Community discussions

MUM Europe 2020
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Default setting of some routerboard series ackward

Thu Feb 27, 2014 2:03 pm

This remark refers to other routers as well but in particular the 951Ui has this setting which is very ackward imho.

The default setting is ether1 = gateway port and ether2-master and 3-5 are slaves in the switch.
But the PoE-out port is ether5! Why!

What is the idea behind this? What is the expectation the PoE-ether5 port is going to be used for? A camera? Ok, but how many people buy a rb951Ui to hook up a camera or other device to powerfeed it from the wifi router? Not so much I'll guess.
Because ether1 is PoE-in? Well, true but most probably this router will be connected to the adapter directly by means of the powerplug.

Why not swap the default setting of the ether1 and ether5 usage. Many WISP working with MT product might want to use this rb951 to also power the antenna that makes the connection to the provider's AP network. (Like the documentation states. "Less use of power-adapters thus cables.")

Usually the antenna is the gateway and that has to be connected in this default setup to ether1.
But we actually want to use a PoE-out port. So we have to connect the antenna to ether5. But this is just a slave port in the LAN network. If not aware, problems all over....

To make use of the ether5 as gateway port we now have to remove default configuration and make new one where Ether5 becomes the gateway port and is removed from the switch and the ether1 port will become the master switch port and the ports 2-4 will become the new slaves with master=ether1.
If this is done during the first config where the default setup is choosen and an external dhcp network is used (like most operators will have) this creates the need of several reboots etc. Very inconveniant!


2nd remark:
Why is the neigbour discovery switched off on the gateway interface. I can understand that for the 'dummy' user this might be the best idea. But imho for ordinary customer this is not the router of choiche anyway. So this router will probably be used mostly in situations where the operator is MT based or where the first setup is done by an operator that already has a network with dhcp-server alive. Default connection will be to the gateway port, but in the other PC the router doesn't come up because discovery is disabled!



If this router is aimed at bulk sales to the 'dummy' customer than the price makes no sense compared to other cheaper and easier to be used devices on the market.

Please give me your ideas and discuss this with MT on this forum.
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
User avatar
rextended
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 2950
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 12:49 pm
Location: Capalbio, Tuscany, Italy

Re: Default setting of some routerboard series ackward

Fri Feb 28, 2014 7:56 pm

Too many question, one simple logical answer:

951Ui is simply 951U with "i".

If you want personalize configuration, do it yourself.
The default configuration, standard for all RB951 version, and other models,
is only for a start.

The WISP that seriously use any RB product, never are using default configuration.

The first step of any RB hardware entering to my WISP is: netinstall 6.7
I'm Italian, not English. Sorry for my imperfect grammar.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Default setting of some routerboard series ackward

Sat Mar 01, 2014 2:17 am

Too many question, one simple logical answer:

951Ui is simply 951U with "i".

If you want personalize configuration, do it yourself.
The default configuration, standard for all RB951 version, and other models,
is only for a start.

The WISP that seriously use any RB product, never are using default configuration.

The first step of any RB hardware entering to my WISP is: netinstall 6.7
So I see. As a newbee you think the unknown buying MT should be kept in the dark and the smart (like yourself) will already have figured it out, and keep that info by himself. Nice for you, but you're missing the aim of this community.

I have been involved in many treats on this forum and after years I find even the 'experts' are at times overlooking or not understanding some (wrong) settings. In this forum it works to discuss these, not to vent egos. You'd get better audience in your local pub.
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
User avatar
rextended
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 2950
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 12:49 pm
Location: Capalbio, Tuscany, Italy

Re: Default setting of some routerboard series ackward

Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:23 am

... What is the idea behind this? ...
... you're missing the aim of this community ...
1) I have explain exactly the idea behind

2) I never write to not use forum to get help, but no one can pretend the RB are configured out-of-the-box as idea of one, perfectly to work as one think.

3) I'm not english and what I write can be misunderstanded, but my post, in this thread, is not ambiguous.

4) I do not want to retort at your squallid provocation, is not "the aim of this community".
I'm Italian, not English. Sorry for my imperfect grammar.
 
User avatar
dasiu
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:41 am
Location: Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: Default setting of some routerboard series ackward

Sat Mar 01, 2014 1:59 pm

Usually the antenna is the gateway and that has to be connected in this default setup to ether1.
But we actually want to use a PoE-out port. So we have to connect the antenna to ether5. But this is just a slave port in the LAN network. If not aware, problems all over....
I have access to about 5 different RouterBoards (751 mostly) that work as a SOHO router. I also borrowed my routers for some temporary replacements. And only in ONE of the cases the ether1 is connected to the antenna. In the other cases the ISPs were wired ISPs. So what you say about "usually the antenna is the gateway" - strongly depends on the country and area you live in.
To make use of the ether5 as gateway port we now have to remove default configuration and make new one where Ether5 becomes the gateway port and is removed from the switch and the ether1 port will become the master switch port and the ports 2-4 will become the new slaves with master=ether1.
If this is done during the first config where the default setup is choosen and an external dhcp network is used (like most operators will have) this creates the need of several reboots etc. Very inconveniant!
ether 2 can still be the master port, as DHCP server and IP address are already configured on it. So you just remove ether5 from the switch (master port = none) and set ether1's master port to ether2 :). And move IP and NAT from ether1 to ether5. It's quick, it can be done by a simple script, and it doesn't require ANY reboot. If it is a WISP, that configures and gives user the router - the WISP for sure have a specialist that can do it veeery quickly for a big amount of RouterBoards.
2nd remark:
Why is the neigbour discovery switched off on the gateway interface. I can understand that for the 'dummy' user this might be the best idea. But imho for ordinary customer this is not the router of choiche anyway. So this router will probably be used mostly in situations where the operator is MT based or where the first setup is done by an operator that already has a network with dhcp-server alive. Default connection will be to the gateway port, but in the other PC the router doesn't come up because discovery is disabled!

If this router is aimed at bulk sales to the 'dummy' customer than the price makes no sense compared to other cheaper and easier to be used devices on the market.
I think, that the router is for both.
1. If the first setup is done by an operator - it will for sure have the config automatized and it will be very quick - and the user will receive the box ready to work :).
2. If a "dummy" customer buys the router - it will work as other "well known" simple routers. Usually the first interface is WAN, and others are LAN. Also, the incoming WAN connections are blocked - so the router is very secure. Have you heard lately about many bugs in SOHO routers, that allowed the attackers gain access to the router by WAN and change some settings, like DNS servers redirecting to fake e-banking websites? MikroTik is a bit more expensive, but it's secure. Also the Neighbor discovery is enabled only on LAN - which is MY network. WAN is operator's network, a hostile territory - why would I tell my operator and it's other customers my ROS version, system name, exact RouterBoard model etc.?
If the customer is "dummy" - it is secured by default, from a start. If he wants to change some settings - he can do everything :). I think, that's the case.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Default setting of some routerboard series ackward

Sat Mar 01, 2014 5:56 pm

hmm, it would actually be interesting to know who buys these desktop routers.
I have so far not seen any mayor big ISP seen putting MT anywere. Maybe some now try the high-end CCR's etc. but if it comes to big scale deployment of wifi routers thrown at the client all you see is Netgear, lynksys and nowadays TP-link and in US maybe also ubnt. Probably MT wouldn't even have the production capacity to produce so many devices in bulk to serve this market.
Ask any engineer of these big nationwide players what they think about Mikrotik devices and most of them never even have heard of that name....
So, imho MT-desktop wifi is not in use a lot by the big players. But I'll gues that could be a nice business oportunity for them here!

The home user market then? Where the real dummy's are to be found....? I still have to find the first electronic shop that sells MT.
Online? Well not in the 'normal' electronics shops. You have to go to the more specialised shops to find some MT stuff on the shelfs.

In other words, most people that but MT are enthousiasts that buy because they think its good or they want to learn about the product and start playing with it. Another group will be starters in the (W)ISP industry. Most of them are still to be called 'dummy' in the field (I was for years, in some fields I still am...) of MT so yeah, if that is were MT will finds its marktet, lots of starters are completely lost and put in the wrong directions with some of these weird default settings.

Regarding the PoE-out port of the 951UI-2HnPD;
If this router is bought because you are a provider's client (that installs another router by default) and you want to power feed one camera or other device (antenna to 'feed' your neigbour?) than this is a proper setting. Works out of the box.

But if you use this router because you are a WISP and you are looking to use this PoE port to feed the CPE antenna than its not the best config. Many small wisps with only tenths to some hundreds of clients use MT and their solutions. But for them this config is not right. Yes, you are right, they need to alter the config. I am only wondering why a config setup is made for a relative small group of proposed buyers were the bulk will have to alter it...
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
User avatar
rextended
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 2950
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 12:49 pm
Location: Capalbio, Tuscany, Italy

Re: Default setting of some routerboard series ackward

Sat Mar 01, 2014 6:29 pm

hmm, it would actually be interesting to know who buys these desktop routers.
Hi!
I have so far not seen any mayor big ISP seen putting MT anywere.
Today, 4235 client, all machine, except one x86 for user manager and one x86 for log storage, all CPE are RouterBoard, and all other Switch, Gateway, Router, etc. only MikroTik for infrastructure.

Is big enough my WISP to be considered "mayor"?

But if you use this router because you are a WISP and you are looking to use this PoE port to feed the CPE antenna than its not the best config. Many small wisps with only tenths to some hundreds of clients use MT and their solutions. But for them this config is not right. Yes, you are right, they need to alter the config.
If are serious WISP (and not improvised WISP with only dummy people passed off as good one),
never use default config for ANYTHING, included any other devices, not only mikrotik.

As repeated above, the RouterOS DEFAULT configuration are identically to all similar devices and not personalized for each single type of RouterBoard.
Do you understand my very bad english?
I am only wondering why a config setup is made for a relative small group of proposed buyers were the bulk will have to alter it...
The configuration is not maded for one group in particular, simply is the default configuration.





In this years I have sold at my users (not in particular order) Netgear, Atlantis Land, D-Link, TP-Link, Cisco, Ubiquity, Sparklan, etc.
All users want router pre-configured from us.
Just 10/20 persons buy only the router
About this 10/20 person, most return back for let us configure the router.
And no one router were mikrotik...


For the sake of precision, and clarity,
best regards.
I'm Italian, not English. Sorry for my imperfect grammar.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Default setting of some routerboard series ackward

Sat Mar 01, 2014 6:47 pm

Is big enough my WISP to be considered "mayor"?
No. Sorry, big enough to be called mayor is at least 100K clients I would say. Many countries have big ISP's serving millions of clients. They serve a group of clients that might have an interest in buying a new wifi router in the shop. And this is the market were the big bugs are spend, and made. MT won't even dream to become a player in this market....
If are serious WISP (and not improvised WISP with only dummy people passed off as good one),
never use default config for ANYTHING, included any other devices, not only mikrotik.
True. But like I said, "serious" can have so many meaning. If you talk "serious making money" than probably none of the MT forum user belong to that group. If you talk "serious" in dedication to the setup of a (small) router network probably 90% of forum users fall in this group....
The configuration is not maded for one group in particular, simply is the default configuration.
Not true. Default is only called default because it is like the word say; "default" It doesn't mean its good and usually it means a basic setup is aimed to serve the biggest proposed group of buyers. If not than the sales department doen't have a good grip on what they are doing...

In this years I have sold at my users (not in particular order) Netgear, Atlantis Land, D-Link, TP-Link, Cisco, Ubiquity, Sparklan, etc.
All users want router pre-configured from us.
Just 10/20 persons buy only the router
About this 10/20 person, most return back for let us configure the router.
And no one router were mikrotik...
So now both of us basically ruled out any proposed buyers market for MT. I'm sure they like this! :D
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
User avatar
rextended
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 2950
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 12:49 pm
Location: Capalbio, Tuscany, Italy

Re: Default setting of some routerboard series ackward

Sat Mar 01, 2014 6:56 pm

... So now both of us basically ruled out any proposed buyers market for MT. I'm sure they like this! :D ...
Yes, from the availability of "i" in the market (I wait new "mAP" :o [mikroAP] AP with 2 ether, 1 poe-in 1 poe-out devices on the market...) I stop to sell other brand for new installations.
This year ~90% of my installation are fully wireless.
I'm Italian, not English. Sorry for my imperfect grammar.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: malindem, pattone and 83 guests