Community discussions

 
kurtkraut
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Topic Author
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:55 am

Feature request: MLPPP server

Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:45 pm

RouterOS already supports MLPPP as a client but I really think Mikrotik should implement MLPPP server. For those who are unaware of what MLPPP is, from Mikrotik wiki:
Multi-Link Point to Point Protocol (MP, Multi-Link PPP, MultiPPP or MLPPP) is a method of splitting, recombining, and sequencing data across multiple logical data links.

In a situation where we have multiple DSL links a pair of devices, performance by “widening the pipe” between two devices can be increased by using Multi-Link PPP, without going to a newer, more expensive technology.

Large packets are actually split into bits and sent evenly over ALL logical data links. This is done instantaneously with NO loss of bandwidth. It is important to understand that other end of the link needs to use the same protocol to recombine your data.
So it is better than load balance, because a single TCP connection (example, a download or a streaming) can be splitted between all internet connections while load balance would use only one upstream connection.

Mikrotik is widely used in developing countries and rural areas. By supporting MLPPP a RouterOS could be deployed in the field (rural or low density area) with many DSL or 3G (HDSPA) links and another one in a big city where the connectivity is better anoter RouterOS will join all packets splitted from all the connections and make them reach the internet. Providing MLPPP server would increase Mikrotik sales because it would place Mikrotik among only few products and competitors that provide this solution.
Last edited by kurtkraut on Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
samsung172
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1186
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 3:45 am
Location: Østfold - Norway
Contact:

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:11 pm

+1 for this.
 
dog
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 186
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:37 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:33 am

Has been a request for years:

http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/MikroTik_ ... e_Requests

(Also take a look at OpenVPN/UDP on that page to see how much Mikrotik cares about user requests)
 
riggerman
newbie
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Contact:

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Tue Oct 09, 2012 9:35 pm

This would be a reasonably big +1 for us too.

Obviously can be worked around using other systems for this but having Mikrotik as preferred deployment option it would be a very welcome addition.
-- to contact me rather use my other account: "regardtv"
 
markom
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:42 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Fri Mar 01, 2013 11:03 pm

Can someone from mikrotik co. say anything about MLPPP server on mikrotik? Working, not possible, we are not working and we will never work on that, Work in progress, this option will be no available in ROS 6.xx, maybe in 7? Something???
 
samsung172
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1186
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 3:45 am
Location: Østfold - Norway
Contact:

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:52 am

MLPPP is really an underestimated feature, generally spoken. if anyone make a MLPPP implementation, capable of bundling different connection speeds, and to multiple servers at once, it could be one of the most valued redundancy and bundling protocol/feature ever made.
 
markom
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:42 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:27 pm

if MLPPP is so minor then cisco and juniper should abandoned that function. I have use MLPPP since ISDN dialup but those cisco routers are limited by aging and slow CPU, and to buy new cisco only for that and spend >5k $ is nonsense.
 
pkelly1603
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Wed Oct 01, 2014 10:32 pm

+1 for MLPPP and +1 for UDP/OVPN
 
User avatar
yngndrw
just joined
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 12:26 am

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:33 am

Any updates on this feature request ?
 
User avatar
9939781
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 6:42 am

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:36 am

+1 for MLPPP
I need a about mikrotik job
Welcome to my blog:http://www.cat-home.org
 
User avatar
chechito
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1743
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:14 am
Location: Bogota Colombia
Contact:

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:41 am

one question

equal cost multi path routing can be an alternative??
 
User avatar
bajodel
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 545
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 8:30 am
Location: Italy

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Tue Oct 27, 2015 7:14 am

one question
equal cost multi path routing can be an alternative??
IMHO in ECMP scenario every single stream is forced onto single link (route decision first, route cache for subsequent packets with same src/dst).
Maybe better to spread at layer 2 with bonded EoIP links ..or even better vpls. Multiple IP on both side are probably needed for correct setup.

Anyway +1 for MT MLPPP server side :D
 
User avatar
shahbazian
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 6:22 pm
Location: Iran
Contact:

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Mon Nov 09, 2015 11:22 am

+1 for MLPPP over multiple physical links in server configuration.
Learn MikroTik to improve your network.
( MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCUME, MTCIPv6E, MTCINE )
MikroTik Certified Trainer & Consultant
RIPE NCC Trainer
 
magnavox
Member
Member
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:03 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Thu Nov 12, 2015 11:50 pm

+1 for MLPPP Server
Best Regards...
 
pdf
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:56 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Fri Nov 13, 2015 9:50 am

+1 :D
 
gcakici
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:44 am

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Tue Mar 15, 2016 1:39 pm

Big +1
 
equalizer
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 7:50 pm
Location: kiev
Contact:

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Tue Mar 15, 2016 1:42 pm

+1 +1 +1 :)
 
Zorro
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 676
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:43 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:12 am

whats wrong with old-fashioned bonding for example ?
p.s. sorry for stupid/ignorant question. but cannot not ask.
 
PMTech
just joined
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:13 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Sat Aug 06, 2016 1:48 pm

+1, big deal for us.

@Zorro - Bonding is ok to a degree and if you can get 2 or 3 lines with equal latency then you'll end up with a bond performance somewhere near what you're expecting. The problem comes when one of those lines differs by even a couple of ms and then you get out of order TCP packets and eventually it slowly falls apart. MLPPP would have a buffer of some form and would be able to re-order those packets correctly before sending them on their way. This is only really an issue for Round-Robin packet-level bonding but that's the only way you'll achieve bonded throughput on a single TCP stream.

Thanks Mikrotik, hope it makes it soon...
 
User avatar
hknet
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 6:05 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria
Contact:

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:39 pm

YMMV, but we usually prefer per packet load-sharing (ppls), especially for customer-connections.
typically because: a) lower cpu overhead, b) independent layer3 connections (monitoring is easy), c) policies can decide for different paths in case

then again, while activating ppls is just an interface command on cisco or a policy-statement on juniper, in RouterOS it's quite a combination of packet-marking and associated routes to achieve ppls.
 
magnavox
Member
Member
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:03 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:37 pm

+1 for MLPPP over multiple physical links in server configuration.
+ 1
Best Regards...
 
User avatar
Cha0s
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 908
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 4:53 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Thu Aug 18, 2016 1:15 pm

+1 :)
 
klisha
just joined
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 4:37 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Fri Aug 19, 2016 4:40 pm

+1 :-)
 
irghost
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2016 1:49 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:51 am

+ 1000000000000000000000000000000000000
MTCNA MTCRE MTCTCE MTCUME MTCWE MTCIPv6E MTCINE
 
Detoxica
just joined
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 11:01 am
Location: London, United Kingdom

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Mon Jun 12, 2017 1:15 pm

+1 for implementing MLPPP server
 
magnavox
Member
Member
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:03 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Mon Jun 26, 2017 12:10 pm

Dear Mikrotik staff...

+1 for implementing MLPPP server
Best Regards...
 
evhawk
just joined
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2018 12:33 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:14 pm

+1 UP
 
magnavox
Member
Member
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:03 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:31 pm

Best Regards...
 
User avatar
doneware
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 539
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:39 pm
Location: Hungary

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:39 am

if MLPPP is so minor then cisco and juniper should abandoned that function.
trust me, there’s no mlppp support on ios-xr and it’s not even planned. indeed it would be nice to have it
#TR0359
 
User avatar
doneware
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 539
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:39 pm
Location: Hungary

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:51 am

YMMV, but we usually prefer per packet load-sharing
it varies. Per packet load sharing will restrict your RTT to the worst value among your available paths/links, that severly limits tcp performance in an unpredictable way. instead, per destination/flow sharing will limit the throughput of your flow to the capacity of your member link.

ppls can (and will in many cases) result OoS packet delivery that again ruines the throughput, and can break several lame protocols.

imo, unless you’re severely limited with link throughput you shouldn’t really use ppls, especially because low speed links tend to have high jitter (in absolute. values) that will exactly cause the oos behaviour.
but if you’re on high speed link, the per flow throughput limitation isn’t important anymore.
#TR0359
 
magnavox
Member
Member
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:03 pm

Re: Feature request: MLPPP server

Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:16 pm

Mikrotik Staff, please check this:

https://bsdrp.net/documentation/example ... _isp_links

Hi Mikrotik Staff, I implemented in lab a MLPPP server on a Linux machine and MPD service, and seem work fine.
Need only: set link enable multilink

Below the mpd.conf.
startup:

poes:
	set ippool add p0 10.11.12.0 10.11.12.19

	create bundle template poes_b
	set bundle enable compression

	set ccp yes mppc
	set mppc yes e40
	set mppc yes e128
	set mppc yes stateless

	set iface group pppoe
	set iface up-script /usr/local/sbin/vpn-linkup-poes
	set iface down-script /usr/local/sbin/vpn-linkdown-poes
	set iface idle 0
	set iface disable on-demand
	set iface disable proxy-arp
	set iface enable tcpmssfix
	set iface mtu 1500

	set ipcp no vjcomp
	set ipcp ranges 10.10.10.1/32 ippool p0
	set ipcp dns 8.8.8.8

	create link template poes_l pppoe
	set link action bundle poes_b

	set auth max-logins 5

	set pppoe iface em1

	set link enable multilink
	set link no pap chap
	set link enable pap
	set link keep-alive 60 180
	set link max-redial -1
	set link mru 1492
	set link latency 1
	set link enable incoming
Best Regards...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 45 guests