Hi Guys,

Where / how can I download the v7 Beta?

Is there a changelog to see the features that have been done / are being worked on?

Thanks guys.

It's chimera only. Nothing like that exists.

It's chimera only. Nothing like that exists.

There is a sub-title "RouterOS v6 RC and v7 BETA" create by them. If no v7, they must announce to user in order to avoid any confuse.

Subtitle... Yes. It is. And then what? Nothing. No roadmap, no description of features, no previews. Fata morgana is more tangible than v7.

I don't understand the constant need for v7? What are you trying to achieve now and can't that you know v7 can do?

The need was invoked by mikrotik, because they postponed some things to that version. Nothing more.

I don't understand the constant need for v7? What are you trying to achieve now and can't that you know v7 can do?

There are certain caveats (don't remember now which ones) that were dependent on kernel. Mikrotik said they would be addressed with V7 - due to the new kernel.

So, we want it. In fact, we want these caveats addressed, and not V7 per se.

It is interesting that you are waiting for something and you do not remember even what it was

The world would literally stop revolving if MikroTik renamed 6.42.3 to 7.1
I wonder how many people would be waiting for v8?

All those who do not wait for v7, because they don't know what they are missing now.

I am waiting for "new routing" they could call it "RouterOS Flying Sphagetti Monster" for all I care, as long as it has the new routing engine in it.

That will never happen. Save your time and switch to another vendor.
As good as the MikroTik hardware is - as bad is the software.

It is interesting that you are waiting for something and you do not remember even what it was

Well, if it makes You happy:

1) UDP OpenVPN
2) LZO compression with OpenVpn
3) Better thread handling with BGP
4) Various IPv6 improvements

From the top of my head, we have this 4. I know there are many more - I just can't remember.

Now, can we have ROS 7? Pretty please?

Also add to firewall address-list from routing filter and isolated VRFs

- better Multicore Support
- BGP Multicore optimizing

Also add to firewall address-list from routing filter and isolated VRFs

These are my top requests also

It is interesting that you are waiting for something and you do not remember even what it was

It is also interesting to launch v7 over FOUR YEAR.

It's more like 6 years....

True Isolated VRFs
ip setting RP Filter Strict VRF Aware.
All other Services/Features VRF Aware
New Routing Engine Multicore Support.
v4v6 agnostic full same features over the whole product.
And that's just the top of my head.

i will open a bottle champagne when Mikrotik support multicore BGP

Let me know. I would like to drink it before the bubbles go off.

i will invite u to drink it with me i can't believe for what i need 36 cores on tile ....

i will invite u to drink it with me i can't believe for what i need 36 cores on tile ....

Concerning the CCR/CRS'es, while being very ambitious at the beginning, to me it seems Mikrotik has lost it's interest in getting into the core-routing and -switching market. Maybe the competition among the industry leaders like Cisco and Juniper is just too strong for MT in that segment - who knows?

While MTs hardware design is very nice and ROS is a damn feature-rich router operating system, it still lacks so many urgently required features to be used in production core-networking. Maybe it would be an idea to fork current ROS to a new, dedicated and cleaned-up version for the CCR/CRS platform (eg. CloudCoreOS) without all that unnecessary stuff like wifi, hotspot, parental control and so on. Seriously, NO ONE needs that SOHO/WISP functionality for a BGP core-router or core-switch... Two separate development teams could then work on ROS and CloudCoreOS independently and thus more effectively. Instead of working on "stupid" wifi-fixes in every release (just check the ROS changelogs), the CCOS development team could then focus on implementing enterprise/core-networking features such as multi-core BGP, ECMP, BGP4 SNMP MIBs, VXLAN, etc. instead.

Just my opinion, but a "jack of all trades" software as ROS currently is, will not work out in the long-run. Customer's expectations and requirements are simply to diverse

Concerning the CCR/CRS'es, while being very ambitious at the beginning, to me it seems Mikrotik has lost it's interest in getting into the core-routing and -switching market. Maybe the competition among the industry leaders like Cisco and Juniper is just too strong for MT in that segment - who knows?

I do not think that Cisco and Juniper are too strong for Mikrotik. I think Mikrotik have been having an identity crisis, and have lost focus on what made them successful in the first place. Routing...

A lot of ISP and small cloud providers "boot strap" their business using Mikrotik, then when they have the cash flow they move to other platforms like Juniper, Nokia or Cisco. Not because they want to move away from Mikrotik but because Mikrotik's lack of focus on "core" features like Routing gives them no other option. This is not conjecture, I have personally moved 3 mid size (6000 - 10000 subs) ISP's from Mikrotik CCR's to Juniper MX's in the last year.

As for the switches, I do not think Mikrotik understood their potential customers and failed to deliver the required features. Again, a lack of focus. The first gen switches had a horrific work-flow and were lacking required features such as Hardware Spanning Tree and Option-82 snooping/injection. The CRS3xx has potential, but has launched missing critical features required by Service Providers and with only about 60% of the features required by SMB/Enterprise. I see the Service Provider switching market as a HUGE opportunity missed.

I think Mikrotik need to work more closely with their power users, consultants and large customers to deliver finished products first time, instead of having repeated false starts.

It pains me to write this as it feels like I'm beating on the awesome staff at Mikrotik, but if customers don't complain they won't know what the problems are, and won't change.

I do not think that Cisco and Juniper are too strong for Mikrotik. I think Mikrotik have been having an identity crisis, and have lost focus on what made them successful in the first place. Routing...

This is where the crux lies. I for one would pay more for a better product, Mikrotik does not always need to be rock bottom in pricing. They should have different divisions:
switching
routing
AP's/consumer routers
outdoor wireless (and frankly focus on other bands such as 60/70/11Ghz only)

e.g I bought a bunch of Juniper EX4600 switches, why? Mikrotik has no 10Gbps SFP switches with 40Gbps uplinks. They also do not support selective q-in-q and some other features. i.e a missed market. They have revealed a bunch of new switches, but then again why would I want 24x SFP+ ports and no 25/40/100Gbps uplinks?

I do still love Mikrotik, use tons of their HAP ac lites, CCR1009's, and will try out some of their POE switches. Just wish they had a roadmap, and put more into routing and switching.

e.g I bought a bunch of Juniper EX4600 switches, why? Mikrotik has no 10Gbps SFP switches with 40Gbps uplinks. They also do not support selective q-in-q and some other features. i.e a missed market.

I complained about exactly this, and was told I was the only customer who had complained. Yeah, I complained because I purchased the products as soon as they were available specifically to see if they had these "bare minimum" Service Provider switching features, then when they did not I contacted Mikrotik to let them know, trying to help them out.
I am sure a lot of other people buy one, see it does not have the features they require then just don't buy any more without complaining.

I do still love Mikrotik, use tons of their HAP ac lites, CCR1009's, and will try out some of their POE switches. Just wish they had a roadmap, and put more into routing and switching.

Bingo..

Personally I think Mikrotik needs to start over with RouterOS. For example, Cumulus Linux contributed a VRF implementation into the Linux kernel. Using OpenVPN from upstream could permit TCP and UDP. Etcetera. They probably had a good reason for diverging at some point. And perhaps they still do, I'm not a developer. But from my perspective it would only be a benefit to commit changes upstream then incorporate those into the finished product. And maybe it would even allow them to incorporate new features faster. They won't lose marketshare by doing so.

The single biggest reason i want Ros7 is that every time i ask mikrotik support for something.. they answer "this will be fixed in version 7"

so mikrotik support use "version 7" as the "wont fix"/get rid of this annoying ticket. this leads to all our problems will be fixed in version 7 and hence everyone waiting for it.
nobody cares if the version is 7 9 or 3.14 as long as the issues are addresses. i would much rather have a real timeline, or even just an acknowledge that things are being worked on.

the biggest issues i have personally is
- recursive route lookup in ipv6 - this single issue makes Ros unusable as a router in all current deployments
- recurring ospf errors when mikrotik is ABR in ospfv3 - thins also makes Ros unusable as a router, in anything but the smallest networks.
- single threaded BGP - an annoyance, but not a show stopper. (for me)
- ipv6 LDPv6/MPLS - prevents mikrotik from being used in future deployments.
- ECMP labels on mpls
- RPKI to router mrz state it is scheduled for Ros7 viewtopic.php?t=81340
- VRF aware services

most of these i have been in contact with mikrotik support about when i ran into them, and the answer is always "routeros 7 will fix all your problems" and this have been the official support mantra for all difficult questions the last 6 years.

of course i have had issues that support claimed would be fixed in Routeros7, and then some months later have it fixed in version 6.x but since they already closed my case I was not notified of when the issue was solved. also since support close issues with "Ros7!" it must be hard for mikrotik to keep track of wanted features. i know there is a wikipage at https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/MikroTik ... e_Requests ;; but since nobody can sign up on their wiki it is of course very thin on content.

still waiting for ROS7 (but running other vendors while we wait)

kind regards
SEP

edit: typos

when support@ writes to me, they allways make it sound like Ros 7 is something that is in development and will be ready sometime. (specifically my issues will be fixed in the future) And ofcourse it may be in development, and it will probably be released eventually . But since this have been going on for years it is not "working" any more. one can only delay deployments and network designs so long, before one have to find alternatives. The effect in all practical purposes is: you need to do this with another vendor

That being said, I really like routeros, and use mikrotik anywhere it is possible. But those places are fewer and fewer. nowadays is is just fringe cases and some speciality networks that can use mikrotik.

We are all on this forum becouse we love mikrotik and routeros. And want the company and it's products to "make it". And I think it would benefit mikrotik immensely to open up about the development of routeros, by using things like frequently updated roadmaps, and open bugtrackers where people could subscribe to the issues they care about. There are people in this thread that have forgotten the issues they had... that probably mean they gave up on using mikrotik on that deployment. and with no tracker or open support case, not even mikrotik registers this as a problem.

Many companies sell their software with a license, but do the developement with opensource methods. i think mikrotik would be wise to look at and emulate such behaviour. it builds community, a community that may even in some cases help with patches if mikrotik lets them.
And if they can not manage to get routeros out of the ditch they are in with regards to ipv6 and routing, they should perhaps look at opening up the hardware to allow other NOS's to run on their devices. ie cumulus or similar.
if not I fear mikrotik will be even more of a niche product. but the niche becomes smaller and smaller. since there is not a single new isp that can exclude ipv6 nowadays.

kind regards
SEP

Pretty simple. Mikrotik just needs to stop the speculation.

"Yes we are actively working on v7, a RC should be available Q4 in 2018."
"The main objectives - new routing engine, new linux kernal etc... future enhancements to be added in further RC versions."
"It has been delayed due to X and Y and we are waiting on Z to release it"

/thread

Mikrotik does a lot of good work but at the end of the day speculation does no one any good.

Here is my speculation. There was a forum thread on where Mikrotik asked what ports we want on a 100Gbps router - great idea (and thanks for letting the community get involved). But I would presume v7 will only arrive when these arrive (though I have heard no concrete info on or what they are). No point in having slow BGP etc on a new flagship router series.

It seems like Mikrotik has been hit by second-system effect. You have a successful product that is simple and works, you design the successor product to do "everything right" and generate lots of promises and expectations - and in the end the successor is just too complex, never really works and has to be scrapped. It happens a lot. Apple had A/UX and Taligent, Microsoft had Cairo and WinFS, and Mikrotik has v7.

I guess what's going to happen is that someone will just port 6.xx to a new kernel and call it by an entirely new name outside the old numbering scheme. It will not have too many new features, it will be mostly compatible with v6 except some details, and it will mostly work. People will complain a bit and will gradually move over to it, and a few years later v7 will be forgotten.

I do agree that it would be good if there was a roadmap, though.

It seems like Mikrotik has been hit by second-system effect. You have a successful product that is simple and works, you design the successor product to do "everything right" and generate lots of promises and expectations - and in the end the successor is just too complex, never really works and has to be scrapped. It happens a lot. Apple had A/UX and Taligent, Microsoft had Cairo and WinFS, and Mikrotik has v7.

So far the development effort even for the rc channel is being quite smooth. That's good. Meanwhile they have released new products like the w60 series.

I guess they are working on v7, probably doing an enormous overhaul, and that will take a lot of time.

So far the development effort even for the rc channel is being quite smooth. That's good. Meanwhile they have released new products like the w60 series.

I guess they are working on v7, probably doing an enormous overhaul, and that will take a lot of time.

Problem is: the development of V7 started more than 4 years ago.

Problem is: the development of V7 started more than 4 years ago.

Started with development, or just mention that there may be a new version...

Problem is: the development of V7 started more than 4 years ago.

Started with development, or just mention that there may be a new version...

I remember seeing a screenshot, posted by Normis, which showed the command line of ROS v7 alpha. It was almost two years ago, and gave the impression that development wasn't new them.

since mikrotik plays the cards close, everything I write is just gusstimates and assumptions..

But I belive part of the problem is that they are aming for a continuously moving target, the linux kernel and tooling are developed in a rapid pace. and there are new things in networking all the time.
taking a linux kernel and spending 4-6 years to adapt your changes and needs to it, you will either end up with an ancient kernel when you release. Or you start over again, and again on a even newer kernel since it also have "must have" features, and you basicaly never release.

Also the more history you accumulate, the worse this problem becomes. this is why I think they need to look at how they do their developent. try to keep closer to the origin, use standarized solutions, and try try to have less custom made stuff.

ofcourse the other option is that they just do not prioritize fixing the issues we (I) care about enough, since it is hard to gauge what problems are most pressing for people, when you have no bugtracker. perhaps they simply do not feel the urgent need.

opening (part of) the wiki for editing would be a start, atleast we could rememer the issues we have when we face them this way:)

I don't understand the constant need for v7? What are you trying to achieve now and can't that you know v7 can do?

BGP, filters and routing management using multicore

MLPPP server implementation... on V6 or V7

This is pure speculation based on what Mikrotik have done in the past, but my bet is on a split release.

RouterOS v7 will be a continuation of RouterOS v6 with a bumped 3.xx Kernel, e.g. 3.7 and support for all current architectures. It will have the new routing engine, but will rely on the same forwarding paths as the current release. Think of it as RouterOS v6+

RouterOS "Next Generation" will run a 4.x kernel and will be limited to running on MIPSBE, ARM, ARM64 and CHR/x86. It will have the new routing engine as well as the ability to have "next gen" features such as flexible forwarding planes, e.g. Marvell Hardware, DPDK

This is pure speculation based on what Mikrotik have done in the past, but my bet is on a split release.

RouterOS v7 will be a continuation of RouterOS v6 with a bumped 3.xx Kernel, e.g. 3.7 and support for all current architectures. It will have the new routing engine, but will rely on the same forwarding paths as the current release. Think of it as RouterOS v6+

RouterOS "Next Generation" will run a 4.x kernel and will be limited to running on MIPSBE, ARM, ARM64 and CHR/x86. It will have the new routing engine as well as the ability to have "next gen" features such as flexible forwarding planes, e.g. Marvell Hardware, DPDK

Yup I agree, part of the reason we are not seeing any new CCR Tilera based routers for ages. Definitely should standardize on ARM, MIPSBE and Marvel as a chipset for switching. Would make their life easier.

How about a Jericho+ based machine with some external TCAM...

I only need a firmware that works fine in arm. The versión number, for me, not is importante, good firmware is only i need