Its not possible to add the dhcp server on a bridged interface because those ports are logically connected like on a switch. That means the dhcp service on slave interface (ether6) would also listen on slave interface (ether7). That results into the problem that the service cannot distinguish from which client (on ether6 or ether7?) the request was sent (and here you would need the deicision if it should hand out a ip from pool 1 or pool 2).
You need to make a decision: What are you trying to do. Should devices from pool 1 be able to connect to devices from pool 2 (and vice versa)? Or do you want them to be seperated? Sometimes you only need one or more specific devices from one network to reach one or more devices in the other network.
Your options are:
- Route the traffic between both networks (make sure to have proper firewall rules) -> you dont need a bridge for the two networks, just assign the dhcp service to the specific ethernet port.
- Have them in a bridged network and setup ip addresses in /ip dhcp-server leases statically for the clients (you do not need pools for that, but you need two entries in /ip dhcp-server network)
Don't want to be rude, but this answer is as confusing as the question. I think the OP has to refine his request.
Just to clear one point, if you have two ports in one bridge, the dhcp server goes on the bridge, nowhere else. If you want one port to use one pool, and the other another pool, you don't bridge them. They become separate subnets that will be able to communicate with each other without any problem. Of course, both ports will have their own ip address. The firewall is only added after to restrict communications. Routing is not even required since both subnets are on the same router.
Sent from my cell phone. Sorry for the errors.