I believe it is clear that this request is nonsense.

+100500

This request isnt nonsensical and is possible to do yourself if you were to hack the box. Essentially all you need is cups for printing and xsane for scanning. Based on the missing network features on mikrotik i think they should implement those first before print server. Infact my suggestion is to allow the installation of 3rd party software in some form such as java for example so that mikrotik can focus on network features but the community can add features that would benefit other people too like home users.

Refer to openwrt about gaining root shell in mikrotik.

Another option if your routerboard has usb is to power a raspberry pi from it and implement cups and xsane which will give you driverless print and scan on the network. However i still preferred if the routerboard were to run all the functions as i have a CCR and UK's fastest internet doesnt register any cpu usage so i try to offload as much as i can to my CCR.

using cups and xsane is better than any solution currently present in consumer routers.

Can you ´post some link to the cups and xsane on router?

Otherwise it's HOME and OFFICE router wit USB which is now almost useless...
Why I should by new printer just for network sharing when I have already some good one at home? And I have home router with USB?

On OpenWRT I use now VirtualHere. It's not opensource, but there is a free version which is OK just for printer...

Isn't better to use printer with network interface instead?

I'm sure it is. But you do realize that people asking for print server feature are most likely ones who already have a printer, but it doesn't have built-in network interface, right? And if the lack of network interface is that printer's only flaw, they probably don't want to throw it out and buy a new one. And neither they want to buy dedicated print server, because they already saw that some home routers are able to handle it too. Perhaps they even had such router themselves and replaced it for whatever reason by supposedly superior MikroTik device, only to find out that it's not superior in all possible aspects.

Sure I know that. Hopefully those people will not be heard by mikrotik.

I could not imagine that someone is asking CISCO to implement print server in their routers. Routers , not their SOHO's Linksys.
Mikrotik is as cheap as SOHO router "for everyone" but is not such kind of device.

I can't even imagine that Cisco will have something like winbox and so nice terminal

People, stop this print server issue. You will never get over the hypocrisy of ISP people.

Experts on this forum know your needs better than yourself and decided you don't need printing support on your MT home router.
As you don't need sharing of a hard drive connected to your router, for that matter.
But of course you need pfsense support, advanced queues, romon, MPLS, NV2, capsman and all the other advanced stuff which of course is a must on a home device you pay for. But network printing or USB over ethernet is "no no no".

You should get a new printer with network capabilities. Your current brand new multifunctional unit is bad. If you didn't get it with
networking capabilities it's your fault. What kind of bs is a color laser printer/scanner/fax combo if it doesn't have a network interface? Throw it out, get a new one, even if it costs 20-30 times the price of that router.

You have no right to ask for what YOU need, it's all about them. Because ISP experts don't give a damn, and see only their needs:
Cheap devices they can drop at their customer premises, and if possible never need to touch them again. Printer support would give those so called ISPs headaches because people would want to use it. And that means supplemental support work for them.
If they could squeeze out 10 cents more out of you, your needs don't matter. It's only their needs.

So no, no one wants/needs printer support. Experts on a user support forum decided it is nonsense

Very nicely written. I fully agree with it.
But it is only half of the truth.

Really, I have no need for network printing myself, but I don't understand this war.

Most modern network printing support is done via USB over ethernet methods. It is simple, efficient, and puts almost no load on the network device itself, at least no more than a simple tunnel. There is no need for cups and other linux specific printing services. The user just sets up a virtual printing port, installs the printer drivers on his machine and everything else is transparent.
And this approach also supports scanners, faxes or other usb devices, without special demands on the router itself.
There are driver included with most modern operating systems, and deploying such a support as an independent package would not interfere with anything networking related and would not impede on high end models which just would not have that packet installed.

And the actual network pros could benefit from it, since it is not only printer oriented. It could transport a remote console as well, or field access to a file repository on portable hard drive.
There is such a protocol implemented in ROS, as remote USB port supporting console only. What is missing is the access management/arbitration part so that multiple users can access that port, as it is done in those cheap USB "print servers", and of course the driver support for other OS, since it has to conform to existing implementations or provide its own port drivers.

I know that there is a fear that such a feature would redirect some of MT's development effort towards this feature instead of networking. But such a feature is neither urgent, nor very resource hungry from a development point of view, compared to advanced networking features. Especially in the testing/validation part.

All fear it is a strain on MT's developers. I would say it is an opportunity to get a new developer into the team, and use him later on other features

Actually mikrotik already supports print sharing. First you need a routerboard with a usb port. Plug a raspberry pi into it, then plug the printer into the raspberry pi. Install cups and xsane on raspberry pi and you will now have a printer and scanner sharing through usb on mikrotik

For mikrotik CCRs i suggest changing the PSU with a better one so that your raspberry pi wont freeze.

Dont forget to plug the ethernet of the raspberry pi into the router/switch

Very elegant... mikrotik supports printer sharing when using another computer to do it... right. And what about print servers? They are supported by mikrotik too, as long as they use ip protocols... what is more, they do not need to be even powered from mikrotik, because they are by default equipped by their own power supplies

People, stop this print server issue. You will never get over the hypocrisy of ISP people. ... Experts on this forum know your needs better than yourself and decided you don't need printing support on your MT home router....As you don't need sharing of a hard drive connected to your router, for that matter....

I would say it is an opportunity to get a new developer into the team, and use him later on other features

You have forgot to mention fax support and scanner support as these home "printers" are mostly not only printers but multifunction devices ... ops ... what about handsets to support skype or VoiP phones or USB camera for monitoring or ... why to limit ourselves ... plug USB speaker and listen to the Mikrotik's brand new Spotify player or plug USB to VGA coverter to watch YouTube ... I do not think that ONE developer will be enough

Why no one have already combined oven with microwave device and dishwasher ? It could be a PERFECT spacesaver for small apartments ... what a bright idea, don't you think ?

You have forgot to mention fax support and scanner support as these home "printers" are mostly not only printers but multifunction devices ... ops ... what about handsets to support skype or VoiP phones or USB camera for monitoring or ... why to limit ourselves ... plug USB speaker and listen to the Mikrotik's brand new Spotify player or plug USB to VGA coverter to watch YouTube ... I do not think that ONE developer will be enough

You obviously have no clue what I was talking about... You do not care about the device on a USB over ethernet approach. You just have to transport USB traffic transparently. There is no development effort for a specific device class, just for the virtual USB adapter, the router side being actually almost implemented by that remote USB serial port part. So it could be a 1 man effort.
And yes, you could plug your USB to VGA converter in and it would work. An access point with USB video converter plus a big screen connected to it makes a wonderful advertisement billboard with remote content management. BTW, this brings more money than a CPE.

Why no one have already combined oven with microwave device and dishwasher ? It could be a PERFECT spacesaver for small apartments ... what a bright idea, don't you think ?

Yes, it actually would. Throw in an expresso machine and and a refrigerator and it gets even better: Integrated Kitchen Appliance Unit. Even with remote control over internet. This could actually be viable and a good idea for a startup...
Internet of things, anyone?

But back to your question of "why": Why do you need routing protocols on a home class router like the hAP or on a simple access point? Why do you need capsman on them? Why do you need winbox instead of the web interface? Why support NV2? None of this is required for home use.
And, if you look into late development, MT steers toward the home user market, because money is in numbers, not in a few elite users.
There are more home routers supporting print server and HDD sharing out there than those supporting advanced routing and management features . So by the same logic you apply, I could say, those advanced features are the ones that shouldn't be there, development should stop and they should focus on features needed for home users. Throw out YOUR gear and get your Cisco if you need such stuff. Waste YOUR money. As home users should waist theirs by throwing out their existing stuff and getting a network printer. It is the same logic, nothing is changed except the target.
The microwave dishwasher combos are the small, cheap, SOHO MT routers featuring carrier grade functions, which YOU use to save money, not the ones with included print servers and file sharing people use at home, which are the norm, not the exception. YOU want an exotic device, not the SOHO users.

But the answer is obvious: You are supporting yours needs only, and deny the needs of others. This is called hypocrisy my friend...

PS: My printers are network printers and I actually don't need this feature, and probably never will. But I don't shut people up by telling them that what they want is nonsense.

I'm perfectly aware what you are writing about.

Primo: IoT is not the same as mixing oven with dishwasher. Managing/monitoring devices using some kind of standarized protocol/communication method called with big marketing word an "IoT" is not mixing such different worlds as fire and water.

Secundo: making USB shareable port for LAN users is not implementing printserver what is the main demand for this topic.

Tertio: To use USB port to connect printer or any other device you need to have them close to each other so do you think that printers are located close to routers ?

Quarto: nowadays for most home users network means WiFi connection and they connect via WiFi and devices (read printers) are expected to use WiFi not cables so USB is starting to be passé.

Primo: IoT is not the same as mixing oven with dishwasher. Managing/monitoring devices using some kind of standarized protocol/communication method called with big marketing word an "IoT" is not mixing such different worlds as fire and water.

I know what IoT is, and I specified the monitoring part. And you are right, you don't mix fire and water, SOHO with serious routing.
So please request the removal of advanced features from all low cost MT models. This is such a mixing.

Secundo: making USB shareable port for LAN users is not implementing printserver what is the main demand for this topic.

Most users want to share their existing printers in their home or office, they don't give a damn what's behind it as long as it does the job. This was exactly the main demand: printer support.

Tertio: To use USB port to connect printer or any other device you need to have them close to each other so do you think that printers are located close to routers ?

Why do you assume that routers have to be far away from the printer. Why do you think MT builds routers in neat plastic cases or with LCD screens on the top? Because they sit on an office table, not in a rack...

Quarto: nowadays for most home users network means WiFi connection and they connect via WiFi and devices (read printers) are expected to use WiFi not cables so USB is starting to be passé.

As long as you don't give away money for new equipment that meets your expectations, please don't make assumptions. Cables are far away from passé because they are reliable and fast. And not everyone likes to throw out working equipment just because it is not in line with the newest IPhone generation trend.
Why do we still deploy ethernet and fiber optics? Because WiFi, BT, 3G, 4G and LTE are fantastic?

Anyway, the issue is not what's trendy or not, the issue is not to get hysterical on the fact that other persons may have other needs than yourself. These needs are bluntly dismissed by a bunch of people which think they know what others shall or shall not do.

In the end it is all about respect. It was a feature request like any other, supported by some. Don't want it, don't use it.
But do not classify it as nonsense or useless just because you don't need it (you as a hypotetical reader, generally speaking). Netwoking feature requests where never dismissed by home users, even if they don't need them, or never even heard about them. Show the same respect to home user requests, like this one, too.

Using the cups and xsane means driverless printer and scanner server, only the raspberry pi needs the drivers. On windows you would select a specific driver preincluded but on all other OS it will work fine. Its what i did for quite a while and i usually suggest people to do that by adding a raspberry pi to do the jobs that routers suck at. The printer and scanner sharing on consumer routers are terrible as you need to install the drivers so thats additional bloatware. With cups and xsane you dont.

So its why routers shouldnt really try to have their own print server, if they want they should add cups and xsane instead.

The problem with xsane is that it is an gtk/x11 application. There is no X11 support on a mikrotik router. And adding minimal x11 support libraries to allow such applications to run would probably at least triple the size of the firmware. On the other hand, it requires storage space for temporary scanned files, which is not plenty by default on MT routers.

sane is a gtk application, xsane uses a web server so you just use your browser. It may require libraries to handle the graphics and file conversion bit but you shouldnt store this on your router's flash regardless, the files should be stored on an sd card or usb flash drive at least.

So please request the removal of advanced features from all low cost MT models. This is such a mixing.

Just disable unwanted packages and ask Linus to remove some advanced networking funcionality from Linux.

Most users want to share their existing printers in their home or office, they don't give a damn what's behind it as long as it does the job. This was exactly the main demand: printer support.

OK but there are many cheap specialized solutions so why to pack it into router ? If we block the only one USB port with printer so we need the second one for disk to make NAS. NAS is so obvious for home use as printer support. What about the third one for backup LTE dongle ? The fourth we need for ... and so on, so on ....

Why do you assume that routers have to be far away from the printer. Why do you think MT builds routers in neat plastic cases or with LCD screens on the top? Because they sit on an office table, not in a rack...

Do you thing that all use racks ? Do you think that rack in the apartment is "must have" ? Do you have one in your home nearby you desk or TV set ? That is why MKT does make plastic desktop versions. It is much easier to place plastic ones on the desk or in the box where all cables are concentrated (if you have such central place) or as AP over false ceiling than rack version. Small plastic box could also be installed in the rack. LCD is just a toy as we know that it eats so many CPU resources that is it better to switch it off.

As long as you don't give away money for new equipment that meets your expectations, please don't make assumptions. Cables are far away from passé because they are reliable and fast. And not everyone likes to throw out working equipment just because it is not in line with the newest IPhone generation trend.

I do not make any assumptions. Maybe I do not want to pay more for MKT devices just because they need to pay developer for implementing print server funcionality instead of Bonjour protocol for iOS and MacOsX printing ?
Most printers with USB connector demand host printing drivers installed on the computer. USB is used just for sending raw data to the printer so print servers are obsolete for such devices. If we start talking about USB sharing server ... it is a completely different ballgame.

Why do we still deploy ethernet and fiber optics? Because WiFi, BT, 3G, 4G and LTE are fantastic?

This is a completely ludicrous argument, you know why ... crowded wireless bands.
Are you sure that most home users moving in into new house do install cables everywhere to make access for tablets, smartphones or even notebooks ? Why more and more devices use WiFi to be managed as IoT ? Do you expect your refigerator to have RJ45 connector instead of WiFi ? WiFi is becoming the "last yard" home solution.

Anyway, the issue is not what's trendy or not, the issue is not to get hysterical on the fact that other persons may have other needs than yourself. These needs are bluntly dismissed by a bunch of people which think they know what others shall or shall not do.

Do not be ridiculus and do use "hysterical" and "bluntly" arguments. They do not make any positive contribution to this thread.

One could opt for print server, one could not. My need is not to integrate print server so I express my expectations as you do.

There are three ongoing arguments on this forum in recent months:
- threads like this one (feature requests for things not related directly to routing)
- UI should be simplified for newbies
- changes to default firewall configuration

All three of them fall into one broad subject of debate IMO: the very nature of ROS regarding whether it's a SOHO platform or a feature-rich advanced routing platform.

The line is further blurred by the fact that many Mikrotik devices are < $100 and several are < $60. These devices run the same exact OS as the top-of-the-line CCR or a server-class X86 platform running ROS. Therein lies the rub.

IMO, there's no way to satisfy both of these goals in a single solution. The only way to simplify things for beginners is to hide functionality and/or make lots of decisions ahead of time that will fit most cases, and then do things "in the background" based on these decisions. There's already a lot of gear out there that basically does what ROS does at its core: act as a shim for a Linux kernel running on purpose-built hardware. That's what Netgear, Linksys, Ubiquiti, TPLink, Belkin, et. al. do.

Also IMO - It would be more ideal if Mikrotik were to make a SOHO version of ROS that's simplified for the non-expert userbase, and it would be the SOHO O/S which has SOHO goodies like print server, etc. SOHO models could ship with this version, but support full ROS. This would probably warrant a dedicated employee or team as well as some of the suggested features that have been discussed recently which get poo-pooed by the core network crowd, which is why I said it would be 'ideal' and not 'realistic' or 'feasible.'

In the end, I do fall on the core network side of this debate. ROS is the only Linux shim I've found that gives such a complete level of access to the full networking functionality of Linux. It has its limitations, but in the end, that's what it was born to be: a feature-rich Linux-based routing platform stripped of everything unessential for being a router. Mikrotik did target the SOHO market a few years back, and the SOHO feature advocates do have valid points about SOHO concerns, but as ROS currently stands, I tend not to recommend Mikrotik to anyone who has no clue about networking below layer 5-7 + no desire to learn about it. I highly recommend it for anyone who is interested in learning about networking though, because it really lets you do amazing things (and in many cases, things that are bad design but serviceable). In short - a SOHO version of ROS to compliment their SOHO-targeted platforms makes a lot of sense and could vastly improve the end-user experience for novice users, which would only increase their market share, but that may not be something that they have the resources to successfully implement and support.

I'd like to disagree, IMO there is a way to satisfy everyone with one solution. In target group, that's the catch.

It's clear that MikroTik wants to target SOHO market too. But it does not necessarily mean whole SOHO market. IMHO they don't have anything to offer to users who were happily using cheap home routers until now, and I don't think they should even try to change that (at this point). Even cheapest hAP Lite is still more expensive than some other routers, it's hard to configure (for someone who doesn't know anything about networking), and first impression wise, it's nothing special, it doesn't even have bunch of big antennas! They can create a simplified version of RouterOS, to make it more accessible for beginners, but the problem is, every other manufacturer already has something like that. So then why would a beginner (who is not much willing to learn) buy specifically a MikroTik product? To be honest, I'm still trying to figure out, why they do it now.

IMO RouterOS is for SOHO market, but only for advanced part of it. It's something unique, it's kind of low level, but at the same time very admin friendly, mostly thanks to WinBox. And what I especially like, is that even the cheapest device offers all features. Who else has that? As I already wrote, MikroTik clearly does target SOHO market, and no matter how they do it, they have to dedicate some resources to it. "Oh no, it will slow down development of <insert your favourite enterprise feature>!" Tough luck, there's no way around it, unless they'd start to target enterprise exclusively.

So what's the solution? Nothing special, keep the basics of RouterOS the way they are now, and just create a new package for non-routing non-enterprise things. From currently available features it might get SMB, UPnP and Quick Set for start. A simple print server would be a logical addition too. Strictly enterprise users would ignore this package, the same way SOHO users ignore some other ones, and everyone could be happy.

After my previous post, I thought that another way to go about it would be to make a "Beginner" version of Winbox or something.
Basically give a simplified interface that is essentially a wizard to set up the existing ROS in whatever way you like.
It wouldn't have to change the underlying ROS at all.

Also, I would definitely agree to the SOHO module (set) being a good compromise.

I guess I just get tired of people nearly having an aneurysm because they can't get every conceivable service implemented in one ~$75 box that's powerful enough to use all features at once while forwarding a full bidirectional gigabit of traffic through a deep packet inspecting firewall. ('Cause TP-Link has a box that does this for $49.95 don't ya know?)

That, and when I see "this will be implemented in ROSv7" posts dating back to 2012 about important things being missing in routing protocol implementation, IPv6, etc, I really would rather Mikrotik spend their efforts on the core functionality instead of getting off into the weeds chasing rabbits in creeping fluffy features.

In my understanding, the "beginner version of WinBox" is Quick Set. If you buy MikroTik router by mistake and you don't know anything about networking, it should get you going. I myself avoid it like a plague, which is probably undeserved, but what can I say, when you touch a hot stove, it takes a time before you start trusting it again. But I think that Quick Set is good idea. Polish it a little more, add some often used stuff (e.g. simplified port forwarding with auto-configured hairpin NAT could be nice) and it should be enough for all beginner's needs. I wouldn't go beyond that, because if even this shouldn't be enough, then the customer actually needs completely different product.

About people wanting every possible feature... ok, I confess, I'm guilty. The more, the better. It's probably because of my perception of RouterOS - possibly wrong - as Linux with all its power, but in much nicer package. It's clear that it won't ever have every possible feature, but there are many at least related to networking, which would be nice to have. I agree that it's primarily a router, but we're already beyond that, with all current features it's more than just a router. Of course priorities are important, so ROSv7 first (I'm very interested how it will live to expectations, because those are huge), fluffy features later.

Funny thing is - my comment about the all-in-one-box-for-dirt-cheap crowd wasn't directed at you, Sob.
I was mostly having horrible flashbacks to everyone's griping about the hAP AC when it came to the world after so much hype.
It didn't surprise me at all because it was just enough to be a gigabit access point.
There was a large crowd of people going bananas over how it couldn't route at gigabit speeds with any features, etc etc etc.

I actually had a meltdown and posted a rant, which I almost never do.

I am in the same mindset re: Quickset - I played with it when it first came out back in 2012, and found that it easily messed up my configuration, especially if I'd done anything through the regular configurations, or wanted the interface roles moved around. (my then-ISP's cablemodem wouldn't link to the gigabit ports of my 2011, for instance, so I had to make ether6 be the WAN)
I've found that user-friendly front ends tend to get messed up whenever you also have direct access to the under-the-hood stuff. Wizards tend to expect things to be done a very certain way, and if you move even one comment around, it could potentially make the thing go crazy. That's why I think a NewbieWinBox that was ONLY a wizard front end - more featureful than Quickset, and contains a simplified way to do firewall recipes, etc - that would work fine if you could never go under the hood and get directly at the chains / IP lists, etc.

There is a user friendly version of mikrotik, its called netduma. They essentially use mikrotik hardware and have their own configuration utility and are actually gaming focused.

At the age of GPON RouterBoards are not ISP devices any more. They are rather SOHO devices for GPON ending. MikroTik should think again to find his place on the market. Its not a bad idea to make a print server functionality.

Hi there! I like Mikrotek products and have almost decided to switch from Keenetic as I need to control the sites my teenager-son visits from his tablet. But I have an HP1018 printer connected to Zyxel. What a disappointment that Mikrotek has no build-in solution yet. Will have to stay with my old router.

I want this feature to much!!

+3452342

NO, please DO NOT add this feature !!!
Let ROS do what it is supposed to do

Just buy one of those "usb print server" device, much cheaper than a routerboard

Next vote +1 from me. I am using printer on port 9100 via TPC only. P910nd plugin/module support is good enough if it is possible to implement into MikroTik Route OS.

What happened with this?

There's no official word, but I guess the consideration of this feature is postponed to RouterOS v8 or later.

As pistes earlier, I do not wanna see this feature on RoS... Simply the fact.. This is Router software, there are so many other solutions with printer servers that will do the job

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-G965F met Tapatalk

+1 !
Great idea!

We have an MFP than runs on cheap ink and a replacement would be expensive.

FAX would also have to be supported.

I do not buy 35 pieces of Mikrotik hAP ac2 due to lack of support for printing and scanning. A function on such a device is very necessary.

That idea is probably expired, at least as of 2020.

Having printers and MFPs with wireless/wired connectivity and WiFi direct, that doesn't make sense to insert this "alien" very niche functionality into RouterOS and then bother with it's support.
In no circumstances I'm going to put a printer into a closet where my router is placed:)

For those who really lack network connectivity - buy one of print servers - cheap or expensive, wired or wireless.

If they added super basic IP printer support it would be helpful. Like super basic. Little more than a blind translation layer with the basic IP print protocol. Then allow users to use the designated IP to simply add a windows "IP port" (eg 192.168.0.45) to their windows workstation printer settings. Or use a cut down samba and allow something like \\192.168.0.45\1 where '1" represents the USB id of the device.
I think the only issue with ip printer support is they likely need to licence jetdirect from HP, and the extended drivers needed for USB hurting the overall disk size footprint. As for samba, it is free but do they allow commercial use in the user licence? They must do since it is used a lot my large organisations that dont want to buy a domain controller licence from Microsoft.

Mikrotik already run http and ftp and can even do https, so those mocking the idea as silly like the idea of supporting NAS too must not realise it already is a NAS - it just doesn' allow you to use USB media beyond the boot device to do it.

I am frankly suprised it doesnt have any extended usb functionality beyond crude UPS serial support. I literally have a shelf of USB network device here for sale. I was considering throwing a printer in the cabinet with my mikrotik, to save space and checking the winbox found it had no support. Which I thought was odd, as I have a box of crappy old 1mb firmware chip adsl modems and at least 1/5 of them support raw IP port mode if you plug a printer into it's usb port (which likely is what I will end up using if I can make one play nice with my lan) some even work as a samba USB nas.

So it certainly is possible in a <16mb footprint router OS.

But imagine that 99.999% of users don't care about attaching a printer via USB,
given the millions of different models that exist, then who is behind all the pain in the ass that follows?

Now non-obsolete printers are practically all either ethernet or wireless,
so adding support to a USB printer just doesn't make the slightest sense.
Of all my customers, there is not even one who uses USB printers anymore...

Better if the MikroTik staff focus on really important things on v7, which is still full of problems, instead of thinking far away about this bullshit.

But what do you care anyway?
You just need the printer to go via USB, you don't give a shit about the vast majority of the others.

Support for ipp will be very useful.

Just no... Buy a decent printer instead with networking

Also, scrap the SMB support as well or move it to a package.