’t see them doing it..... they’ve previously been very vocal that you should run CHR if you don’t want to use a routerboard.

Takv · Thu Mar 28, 2019 5:29 pm

Its not "me or many" who wants not to use routerboards, it's the limitations of VM about 10Gbps, 40Gbps fiber modules, not needed usage overhead and the extra costs of HyVs. Why I need to use a VM if I can use a PC by my own to do the job? Why to depend in other OS to have the intended OS running? Undesired OS updates ruins the uptime, and also aggregates the extra security measures to avoid supporting OS become vulnerable to attacks.

We use routerboards, we love it, but in the Core we need the upgradeability and brute force from PC's.

marlow · Fri Apr 05, 2019 11:59 pm

Its not "me or many" who wants not to use routerboards,

Unfortunately the customer is not always King. At least in this scenario.

Either way ... thank you for those above, who have pointed out, how to get around this issue.

uptime: 57s
version: 6.43.14 (long-term)
build-time: Apr/02/2019 09:12:23
free-memory: 31.3GiB
total-memory: 31.4GiB
cpu: Intel(R)
cpu-count: 8
cpu-frequency: 2992MHz
cpu-load: 0%
free-hdd-space: 461.5GiB
total-hdd-space: 461.6GiB
write-sect-since-reboot: 3600
write-sect-total: 3600
architecture-name: x86_64
board-name: x86
platform: MikroTik

And those 3 GHz come by 8 physical cores

... in the form of 2 x quad core Xeon CPUs.

# CPU LOAD IRQ DISK
0 cpu0 0% 0% 0%
1 cpu1 0% 0% 0%
2 cpu2 0% 0% 0%
3 cpu3 0% 0% 0%
4 cpu4 0% 0% 0%
5 cpu5 0% 0% 0%
6 cpu6 0% 0% 0%
7 cpu7 0% 0% 0%

and that with 4x 10gig interfaces with SFP+ cage and 2x GigE on a box with hardware raid1 on 2 SSDs and a nice and tidy level6 license.

/M

rzirzi · Fri Apr 12, 2019 7:31 am

+1 for X86_64

GuJack20 · Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:06 pm

Hello guys

thanks for this informative and very useful thread.

Can you point out some models of NICs with 2+ SFP+ cages that you know that are recognized by and work great with 64bit?
Also some 40gbit SFP just for testing, but the 10gbit ones are enough for production in our everyday work.

Regards

jmginer · Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:10 pm

Hello guys

thanks for this informative and very useful thread.

Can you point out some models of NICs with 2+ SFP+ cages that you know that are recognized by and work great with 64bit?
Also some 40gbit SFP just for testing, but the 10gbit ones are enough for production in our everyday work.

Regards

We use FSCOM nics and transceivers working perfect with Proxmox v6

GuJack20 · Sun Jul 19, 2020 10:36 pm

Hello guys

thanks for this informative and very useful thread.

Can you point out some models of NICs with 2+ SFP+ cages that you know that are recognized by and work great with 64bit?
Also some 40gbit SFP just for testing, but the 10gbit ones are enough for production in our everyday work.

Regards
We use FSCOM nics and transceivers working perfect with Proxmox v6

Thanks for the reply. But I was thinking about bare metal.

rextended · Sat Jun 05, 2021 5:36 pm

search tag # install routeros x86_64 ENABLE_X86_64

For enable 64 bit on RouterOS x86 installation
(obviously installed on 64 bit hardware with more than 4GB of ram)

"simply"

remove hard disk and connect it on another linux PC
OR
use a bootable USB with linux (ubuntu setup for example) for access on ext3 internal storage

and on folder /system/rw

"simply" create empty file named

ENABLE_X86_64

warning: all uppercase, with _ and NO SPACES (with right -rw-r--r--)

put back the hard disk,

start RouterOS (x86_64 still not active),

put this on terminal (for "touch" and update the hardware preferencies on boot ramdisk):

/system hardware set multi-cpu=no
:delay 2s
/system hardware set multi-cpu=yes

you see two times the message on terminal:

ros code

echo: system,info,critical New hardware settings will take effect after the reboot
echo: system,info,critical New hardware settings will take effect after the reboot

reboot RouterOS,

now x86_64 is active.

:)

Emro Batmok Ot Meok

jspool · Sun Jun 06, 2021 7:42 pm

Personally I think that real performance will be reached when Mikrotik adopts VPP and DPDK. I use Mikrotik CHR and CCR for core routing and use TNSR for edge routing as the VPP and DPDK are impressive to say the least. The BGP performance is crazy good and it ends up being able to do about 10Gbps per core. Obviously this depends on the hardware but I have a Dell R440 with a E-2288G and two Mellanox 10G cards (soon to be 40G) and its set and forget. You can use it on bare metal or virtualized. I had a mild DDOS of 5Gbps and the TNSR was routing away and the CHRs and CCRs were tapping out. Now I will say the learning curve from Mikrotik to TNSR is quite a challenge but worth it if you are into the performance. If Mikrotik chooses to go down the VPP and DPDK then that will be a game changer.

Caribetech · Tue Jun 08, 2021 1:48 pm

Before update

Later update 6.31 to 6.47

Server Dell Tower 7910
2 CPU Xeon

rextended · Tue Jun 08, 2021 3:16 pm

6.45 to 6.47?
Or 6.45 to 6.31 to 6.47?
Or you create the file as I have described?

sbhokray · Tue Mar 01, 2022 6:27 pm

my doubt, after enabling the X86_X64 checkbox will it just show the architecture name as X86_X64 for namesake, or, it becomes truly a X64 based system.

Chupaka · Tue Mar 01, 2022 7:42 pm

At least, more RAM is available after the "conversion"

sbhokray · Tue Mar 01, 2022 11:47 pm

At least, more RAM is available after the "conversion"

agreed, but have you seen ram utilizations above 2gb from the total ram shown after the conversion?
am on the CHR installed on del power edge r710 on top of hiper-v. so far so good. touching around 535Mbps at the cost of 35% CPU. I configured 8 cores to the Mikrotik. is this kind of CPU load ok for such configuration?
am not looking at the X86 setup cause I know this will come to end soon by Mikrotik.

Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:12 am

Question:

I pretty much only use CHRs for my core routers and bandwidth shaper and BGP and NAT444 ( 60-thousand lines of NAT configuration for ports per live IP address for my CGN networks ).

Is an x86 with X86_X64 enabled any faster or slower than a CHR doing the same thing ?

sbhokray · Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:48 am

Question:

I pretty much only use CHRs for my core routers and bandwidth shaper and BGP and NAT444 ( 60-thousand lines of NAT configuration for ports per live IP address for my CGN networks ).

Is an x86 with X86_X64 enabled any faster or slower than a CHR doing the same thing ?

your post caught my attention. I am trying to implement nat444[CGNAT]. followed the guide on Mikrotik.
the problem is, few of my clients had no Internet and the things were good for other clients.
as that was an production server, I haad no time to take the coomfigaration print to share.
I will be greatly thankful if you can guide me on this.

Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:22 am

Question:

I pretty much only use CHRs for my core routers and bandwidth shaper and BGP and NAT444 ( 60-thousand lines of NAT configuration for ports per live IP address for my CGN networks ).

Is an x86 with X86_X64 enabled any faster or slower than a CHR doing the same thing ?
your post caught my attention. I am trying to implement nat444[CGNAT]. followed the guide on Mikrotik.
the problem is, few of my clients had no Internet and the things were good for other clients.
as that was an production server, I haad no time to take the coomfigaration print to share.
I will be greatly thankful if you can guide me on this.

Re: ... I will be greatly thankful if you can guide me on this. ...

Some questions related to your wanted build of a Mikrotik NAT444 configuration.
- What Mikrotik ( physical hardware or virtual CHR ) are you using ?
- How many CGN networks are you wanting to have a NAT444 configuration work with
- What size is your CGN network(s) - aka /21 or ./22 or /23 or /24 ( note - My network has twelve /21 ( 100.64.x.y/21 ) CGN network and each /21 in my use used eight live IP addresses.
- How many live un-used Internet IPs do you have available for your NAT444 ?

Based on your answers , and some additional questions later asking what actual IPs you have , I might be able to message or email you a paste and go NAT444 configuration that is pre-configured for your use.

North Idaho Tom Jones

sbhokray · Sun Mar 06, 2022 9:55 pm

your post caught my attention. I am trying to implement nat444[CGNAT]. followed the guide on Mikrotik.
the problem is, few of my clients had no Internet and the things were good for other clients.
as that was an production server, I haad no time to take the coomfigaration print to share.
I will be greatly thankful if you can guide me on this.
Re: ... I will be greatly thankful if you can guide me on this. ...

Some questions related to your wanted build of a Mikrotik NAT444 configuration.
- What Mikrotik ( physical hardware or virtual CHR ) are you using ?
- How many CGN networks are you wanting to have a NAT444 configuration work with
- What size is your CGN network(s) - aka /21 or ./22 or /23 or /24 ( note - My network has twelve /21 ( 100.64.x.y/21 ) CGN network and each /21 in my use used eight live IP addresses.
- How many live un-used Internet IPs do you have available for your NAT444 ?

Based on your answers , and some additional questions later asking what actual IPs you have , I might be able to message or email you a paste and go NAT444 configuration that is pre-configured for your use.

North Idaho Tom Jones

first, thank you so much for the help.
1. its an CHR7.1.3 on hiper-v.
2. I have total 3 CGN networks.
3. all are /24 networks[100.122.0.0/24, 100.123.0.0/24, 100.126.0.0/24]
4. for now, I have only 1 gateway IP address to use.

ros code

Who is online