I propose to consider another option

Great work there!

I like as well - but, is there any way to make it horizontal instad of vertical?
If it was horizontal, it would fit on a widescreen monitor much better.

Also, there is bunch of spelling errors, and on the right side, it should say Encapsulation (currently says Decapsulation).

But great work otherwise!

Could you please please please upload an editable version?

I propose to consider another option

Awesome!
What diagramming tool did you use?

Fixed small bug

For preview:

For preview:

Packet Flow Diagram r20140328.jpg

Nice... PDF or SVG or some sort of vector image would be ideal. Looks great though.

Nice... PDF or SVG or some sort of vector image would be ideal. Looks great though.

See my previous post.

Nice... PDF or SVG or some sort of vector image would be ideal. Looks great though.

See my previous post.

Any chance for an editable version?

Thanks!

Nice... PDF or SVG or some sort of vector image would be ideal. Looks great though.

See my previous post.

Any chance for an editable version?

Thanks!

+1

Some changes, for a better understanding of travel of packets.
Fixes:
2014.04.05
- Corrected position 'IPSec Decryption' and 'IPSec Encryption' boxes in ROUTING (gratitude: macgaiver);
- Fixed form blocks 'Bridge Decision' in 'Forward' and 'Output' Chain.
2014.04.10
- Added "Configurable Facilities": Menu items of RouterOS corresponding function blocks;
- Corrected name of block "Decapsulation 
(TE, VPLS, VLAN, Tunnel)" to "Encapsulation (TE, VPLS, VLAN, Tunnel)" in "OUT-INTERFACE 
LOGICAL" line;
- Corrected name of block "Bridge Adjustm." to "Routing Adjustm." in "Output" chain (gratitude: greek);
- Corrected bloks in "Input" and "Postrouting" chains: "Global HTB" > "HTB Global | Queue tree", added "Simple Queues" (gratitude: greek);
P.S. I am also willing to listen to any comments and additions.

Nice one - very informative. Just "IPSec Decryption and Encryption boxes need to be swapped - traffic comes to router and in case it is IPSec it will have policy and will be decrypted, not encrypted
and when leaving if there is IPSec policy it will be encrypted - this fix was also done on the wiki:
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/File:Pack ... m_v6_b.svg

Nice one - very informative. Just "IPSec Decryption and Encryption boxes need to be swapped

Thank you, fixed - see updated my post.

Thank you, fixed - see updated my post.

Why last block in output chain is "Bridge Adjustm"?
In original scheme it's "Routing Adj."

And why "Simple queues" blocks is absent in "Input" and "Postrouting" chains ?

Why last block in output chain is "Bridge Adjustm"?
In original scheme it's "Routing Adj."

And why "Simple queues" blocks is absent in "Input" and "Postrouting" chains ?

Fixed - see updated my post
Thank you!

This is fantastic. Thanks for the effort as I think this layout helps you connect the layers together better than the original separated diagrams. Hopefully it becomes the official one.

To me the first version of diagrams is easier to consume. Second version is a little bit noise. There is too many arrows. Main content is hidden in the web of transitions! Arrows that define logical layers is too big, it's not the main content.

To me the first version of diagrams is easier to consume. Second version is a little bit noise. There is too many arrows. Main content is hidden in the web of transitions! Arrows that define logical layers is too big, it's not the main content.

You can download the source in Microsoft Visio 2010 and disable the extra layers, making it easier diagrams at its discretion.

To me the first version of diagrams is easier to consume. Second version is a little bit noise. There is too many arrows. Main content is hidden in the web of transitions! Arrows that define logical layers is too big, it's not the main content.

You can download the source in Microsoft Visio 2010 and disable the extra layers, making it easier diagrams at its discretion.

Thanks for reply. =))

noviy, can we use it in the MikroTik Wiki manual ?

Why first and last figures in output chain are not a parallelepiped as in original scheme?

As i know, parallelepiped has concretic mining in flowchart http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flowchart

noviy, can we use it in the MikroTik Wiki manual ?

Yes, of course! I'll be glad if it will be useful for Mikrotik project.

Excellent thank you for this diagram. I have just got back from a MTCRE course in sunny England and it was causing a positive buzz! Loving it!

Regards

Aidan Venn

Excellent work. Very useful indeed!

Thank you.

noviy - can you get in touch with us as we would like to print these professionally as posters? Email me at shop (at) linitx.com

The new diagram is really good.

It is clearer than the previous diagram.

Nice comprehensive graphics!

May I suggest to stick with english grammar rules for questions: auxiliary verb, then subject, then verb

Decapsulation is needed? -> Is decapsulation needed?
Encapsulation is needed? -> Is encapsulation needed?
It's IP Traffic? -> Is it IP traffic? ("It is IP Traffic" is a statement, not a question)

These changes would give decisions a consistent wording.

Nice comprehensive graphics!

May I suggest to stick with english grammar rules for questions: auxiliary verb, then subject, then verb

Decapsulation is needed? -> Is decapsulation needed?
Encapsulation is needed? -> Is encapsulation needed?
It's IP Traffic? -> Is it IP traffic? ("It is IP Traffic" is a statement, not a question)

These changes would give decisions a consistent wording.

Thank you for your comments! In the near future I will try to fix it.

I guess you pros can understand the packet flow but I don't . Is there a book or a link that would explain what is actually happening in the individuals steps?

I guess you pros can understand the packet flow but I don't . Is there a book or a link that would explain what is actually happening in the individuals steps?

check http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Packet_Flow

I guess you pros can understand the packet flow but I don't . Is there a book or a link that would explain what is actually happening in the individuals steps?

check http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Packet_Flow

Thanks!

Thanks

Trying to implement your double qos suggestions for hotel. I want to proritize traffic in queue tree and limit per user with dynamic simple queues. I can generate the simple queues in dhcp lease but what happens if a customer sets his own static ip? How can I generate his queue so that he does not bypass the limits?

How can I generate his queue so that he does not bypass the limits?

1) authorization
2) just create a queue for 'everyone else' (10.0.0.0/16) with hard limits

I have a clarification question regarding the order of mangle and routing processing of the "output" chain.

I want a script on my router to connect to a fixed-ip website via a predefined WAN connection (in order to get my external ip on that connection).
The set-up is the following:

1. mikrotik 951G-2HnD v6.34.3
2. two WAN connections on ethernet ports: first is a default (higher priority in routing), second is a failover (lower priority in routing)
3. my ip-firewall-mangle rules section contain a rule on "output" chain to mark a non-marked connection to a fixed-ip destination
4. my ip-firewall-mangle also contain a rule to place a routing mark on all marked connections to a failover WAN (via routing table)

All is working perfectly as planned.

However, according to http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Packet_Flow_v6 the output chain does not go through a "routing decision" block (K->L flow). The absolutely fantastic new diagram in this thread also shows that local "output" block with "mangle-output" is located after the "routing decision" block (also K->L flow).

My setup clearly shows that mange-output is before "routing decision" block since routing mark changes the flow to a failover WAN connection (non-default in routing table). Without my mange rules connection goes to a default WAN connection.

And my questions are:

1. Is it really correct on the diagrams that "output" block from local output is placed after a "routing decision" block in the flow?
2. Is there a single-mangle-rule solution to mark all traffic (local and forwarded) going to a fixed-ip with a connection/routing mark? [I now have two identical mange rules: one for "output" and one for "prerouting"]

EDIT: is it a "routing adjustment" that actually works in my set-up? Is it not better simply to have a "routing decision" after the "output" block? Why this design decision was made?

Hello,

Is there any detailed diagram to show how VRFs are processed ? I'm missing something here to fix my inter-VRF tunneling setup.

Thanks !

Where is placed "IP - Firewall - Raw" menu ?

Where is placed "IP - Firewall - Raw" menu ?

Guys?..

Where is placed "IP - Firewall - Raw" menu ?

Exactly where MikroTik said they put it. Just here...

Nice joke, thanks. But the topic is Packet flow diagram, not WinBox

It's in the wiki

Where is placed "IP - Firewall - Raw" menu ?

RAW is taking action just before two connection tracking boxes in the Packet Flow diagram.

As described in the diagram RouterOS must apply dst-nat rules before filter rules. But it does not. Why?

it does. explain your problem in details

I have service at 192.168.0.2:12345

I added the rule: but the log remains empty

Dst-NAT rule doesn't work when it isn't allow rule in input chain of filter: According to the diagram packet in general can not get into the INPUT.

busla
Please create a new topic, this conversation is not in any way related to this "New packet Flow Diagram" topic. Thank you.

busla
this conversation is not in any way related to this "New packet Flow Diagram"

Why?
I create rules based on packet flow. Rules don't work. Either the diagram is wrong or diagram need some comments.

Hello,

@busla:
this thread about the new packet flow diagram was started 3,5 years ago and packet flow management is a central feature of routers in general

Do you really think, your problem now relates to this packet flow diagram itself ?
Please try to understand the packet flow diagram by reading appropriate information - either here in the wiki or by searching Google.

Your problem is knowledge- and config-related.
I second nest (Ron) => open up a new forum thread, thank you

greets

The diagram is a part of wiki. I have studied it.
My sample is a sample, not a problem. I want to know a real 'paclet flow' in RouterOS. It solve all my problems.

The wiki shows 'real' packet flow. Point.

is there any MUM presentation about v6?

This small update with possible can someone help better understand the place of new blocks "RAW Prerouting" and "RAW Output".
download/file.php?mode=view&id=27228

[quote="noviy"][/quote]
Can you place the diagram in visio format too?

This small update with possible can someone help better understand the place of new blocks "RAW Prerouting" and "RAW Output".

@noviy
I noticed only now your 2017/03 diagram update (I know, I'm late ) .. but I want to thank you for the brilliant work!! Now with new details and raw tables is really complete.

( & "UP" ..many others may have missed it)

Hello guys !
I'm looking at those packet flow diagrams and the exemple scenario and I was wondering : where does the traffic originating from the router itself appears ?

For example let's say I bind a dhcp-client to a vlan interface, what would be the path of a DHCP Request packet on those diagram ?

Hello guys !
I'm looking at those packet flow diagrams and the exemple scenario and I was wondering : where does the traffic originating from the router itself appears ?

For example let's say I bind a dhcp-client to a vlan interface, what would be the path of a DHCP Request packet on those diagram ?

Router originated packets are always output->postrouting.
Look at, where input are packets targeted exclusively to router (or not-NATted for example), and output are exclusively outgoing originated from router.
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/images/2/2f/Pfd.png (https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Packet_Flow)