FastTrack - New feature in 6.29

Fri Jun 12, 2015 2:36 pm

What's new in 6.30rc19 (2015-Jun-12 11:45):

*) fastpath - vlan interfaces support fastpath;
*) fastpath - partial support for bonding interfaces (rx only);
*) fastpath - vrrp interfaces support fastpath;

Number of possible setups with Fasttrack just got bigger. And, yes, also works with Q-in-Q, just tested it

Fri Jun 12, 2015 2:40 pm

How do i use Fasttrack feature

/ip firewall filter
add chain=forward action=fasttrack-connection connection-state=established,related
add chain=forward action=accept connection-state=established,related
add chain=forward action=drop connection-state=invalid

If i give this simple queues not working....

Yes, that is how fasttrack works - you create a firewall rule that allow connections to skip some processing (including simple queues).
If you use simple queues for all your traffic, sorry, you can't use fasttrack.
But if you use simple queues only for specific traffic, you can always create a more specific fasttrack-connection rule.

Fri Jun 12, 2015 2:42 pm

aguntukk, queues are for slowing down traffic. fasttrack is for speeding it up. you can't have both at the same time

at least make a more specific fasttrack rule, if you want only specific traffic to be fast, and other to be queued

CyberTod · Fri Jun 12, 2015 3:25 pm

You can not use fasttrack with queues.

Fasttrack = skip processing of packets
Queues = processing

aguntukk · Mon Jun 15, 2015 7:27 pm

Thanks for Your help about Fasttrack

aguntukk · Mon Jun 15, 2015 7:29 pm

How do i give null route in mikrotik??
Any idea?

patrick7 · Mon Jun 15, 2015 8:06 pm

Wrong thread.

/ip route add dst-address=192.0.2.2 type=blackhole

chojrak11 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:26 pm

The feature is great, however its user interface is confusing. I think the fast-track rule shouldn't just mark connections, but should automatically work as "Accept", so that the packets don't fall through to the next rule which is in 100% Accept. That's really weird.

I'd expect that only those packets which cannot be fast tracked should fall through to following rules (and ultimately be accepted).

And the dummy rule in 6.30RC only adds to the overall confusion...

2015-06-16_14-21-03.png

LuizMeier · Tue Jun 16, 2015 4:49 pm

The feature is great, however its user interface is confusing. I think the fast-track rule shouldn't just mark connections, but should automatically work as "Accept", so that the packets don't fall through to the next rule which is in 100% Accept. That's really weird.

I'd expect that only those packets which cannot be fast tracked should fall through to following rules (and ultimately be accepted).

And the dummy rule in 6.30RC only adds to the overall confusion...

Same thing here.

2015-06-16_14-21-03.png

 0    ;;; ICMP Permit
      chain=input action=accept protocol=icmp log=no log-prefix="" 

 1    ;;; Accept related input connections
      chain=input action=accept connection-state=established,related log=no log-prefix="" 

 2    ;;; Forward FastTrack
      chain=forward action=fasttrack-connection connection-state=established,related log=no 
      log-prefix="" 

 3    ;;; Accept related forward connections
      chain=forward action=accept connection-state=established,related log=no log-prefix=""

Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:42 pm

I agree. It is confusing. Fasttrack rules should have exactly the same behaviour, feel and look like all other rules.

Chupaka · Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:54 pm

seems like people are requesting an ability to do 'action=fasstrack passthrough=no'. MT?

Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:55 am

seems like people are requesting an ability to do 'action=fasstrack passthrough=no'. MT?

Can't you simply add a drop rule after it?

CyberTod · Wed Jun 17, 2015 10:20 am

I only drop invalid connections in forward chain. I only have fasttrack rule without accept rule after it, because the packets are accepted anyway and it works.

Ansy · Wed Jun 17, 2015 12:55 pm

It seems like FastPath/FastTrack cannot be switched off in configuration Bridge+Firewall+Queues (no routing)

"Use IP Firewall" box is checked ON, "Allow Fast Path" is OFF in Bridge Settings, and either Firewall Filter fasttrack forward rule is DISABLED too.
But -- Bridge Fast Path Packets & Bytes counters are actively increasing, Simple Queues counters are almost empty and not functioning AFAICS, so the Firewall counters and either Torch -- looks like only start packets of every session goes to Firewall.

RB750UP, ROS 6.30rc19 now.
(6.29 and other RC's crashed often and eating CPU by management process -- http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... 36#p485836 )
[Ticket#2015060366000431] [Ticket#2015053066000266] [Ticket#2015052966000214]

Who else can test firewalling/queuing BRIDGE?

G2Dolphin · Sat Jun 20, 2015 2:27 pm

How can I switch off the default dummy fasttrack rule in the filter? What sense in it anyway, we have the same counters in IP-Settings...

pchott · Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:50 am

I see here one example where FastTrack would be very usefull: ! VoIP !!!.

VoIP is usually configured on separate VLAN that has to be prioritized.

Is it possible to use FastTrack for VoIP VLAN? or is that RFE?

kobuki · Wed Jun 24, 2015 1:32 am

I was anticipating this feature and installed 6.29.1 only to find out that it's not supported on my router at home which is an RB450G. It has been one of the most popular ones and there isn't a night and day difference between this and the 750G which is indeed supported. Their hardware is almost identical. Why can't this be supported? Is it some hardware limitation or just company policy? I had exactly zero problems with the 450G since I've installed it 4-5 years ago. Sad.

kobuki · Wed Jun 24, 2015 9:35 pm

I wonder if I ever get an answer...

patrick7 · Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:54 pm

Are you really complaining about not getting an answer in a forum within 8 hours?

kobuki · Thu Jun 25, 2015 12:42 am

Are you really complaining about not getting an answer in a forum within 8 hours?

Check your clock, please. It was about a day later.

But no. It was merely a rhetorical question, if that helps to satisfy your curiosity (or your feeling of righteousness).

patrick7 · Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:11 am

It was on the same day.

omidkosari · Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:24 am

Does FastPath work with EOIP or GRE tunnels ? We have many router which they are just a simple bridge between an ethernet and an EOIP tunnel to pass pppoe to remote router .
In that situation fastpath would be very useful .

Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:14 am

It was on the same day.

depends on your local settings. I see 20hours difference (not being fooled by am/pm...)

LuizMeier · Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:04 pm

Just made a test with queue. Mikrotik just ignores the queues at all if FastTrack is active.

Chupaka · Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:35 pm

exactly. no slow processing (queues, firewall) at all. by design

robdeep · Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:01 am

I'm experiencing the exact same thing. Same routerboard here.

Any solutions?

It seems like FastTrack somehow disturbs my ssh/cifs server connections through IPSec-tunnel..

Ping still works as expected and I can even connect to suitable ports with telnet, but connecting with Putty (ssh) or Windows Explorer (CIFS) just hangs until timeout.. Anyhow, From IP/Firewall/Connection I can see established TCP-connection between client and server in both cases.. SSH to RB works fine, its just connections to servers behind my RB.

After disabling these 3 firewall rules everything works fine again:
0 X chain=forward action=fasttrack-connection connection-state=established,related log=no log-prefix=""
1 X chain=forward action=accept connection-state=established,related log=no log-prefix=""
2 X chain=forward action=drop connection-state=invalid log=no log-prefix=""

..but if I enable these again, problem comes back immediately (it also kills active ssh connections)..

Is anyone else noticed anything like this?

Not the biggest problem for me, because my RB2011UiAS-2HnD can handle my Internet connection pretty well also without FastTrack, but just a notice..

Ansy · Fri Jun 26, 2015 10:00 am

Just made a test with queue. Mikrotik just ignores the queues at all if FastTrack is active.

I don't use "Allow Fast Path" in "Bridge Settings", but I do "Use IP Firewall" there.

Beside of that, "Bridge Fast Path Packets & Bytes" counters are actively (not Mikro!) ticking now, ROS version 6.29.. 6.30rc19.. 6.30rc22.

I don't order and don't like it

My production Queuing Bridge just totally broken by this issue... all users fill all link bandwidth without any limits now. DNAT and Firewall don't functioning too.

I really don't want to change Queuing Bridge to Queuing Router due to lack of IP subnets, and I don't want to change my RB750UP based AP-sectors too because I like this simple & smart PoE installation.

CyberTod · Fri Jun 26, 2015 10:41 am

Fasttrack will not be active if you don't add the firewall rule for it. And Fastpath can be disabled from IP->Settings and for bridge in Bridge->Settings too. Check also Queue->Interface queues.

Ansy · Fri Jun 26, 2015 11:37 am

Fasttrack will not be active if you don't add the firewall rule for it. And Fastpath can be disabled from IP->Settings and for bridge in Bridge->Settings too. Check also Queue->Interface queues.

Well, screenshot is below.

2015-06-26 13-22-51 Скриншот экрана.png

Interface Queues are all changed to wireless-default (i.e. sfq) because of WISP infrastructure after RB750UP.
Why did this config work successfully all other ROS versions before 6.29?

omidkosari · Sat Jun 27, 2015 10:57 am

FastPath (routing with disabled connection tracking) is faster than FastPath with enabled connection tracking handler (which is FastTrack).

You can see description and examples of FastTrack in our latest newsletter (FastPath + Conntrack= FastTrack):
http://download2.mikrotik.com/news/news_65.pdf

If FastPath is disabled , which one is faster
1- Completely disable connection tracking ?
or
2- Use FastTrack with enabled connection tracking ?

Thanks for clarification

Mon Jun 29, 2015 1:27 pm

Well, screenshot is below.

I think you need to write to support with description and supout.rif file from latest RC.

Mon Jun 29, 2015 1:29 pm

If FastPath is disabled , which one is faster
1- Completely disable connection tracking ?
or
2- Use FastTrack with enabled connection tracking ?

Thanks for clarification

Simple FastPath will be faster, cause fasttrack enables the same FastPath in case of conntrack. so it is all packets FastPath vs most packets FastPath.

omidkosari · Mon Jun 29, 2015 2:17 pm

If FastPath is disabled , which one is faster
1- Completely disable connection tracking ?
or
2- Use FastTrack with enabled connection tracking ?

Thanks for clarification

Simple FastPath will be faster, cause fasttrack enables the same FastPath in case of conntrack. so it is all packets FastPath vs most packets FastPath.

You mean "Simple FastPath = Completely disable connection tracking" ?
So in my question 1 would be faster , right ?

Tue Jun 30, 2015 9:43 am

You mean "Simple FastPath = Completely disable connection tracking" ?
So in my question 1 would be faster , right ?

Yes and Yes.

KBV · Wed Jul 01, 2015 1:11 pm

it's not supported on my router at home which is an RB450G

FastTrack is supported only half router models. So it's normal.

MadEngineer · Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:36 pm

Curious if anyone with battery/solar powered routers with this function enabled have any power usage data to share

rado3105 · Sat Jul 04, 2015 5:33 pm

I have one router that has no rules in firewall filter. But limits one network using SQ, but also the traffic except that network goes through router. I am thinking to make rule that will fasttrack all connections except that one network that uses SQ. Is it good idea? Will it lower CPU usage or not?

something like this:
/ip firewall filter> print

Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid, D - dynamic 
 0    chain=forward action=jump jump-target=fastrack 
      dst-address-list=!fasttrack log=no log-prefix="" 

 1    chain=forward action=jump jump-target=fastrack 
      src-address-list=!fasttrack log=no log-prefix="" 

 2    chain=fastrack action=fasttrack-connection log=no log-prefix=""

Sat Jul 11, 2015 1:51 pm

How can I switch off the default dummy fasttrack rule in the filter? What sense in it anyway, we have the same counters in IP-Settings...

Vote against dummy rules in firewall: http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=98471

miharoot · Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:55 am

Do I understand correctly, that it does not work with l2tp interface?

Tue Jul 14, 2015 11:14 am

Do I understand correctly, that it does not work with l2tp interface?

No, currently it is not supported

shifto · Wed Jul 15, 2015 1:59 am

Do I understand correctly, that it does not work with l2tp interface?
No, currently it is not supported

Also doesn't work with PPPoE clients AFAIK. Is this going to be supported in the future? (And just to be bold, any ETA?

)

undecided · Wed Jul 22, 2015 10:50 am

So I currently use PCC mangle rules, and I use NAT on my WAN interfaces, however I do not use "masquerade" instead I use "src-nat" and specify a range of public IP's to use.

Will fasttrack work on this setup? I have no way to test and I'm reluctant to upgrade and test it on my live environment.

Hoping someone can let me know if it should work with this setup?

tx

MadEngineer · Sun Aug 16, 2015 9:47 am

Why do I have the "special dummy rule" duplicated three times in Mangle?

105547111 · Mon Aug 17, 2015 11:15 pm

Why do I have the "special dummy rule" duplicated three times in Mangle?

Look closely there's 3 distinct rules...

forward, prerouting and postrouting.

Just gives you a breakdown of total.

MTeeker · Mon Sep 07, 2015 2:18 am

From what I can see, the main constraint of Fasttrack is Qos of VoIP queue priorities. Simply because Fasttrack does not enlarge an existing bandwidth pipe, it only removes processing at internal 'checkpoint' to speed up delivery.

From this angle though, the intended working of QoS of VoIP (using mangle marking pre-routing, plus queue tree settings) remains a valid reason. It's bandwidth priority required to ensure QoS of such as VoIP calls.

Using macgaiver's apt metaphor of a club entrance, logistically speaking, there are clearly three queues at the club entrance.

- A special priority entrance for VIP (always available for very important personnel).
- A quick pass-through for regular faces, and
- A queue for unknown faces.

I think the real challenges is to make Fasttrack work only in the 'remaining nominal bandwidth' after allowing for QoS (i.e. VIP entrance) whenever it's needed. This way, a VoIP call does not turns into a conversation of broken words with silence breaks in between. This would definitely result in a better overall performance of suitable MikroTik routerboads. A win-win, using a cliche. I believe Jarda has a very good point here in respect of having more than one queue for Fasttracking.

It broke my initiated VoIP call on the receiver's end when Fatstrack was turned on even though with a connection of 100mbps/down and 2.4mbps/up.

I does sounds like a contradictory issue as it currently stands. But I thought of giving a fresh perspective.
Cheers

Mon Sep 07, 2015 8:20 am

Just imagine that someone has weak router, fast Internet access and doesn't care about the qos. His router is a bottleneck without fasttrack. When fasttrack is on: whooooo, what a ride!

efaden · Wed Sep 09, 2015 2:53 am

Anyone have any tips for why I would have a fasttrack connection rule in forward, but yet "fasttrack active" is no? I see traffic going to the fasttrack rule. Thoughts?

Wed Sep 09, 2015 8:30 am

If subsequent accepting rule counts the same like previous fasttracking rule, the fasttrack is not applied. Probably some of the conditions are not met in your case. Check the wiki.

hatred · Wed Sep 09, 2015 2:09 pm

Why do I have the "special dummy rule" duplicated three times in Mangle?
Look closely there's 3 distinct rules...

forward, prerouting and postrouting.

Just gives you a breakdown of total.

But why all chains' counters are always equal?

MT-dummy.png

MTeeker · Thu Sep 10, 2015 2:38 am

Perhaps it's a trivial thing. But it does not make sense.

When Fasttrack is engaged under 6.30.4, Speedtest.net (by Ookla) does not indicate a better performance that I would expect. In fact, it gives much lower performance than my nominal bandwidth 100mbps/down and 2.4mbps up.

Does anybody have the same experiences?

Thu Sep 10, 2015 9:24 am

My experience is that correctly used fasttrack helps always in common situations.

MTeeker · Thu Sep 10, 2015 9:51 am

Would you be able to run a Sppedtest (Ookla) on your wired device and comment on it?

Many thanks.

Thu Sep 10, 2015 10:12 pm

Actually my devices are configured in the way that there is no need for fasttrack. The devices are able to handle the traffic without it and the cpu is not maxed out. When fasttrack is on, the main effect is lowered cpu usage, nothing more. So there is nothing I can show you on the speedtest.net results. I had recently temporary 3times more bandwidth limit set on some of my places. When I was testing the fasttrack there, I have found that I am maxing out RB2011 around 100Mbits/s but with fasttrack it is able to run the 120Mbits/s with around 20% cpu utilization. Then I used the fasttrack only for torrents to get downloads faster and do not block the router by cpu utilization. As it prevents queues to work, I am not using fasttrack in any other way than for torrents and local subnets communication.

MTeeker · Sat Sep 12, 2015 6:43 am

Thanks for the reply.

I have just now been able to isolate a local issue with my ISP which has nothing to do with Fasttrack effects, measured via Speedtest indicator.

Red face. Sorry for barking at the wrong tree.
Cheers

Mon Sep 14, 2015 4:19 pm

Never mind. It is not so easy to find the reason of the problem many times.

docmarius · Mon Sep 14, 2015 6:57 pm

Just an observation: If you use fasttrack on a router capable of wirespeed on a PPPoE link, like the RB110AHx2 on a 1Gbps PPPoE, placing a fasttrack rule in the filter table will actually slow it down a tiny amount (in my case 900Mbps vs. 925 Mbps), because of that additional rule adding a small amount of processing while the PPPoE traffic needs to bypass that rule, not being fasttrack-able.
In this case, not using fasttrack is actually faster for WLAN traffic.

MTeeker · Fri Sep 18, 2015 1:30 am

@ jarda,

I decided not to use Fast Track for the time being. Much along your reasoning but with less knowledge than you have.

I am thinking about a potential flaw at the conceptual level. Imagine a convoy of delivery trucks arriving at my University gate, using a metaphor. The gatekeeper checks the first few trucks and then allows the rest of the convoy to go through. To speed up traffic of course.

The implied assumption is the rest of the convoy carries the same thing as the first few trucks.

What risk does Fast Track pose if it's not the case? Is it possible for subsequent packets to carry additional something else that the router firewall is not aware of, and therefore stops its delivery.

Like to hear your thought.
Cheer
(edited for clarity)

Sat Sep 19, 2015 9:25 am

I am thinking about a potential flaw at the conceptual level. Imagine a convoy of delivery trucks arriving at my University gate, using a metaphor. The gatekeeper checks the first few trucks and then allows the rest of the convoy to go through. To speed up traffic of course.

The implied assumption is the rest of the convoy carries the same thing as the first few trucks.

That's not a flaw in concept of fasttrack. A typically configured firewall without fasttrack behaves just like that anyways- checks the initial handshake, applies policies, accepts everything else. You need to understand that a firewall is NOT a traffic scanner, i.e. it does not (and should not) behave like antiviruses do. Once connection is established there's very little firewall can check in the following packets.

MTeeker · Sun Sep 20, 2015 11:26 am

Thanks for that explanation. I got mixed up.

Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:41 pm

It would be nice to have updated Packet Flow diagram with FastTrack blocks added somewhere. It would have made so many things just way easier to understand and diagnose. It took me considerable amount of time, for instance, to understand that outbound inner-tunnel IPsec traffic should be fully exempt from FastTrack processing, otherwise it'll leave the wire unencrypted. Highly counter-intuitive.

Thu Sep 24, 2015 11:28 pm

Correct. I have a feeling (from email communication with mikrotik staff) that they work on some new way of fasttrack implementation. But as always they don't say anything....

Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:52 am

We have made separated documentation for FastTrack on the wiki,
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Wiki/Fasttrack
Currently it has initial description and configuration examples. More information is coming.

Bytezone · Wed Dec 09, 2015 7:58 pm

Can anybody confirm whether it's supported on x86 .. if not what should i do to use it?
I have v6.33 installed on my computer.

Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:21 pm

No fastpath or fasttrack on x86 for now...

Bytezone · Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:04 am

Even though it's existing as a feature on x86 ROS v6.33, really disappointed i see the fasttrack-connection on the action menu and can not use it !! .. thanks nz_monkey I hope mikrotik people do their job for this matter so i can enjoy this great feature like my friends here.

realdreams · Sun Dec 20, 2015 6:27 am

No fastpath or fasttrack on x86 for now...

or ever? Isn't fastpath/fasttrack using hardware specific capabilities? And for x86, why do you even need it?

realdreams · Sun Dec 20, 2015 6:32 am

ip/firewall/filter
chain=forward action=fasttrack-connection connection-state=established,related log=no log-prefix=""
chain=forward action=accept connection-state=established,related log=no log-prefix=""

Only a test in RB750g, no result...

Same on RB750G 6.33.3, fasttrack filter rule counter is ticking but

IPv4 Fasttrack Active		Yes
IPv4 Fasttrack Packets		0
IPv4 Fasttrack Bytes		0 B

Sun Dec 20, 2015 11:23 am

or ever? Isn't fastpath/fasttrack using hardware specific capabilities? And for x86, why do you even need it?

I can't speak for Mikrotik, but it seems like the natural direction for CHR.

Read this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Pl ... opment_Kit

It is used by Brocade, Juniper and Alcatel-Lucent to do wire speed on x86.

kor3k · Mon Dec 21, 2015 7:33 pm

fasttrack is indeed a cool feature, but it's current implementation is confusing and misleading. it also breaks the "normal" rule behavior.

when you place a "fasttrack connection" rule in your fw, then packets matched with this rule may or may not be fasttracked. that means, not all matching packets are consumed by this rule, therefore you need an "accept" rule right after the fasttrack rule.

this is not how rules behave. also, you cannot just replace your "accept" rules with "fasttrack", you have to add them.

so to correct this, the "fasttrack connection" action SHOULD utilize fallback to accept:

if fasttrack can be applied on a packet, then it is fasttracked.
if fasttrack can not be applied on a packet, then it is accepted.

then and only then all matched packets are consumed, so no need for additional accept rule and no more "broken behavior".

Tue Dec 22, 2015 11:53 am

Interesting concept. As the fasttrack is kind of mangle rule on connection level it should be rather applicable to all types of traffic matching the rule criteria. And anyway there should be also "not match" or "pass" counter on each rule to know what part of load was captured or not matched by each rule. It's obvious that fasttrack is not well cooked enough yet. Mikrotik admitted this to me long time ago. I hope we will see more rationally working fasttrack soon.

Wed Jan 06, 2016 1:47 pm

fasttrack is indeed a cool feature, but it's current implementation is confusing and misleading. it also breaks the "normal" rule behavior.

when you place a "fasttrack connection" rule in your fw, then packets matched with this rule may or may not be fasttracked. that means, not all matching packets are consumed by this rule, therefore you need an "accept" rule right after the fasttrack rule.

this is not how rules behave. also, you cannot just replace your "accept" rules with "fasttrack", you have to add them.

so to correct this, the "fasttrack connection" action SHOULD utilize fallback to accept:

if fasttrack can be applied on a packet, then it is fasttracked.

if fasttrack can not be applied on a packet, then it is accepted.

then and only then all matched packets are consumed, so no need for additional accept rule and no more "broken behavior".

1) mark-connection work exactly the same way.

2) if packet was received fragmented (it is received in slow path) and it will never go fastpath, but it can still trigger that rule, also not all packets form connection will be fastpath as you need some of those to refresh conntrack and arp timeouts, so you need accept rules anyway.

3) how will you combine fasttrack if firewall that checks connection-state=new, like you can do now?

blahblah927 · Thu Mar 17, 2016 2:27 pm

Is there any way to use the fastpath feature with hotspot? my box load is kinda high due to the NAT and queueing

Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:00 pm

There is a presentation available where FastPath and FastTrack is explained in detail. It is available here:
http://mum.mikrotik.com/presentations/E ... 413105.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bl7V5i ... 0HD40QyLEe

kabal · Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:17 pm

On RB750G and RB750UP not worked =( ROS 6.34.3

NetVicious · Tue May 30, 2017 2:36 pm

Hi!

I read RB4xx don't supports FastTrack. But why Winbox it showing this option on the Firewall action ?

IMHO, Winbox should detect this and the fastrack option should not appear.

Regards,

Chupaka · Wed May 31, 2017 5:25 pm

I read RB4xx don't supports FastTrack. But why Winbox it showing this option on the Firewall action ?
IMHO, Winbox should detect this and the fastrack option should not appear.

looks like you're talking about FastPath, not FastTrack. FastTrack is supported by RouterOS, not by hardware

Zdenekhb · Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:30 am

New ISSUE: Fasttrack causes errors with IPTV HLS. If is used Fasttrack , IPTV does not Work.... in all versions.of RoS vhere is it

Tue Aug 15, 2017 1:22 pm

New ISSUE: Fasttrack causes errors with IPTV HLS. If is used Fasttrack , IPTV does not Work.... in all versions.of RoS vhere is it

What do you mean by "IPTV HLS"? can you be more precise? i have no issues with my IPTV and Fastpath? If you use Fasttrack then this traffic is NATed??
There are not enough information in this statement

Tue Aug 15, 2017 1:26 pm

Are you using any of RouterOS functions which are listed here?
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:IP/Fasttrack

"Note that not all packets in a connection can be fasttracked, so it is likely to see some packets going through slow path even though connection is marked for fasttrack. This is the reason why fasttrack-connection is usually followed by identical action=accept rule. Fasttracked packets bypass firewall, connection tracking, simple queues, queue tree with parent=global, ip traffic-flow (restriction removed in 6.33), IP accounting, IPSec, hotspot universal client, VRF assignment, so it is up to administrator to make sure fasttrack does not interfere with other configuration."

If you do, then you need to adjust FastTrack rule so it would exclude this specific traffic.

GARCIADOEGOGERMAN · Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:11 pm

Good Morning!!!
A few days ago I bought an RB750GR3 for my home.
In my house I have internet connection of 30 megs of downhill and 3 megs of climb.
My query is if it is worth using fasttrack for this speed ???
Fasttrack is only for WAN-LAN or does it also affect LAN-LAN ???
On the other hand, the configuration that comes by default has everything activated or you have to do some particular configuration but ???

Thank you very much already.

Greetings.

amt · Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:55 pm

New ISSUE: Fasttrack causes errors with IPTV HLS. If is used Fasttrack , IPTV does not Work.... in all versions.of RoS vhere is it

thats what i try to solve, today i was searching ipTV problems in forum cause i also have a problem at iPTV....
what kind of problem do you have with ipTV ? can you share plase ?

aditrodostress · Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:19 am

fasttrack on rb850gx2 ?

Cha0s · Mon Aug 21, 2017 3:38 pm

RB850Gx2 is not supported.
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:I ... d_hardware

Modestas · Fri Aug 25, 2017 4:03 pm

RB850Gx2 is not supported.
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:I ... d_hardware

However, both OS CLI and WinBox happily allow to enable Fasttrack on RB850Gx2. Filter rule with action=fasttrack-connection is also OK on RB850Gx2.
I really wonder what technical limitations on RB1xx, RB5xx, RB850 prevent FastPath.

GARCIADOEGOGERMAN · Sat Aug 26, 2017 12:41 am

Good Morning!!!
A few days ago I bought an RB750GR3 for my home.
In my house I have internet connection of 30 megs of downhill and 3 megs of climb.
My query is if it is worth using fasttrack for this speed ???
Fasttrack is only for WAN-LAN or does it also affect LAN-LAN ???
On the other hand, the configuration that comes by default has everything activated or you have to do some particular configuration but ???

Thank you very much already.

Greetings.

idlemind · Sat Aug 26, 2017 7:07 pm

Good Morning!!!
A few days ago I bought an RB750GR3 for my home.
In my house I have internet connection of 30 megs of downhill and 3 megs of climb.
My query is if it is worth using fasttrack for this speed ???
Fasttrack is only for WAN-LAN or does it also affect LAN-LAN ???
On the other hand, the configuration that comes by default has everything activated or you have to do some particular configuration but ???

Thank you very much already.

Greetings.

FastTrack will help keep CPU utilization low. It's configured by default so you might as well leave it on. Local connections will only be FastTracked if you are doing inter-VLAN routing on the LAN side. If you have a single flat network on the LAN your traffic will be "switched" at line rate with or without FastTrack.

I use a RB750Gr3 on my LAN and have tested with and without FastTrack and it definitely won't limit you if you turn it off on a 30Mb/3Mb connection as far as accessing the Internet is concerned with a single flat network behind the Internet.

GARCIADOEGOGERMAN · Sat Aug 26, 2017 11:16 pm

Good Morning!!!
A few days ago I bought an RB750GR3 for my home.
In my house I have internet connection of 30 megs of downhill and 3 megs of climb.
My query is if it is worth using fasttrack for this speed ???
Fasttrack is only for WAN-LAN or does it also affect LAN-LAN ???
On the other hand, the configuration that comes by default has everything activated or you have to do some particular configuration but ???

Thank you very much already.

Greetings.
FastTrack will help keep CPU utilization low. It's configured by default so you might as well leave it on. Local connections will only be FastTracked if you are doing inter-VLAN routing on the LAN side. If you have a single flat network on the LAN your traffic will be "switched" at line rate with or without FastTrack.

I use a RB750Gr3 on my LAN and have tested with and without FastTrack and it definitely won't limit you if you turn it off on a 30Mb/3Mb connection as far as accessing the Internet is concerned with a single flat network behind the Internet.

Thanks for your answer!!! Greetings.

Who is online