Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
pizzulicchio
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 3:35 pm

Spanning Tree Protocol

Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:40 pm

Hi,
will be added the STP and or RSTP to RB260GS switch ?
If so, what standard will be used for STP ? the IEEE 802.1D or a proprietary STP ?

I trust in you mikrotik! :-)
 
jandafields
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1515
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:12 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:09 pm

Hi,
will be added the STP and or RSTP to RB260GS switch ?
If so, what standard will be used for STP ? the IEEE 802.1D or a proprietary STP ?

I trust in you mikrotik! :-)
They have simply said "sometime in the future"... but that was a couple of years ago! It may never be added :(
 
pizzulicchio
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 3:35 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:55 pm

8) And so, NO official response from mikrotik ?
 
becs
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:26 am

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Thu Jun 13, 2013 11:32 am

Spanning Tree Protocol support in SwOS is not planned in the near future.
 
cmartin
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 7:04 pm
Location: Plzeň, Czech Republic

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Tue Jul 02, 2013 10:31 am

Unfortunately. STP, resp. RSTP is definitely important feature.
Can you generally estimate if RB250/260 hardware is capable to handle it or isn't?
 
jandafields
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1515
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:12 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Wed Jul 03, 2013 7:03 am

Unfortunately. STP, resp. RSTP is definitely important feature.
Can you generally estimate if RB250/260 hardware is capable to handle it or isn't?
The hardware can probably handle it fine... but this feature is not longer planned for the near future (this means at least a few years away, maybe longer), see the post above.
 
onnoossendrijver
Member
Member
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:10 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:31 am

(R)STP is not a protocol I would like to depend on for redundancy. Is there no way to implement OSPF?
 
jandafields
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1515
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:12 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Thu Jul 04, 2013 12:14 am

(R)STP is not a protocol I would like to depend on for redundancy. Is there no way to implement OSPF?
SWOS is what it is. If it isn't there, it won't be added anytime soon. You should look at using the regular Miktorik router if you want ospf or stp.
 
onnoossendrijver
Member
Member
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:10 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Thu Jul 04, 2013 12:32 am

(R)STP is not a protocol I would like to depend on for redundancy. Is there no way to implement OSPF?
SWOS is what it is. If it isn't there, it won't be added anytime soon. You should look at using the regular Miktorik router if you want ospf or stp.
True, that's what I meant :) Maybe TS can solve his 'redundancy problems' using OSPF on a router instead of STP on a switch.
 
PeterSullivan
newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:23 am

Currently they are planning to adapot it.
 
User avatar
pcunite
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1345
Joined: Sat May 25, 2013 5:13 am
Location: USA

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:44 pm

If you're wanting a 1G switch and STP, the only option is a RB750GL ... as far as I know.
 
jandafields
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1515
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:12 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:10 am

Currently they are planning to adapot it.
"who" is planning to adopt "what" ???

I'm sure you are not saying that Mikrotik is planning to put R/STP into SWOS, at least not anytime soon.
 
grr
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 5:04 am

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Tue Feb 03, 2015 5:45 am

I'm wondering if there was any progress in adding some spanning-tree protocol (RSTP maybe) to the Mikrotik switching platform (RB260GS and CRS125 or CRS226).

Does anyone can share some new info?

Thanks,
Gustavo.
 
stpq
just joined
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 10:28 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Wed May 13, 2015 12:13 pm

+1 stp is a must
 
User avatar
chechito
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 2990
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:14 am
Location: Bogota Colombia
Contact:

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Tue May 19, 2015 1:43 am

at the market its very rare a switch under 8-10 gigabit ports to support stp or rstp, looks like there is no economically viable to implement strong features on 5 port switch, many features are only seen on 10+ ports switches.

not only on mikrotik, other brands are the same, looks like chipset limitation
 
peson
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 10:33 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Wed Aug 03, 2016 2:31 pm

at the market its very rare a switch under 8-10 gigabit ports to support stp or rstp, looks like there is no economically viable to implement strong features on 5 port switch, many features are only seen on 10+ ports switches.

not only on mikrotik, other brands are the same, looks like chipset limitation
It's not a chip limitation, maybe the chip isn't good at RSTP and thats why it's not implemented.
Here is the feature list for the chip: (it's a lot of goodies :-) ie QinQ)

AR8327/AR8327N Features
- Supports 802.3az Power Management
- The AR8327N chip includes the Hardware NAT (Network Address Translation) function
- The AR8327 chip (without the ‘N’ designation) does not contain the Hardware NAT function
- ACL Mask Rule from Layer1~4. Port No, DA, SA, Ethernet Type, VLAN, IP Protocol, IPv4/v6 Source/Destination Address, TCP/UDP Source/Destination port
- 96 ACL Mask Rule for Pass/Drop, VLAN/Q.O.S./DSCP Mapping/Translation
- User define ACL up to 48 bytes depth in Layer 4/3/2
- Q.O.S mechanisms include Weight Round Robin, Strict, Hybrid Up Queue
- Port Base VLAN & 4K 802.1Q VLAN Group
- IVL & SVL
- IGMP Snooping V1, V2 & V3. IPv6 MLD V1/V2 forwarded to CPU
- Supports Light Hardware IGMP snooping v1/v2/v3, MLDv1/v2 and Smart Leave
- Hardware Looping Detection
- QinQ function for SVLAN & CVLAN Translation
- IP Packet/PPPoE bypass to reduce CPU loading on Video packet
- 16 PPPoE session support/PPP Session Header Removal/Addition
- Scalable Ingress/Egress Bandwidth Control
- 40 MIBs Counter/Port & Port Status.
- 1M Bit Packet Buffer
- Supports 9K Jumbo Frame
- Port Mirror, 802.1X Security, Rapid Spanning Tree
- Rule-based Bandwidth Control
- Programmable Wake on LAN
- Half Power Mode for Cable length less than 30m (for home installations)
- Supports Internal/External Loopback
- Supports Reduced AFE circuit
- 2K MAC Table. Edit, Search, Add & Delete.
- MAC Limit by Port/Chip/VLAN
- Trunking Function
- Supports Trunking and auto-failover
- Power Saving on Cable no Link, short Cable & 10BASE-Te Idle
- Supports 1K NAPT entries and 128 hardware based host routing (ARP) entries
- Supports hardware-based IP source guard, ARP inspection, routing/L3 switching
- Supports VLAN translation and mapping with 64 Translation entries
 
User avatar
chechito
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 2990
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:14 am
Location: Bogota Colombia
Contact:

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:35 pm

at the market its very rare a switch under 8-10 gigabit ports to support stp or rstp, looks like there is no economically viable to implement strong features on 5 port switch, many features are only seen on 10+ ports switches.

not only on mikrotik, other brands are the same, looks like chipset limitation
It's not a chip limitation, maybe the chip isn't good at RSTP and thats why it's not implemented.
Here is the feature list for the chip: (it's a lot of goodies :-) ie QinQ)

AR8327/AR8327N Features
- Supports 802.3az Power Management
- The AR8327N chip includes the Hardware NAT (Network Address Translation) function
- The AR8327 chip (without the ‘N’ designation) does not contain the Hardware NAT function
- ACL Mask Rule from Layer1~4. Port No, DA, SA, Ethernet Type, VLAN, IP Protocol, IPv4/v6 Source/Destination Address, TCP/UDP Source/Destination port
- 96 ACL Mask Rule for Pass/Drop, VLAN/Q.O.S./DSCP Mapping/Translation
- User define ACL up to 48 bytes depth in Layer 4/3/2
- Q.O.S mechanisms include Weight Round Robin, Strict, Hybrid Up Queue
- Port Base VLAN & 4K 802.1Q VLAN Group
- IVL & SVL
- IGMP Snooping V1, V2 & V3. IPv6 MLD V1/V2 forwarded to CPU
- Supports Light Hardware IGMP snooping v1/v2/v3, MLDv1/v2 and Smart Leave
- Hardware Looping Detection
- QinQ function for SVLAN & CVLAN Translation
- IP Packet/PPPoE bypass to reduce CPU loading on Video packet
- 16 PPPoE session support/PPP Session Header Removal/Addition
- Scalable Ingress/Egress Bandwidth Control
- 40 MIBs Counter/Port & Port Status.
- 1M Bit Packet Buffer
- Supports 9K Jumbo Frame
- Port Mirror, 802.1X Security, Rapid Spanning Tree
- Rule-based Bandwidth Control
- Programmable Wake on LAN
- Half Power Mode for Cable length less than 30m (for home installations)
- Supports Internal/External Loopback
- Supports Reduced AFE circuit
- 2K MAC Table. Edit, Search, Add & Delete.
- MAC Limit by Port/Chip/VLAN
- Trunking Function
- Supports Trunking and auto-failover
- Power Saving on Cable no Link, short Cable & 10BASE-Te Idle
- Supports 1K NAPT entries and 128 hardware based host routing (ARP) entries
- Supports hardware-based IP source guard, ARP inspection, routing/L3 switching
- Supports VLAN translation and mapping with 64 Translation entries

ok is not a chipset limitation,

maybe a economical reason? too expensive to implement on small switches to be viable?? who knows...

it may even be a cultural issue, many people do not see the purpose of a small switch with strong manageable functions, many only think on big switches, and many only think on no manageable small switches, is a small niche market i think have to evolve, to increase the demand of this devices

I think is a very good idea to have small cheap very manageable switches, in certain scenarios you save money and space on cabling, i think is a modular approach to networking
 
patrick7
Member
Member
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 2:40 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Wed Aug 03, 2016 9:28 pm

Are there plans for STP on RouterBoard models (like RB2011/3011/CCR1009/...) or CRS? I would never use a switch which does not support STP.
 
mpreissner
Member
Member
Posts: 357
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:16 pm
Location: Columbia, MD

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Sat Aug 06, 2016 5:00 am

STP is already supported in ROS when using bridges. STP is currently not implemented on CRS, and it doesn't look like MT has any real plans of implementing it despite a lot of desire for it from the forums.
 
patrick7
Member
Member
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 2:40 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Sat Sep 17, 2016 10:59 pm

Is there any reason why mikrotik refuses to implement STP in any switch products?
In my opinion, any switch missing STP is not really an option for use in production environments. It may be good for home use, not more, not less. And no, loop protect is not a good STP replacement. STP is a lot more than loop protect.
 
SystemErrorMessage
Member
Member
Posts: 383
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 9:04 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:24 am

actually, even in home use STP/RSTP/STP variants are important. Think of a much bigger house where you have 5 port switches all over the place, the loops and issues that could happen not to mention power use.

It seems that mikrotik has slowed down their firmware deveiopment. They are missing lots of important network/router/switch related features. They go big at presentations for all sorts of stuff but they never deliver on the software front. I think in the near future mikrotik will be pointless because of missing many important network features that will be used mainstream. I just realised that mikrotik switches do not even support 802.3ad.

I would really like to see a switch that has all the hardware features implemented.
 
mpreissner
Member
Member
Posts: 357
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:16 pm
Location: Columbia, MD

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Thu Sep 22, 2016 1:30 pm

I agree...I bought into MikroTik for my home because I thought I was getting a good deal for a switch with 10gb ports, but the inability to make redundant switching paths or do 802.3ad based aggregation has become a serious issue for me. I feel I'd almost be better off switching my core network over to Ubiquiti, now that they've come out with a non-POE 48 port gigabit switch with 2 SFP+ ports. The ease of configuring everything through the UniFi controller is more attractive to me than struggling interminably with the MT CLI.
 
alexjhart
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:03 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Fri Sep 30, 2016 10:45 pm

http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=112844
What's new in 6.38rc7 (2016-Sep-30 07:33):
!) switch - added hardware stp functionality for CRS devices (http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CR ... e_Protocol);
 
mpreissner
Member
Member
Posts: 357
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:16 pm
Location: Columbia, MD

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Mon Oct 03, 2016 6:07 pm

Well, that's promising, but I'm not going to run RC firmware on my production network. Since it appears to require adding your master ports to a bridge to enable the switch-chip functionality, I wonder what the performance impact will be on the CRS CPU as a result of implementing STP.
 
alexjhart
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:03 pm

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Mon Oct 03, 2016 6:17 pm

Well, that's promising, but I'm not going to run RC firmware on my production network. Since it appears to require adding your master ports to a bridge to enable the switch-chip functionality, I wonder what the performance impact will be on the CRS CPU as a result of implementing STP.
I wondered about the performance impacts as well, but optimistically suspect they are just using that as a location in the interface rather than actually putting the master port in a bridge behind the scenes. I partially think this because just adding it to a bridge wouldn't provide the information necessary to make port blocking decisions. I have yet to install it in a lab environment and do any benchmarking or testing though. My post was more to notify those interested that they are finally working on this and get everyone involved in influencing the development.
 
mpreissner
Member
Member
Posts: 357
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:16 pm
Location: Columbia, MD

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Tue Oct 04, 2016 1:26 pm

Since the CRS's run ROS, not SwOS, it would probably be worth posting this info in one of the main ROS forums...probably the General forum. Not a huge number of people troll the SwOS forum, so you'll get more exposure there.
 
leosmendes
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Re: Spanning Tree Protocol

Tue Mar 14, 2017 5:03 am

I bought rb260gsp thinking it would support rstp, and I see that I was wrong, I'm already thinking of selling it.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests