Dear friends.
I have set up 2 RB433AH with VRRP and they are not working as in example given in WIki. I set Preemption-mode = OFF.
all configuration is correct and match to the example given in Wiki. see below.

========================
VRRP without Preemption
Each time when router with higher priority becomes available it becomes Master router. Sometimes it is not desired behavior which can be turned off by setting preemption-mode=no in vrrp configuration.

Configuraton
We will be using the same setup as in basic example. Only difference is during configuration set preemption-mode=no. It can be done easily modifying existing configuration:

Testing
Try turning off R1 router, R2 will become Master router because it has highest priority among available routers.
Now turn R1 router on and you will see that R2 router continues to be Master even if R1 has higher priority.
========================

In my lab essay, one router ALWAYS return as a Master regardless Preemption Mode ON/OFF, using equal priority or different priority, etc. It bases its priority on Real IP Address (router with Highest Address becomes Master)

I really need this behaviour in my network. May be an usolved bug or a known failure on these routers?

Thank you to all of you, I´ll be waiting for any comment from you.

just to know, what version of ROS do you use?

Chupaka, I am using 3.25. I have read all posts concerning VRRP and also examples from Wiki, RouterOS manual, etc. The point is ip address afect Master election despite of Preemtive Mode OFF. I have changed IP address and this happens all the time, I mean, I have found where the problem resides but I dont have IDEA how to fix it. I have set up the same priority, maximun priority, Owner configuration (which is not supported by RouterOS) everything.

Could you help me please? coudl you perform the same escenario and try for such configuration?

Thank YOu chupaka

I just tested VRRP on a pair of RB493's running 3.25 and it worked as expected.
One thing that may be throwing off your results is having one of the routers have a priority of 255.
Having a priority of 255 means that the router is the owner of the VRRP IP and will ALWAYS step in and preempt even when preempt is turned off. This is by design and expected when there is an owner.

I believe you will want to try testing with preempt off and priority of 100 on both routers. This should give you what I think you are looking for. If one router dies, the other picks up the VRRP IP and keeps it until it dies.

-Louis

Thank You Louis for your help, But again, I have tested VRRP with equal priority as I said in the post (=100). Despite Priority, the same Router becomes the master when both routers are available and decision depends on IP address (as it is specified in the wiki. please, take a glance on http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/VRRP#Master_state ) I changed the lower IP for another higher IP and the result was the oposite, so IP address plays a role in Master election process. Such situation happens even when Preemptive mode is OFF.

R1:
eth1: 192.168.1.10/24
vrrp1: 192.168.1.1/32
vrid:49
priority: 100
interval: 1
preemtion mode: OFF

R2:
eth1: 192.168.1.11/24
vrrp1: 192.168.1.1/32
vrid:49
priority: 100
interval: 1
preemtion mode: OFF

With this scenario, R2 becomes the master whenever R1 and R2 are available. Expected behaviour does not occur.

PS: dont DISABLE and ENABLE interfaces to reproduce experience, instead PLUG and UNPLUG ethernet cables ( or Switch OFF and Switch ON the routers). I have made the experience by enabling and disabling interfaces and it works properly. But everybody knows a router fails by powering failure or similar and not by enabling interfaces.. .

Thank You Louis

did you try powering off the router instead of unplugging the cable? anyway, if you think it's a bug - please write to support@mikrotik.com

Take a look at this document. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3768.html

Specifically this section.

If the Priority in the ADVERTISEMENT is equal to the local
Priority and the primary IP Address of the sender is greater
than the local primary IP Address, then:

o Cancel Adver_Timer
o Set Master_Down_Timer to Master_Down_Interval
o Transition to the {Backup} state

By disconnecting the cable, you are creating a situation where both routers think they are masters. When they can finally hear each other (plugging the cable back in), they need to resolve the dispute. Mikrotik has stuck with the RFC for doing this.

Most situations though it is a power failure of one router. When this happens you will get the results you expect because the one that failed will go into initialization mode and see there is already a master with the same Priority and thus become a backup.

Make sense?

-Louis