Starting from v6.21 almost every version was "stable" - 99,9% of features was working just fine, only selected few had problems.Also, I think you guys should really just have a stable branch, and not stable... would be far easier and nicer for us as end users. The new system still does not address this. It's pretty much Russian roulette when upgrading, even if you lab it first.
CCR doesn't have wireless interfaces. Remove the wireless package.when i try to upgrade CCR1036-8G-2S+
Error Missing : wireless-6.30.1-tile.npk
wireless-fp-6.30.1-tile.npk
Hi, does this update fix a problem with DHCP? After upgrading to 6.30 I have strange issue - DHCP-server stops working after reboot. The only fix that I found is to delete old server and create new one, exactly the same
have you contacted support@mikrotik.com? please make a supout.rif file when this happens, email it to supportCan anybody answer on my question about DHCP?
Hi, does this update fix a problem with DHCP? After upgrading to 6.30 I have strange issue - DHCP-server stops working after reboot. The only fix that I found is to delete old server and create new one, exactly the same
Torch tool does not work on CRS ports which are in a switched port group because packets between these ports are processed by switch-chip instead of CPU of the device. Switch-chip does not support Torch.interface TX traffic in Torch is still not visible. on the CRS platform at least.
I'm not vortex, but I think I can say what he wants. And I also want to just that:vortex, I really have no idea what you are asking. You really expect a release where "all bugs are fixed, 100% guarantee forever"?
Difference - 5 monthI already wrote that v6.30.x will be maintained for more than a month. If we stretch it for 6 months, it will be exactly what you, ufm, described. So I don't understand the difference
Thank You ,,CCR doesn't have wireless interfaces. Remove the wireless package.when i try to upgrade CCR1036-8G-2S+
Error Missing : wireless-6.30.1-tile.npk
Understand. OK, will think how to solve.I am just saying the UX should not be the same to go from 6.30.2 to 6.30.3 as to go from 6.30.3 to 6.31.x
Or try IP -> Cloud and be happy!more likely that your script is broken. scripting language improves over time, the scripts need to be updated. MikroTik did not make th DynDNS script, you have to ask the person who wrote it, or maybe post this question in the "Scripting" section, someone could update it.+1 for dyndns script, 6.29.1!working and 6.30 broken
Doesnt work on DS-Lite where you only get an public ipv6 and an private ipv4 address.Or try IP -> Cloud and be happy!more likely that your script is broken. scripting language improves over time, the scripts need to be updated. MikroTik did not make th DynDNS script, you have to ask the person who wrote it, or maybe post this question in the "Scripting" section, someone could update it.+1 for dyndns script, 6.29.1!working and 6.30 broken
Send the report to support@mikrotik.comWinbox ignores tick "IP - UPnP - Show Dummy Rule" - they always are in NAT tab. Could you fix it? (Or please give an advice how to report this annoying thing?)
Thanks.
Confirm the problem with the connection to the pptp from android clients for 6.30 and 6.30.1. Downgrade to version 6.29 solves the problem.Something wrong with PPP for Android clients:
connecting >>> authenticated >>> terminated
I tried PPTP and L2TP/IPSEC and behavior is the same. Windows/Linux clients work flawlessly.
So, anyone can tell it's a feature or a bug?+1, since v6.30.It's not working to use "0.0.0.0" (dynamic IP address) as the "S.A. Src. Address" on IPsec Police.
We can't repeat it. Could be misconfiguration that no longer gets accepted in new version? Did you all email support@mikrotik.com ?So, anyone can tell it's a feature or a bug?+1, since v6.30.It's not working to use "0.0.0.0" (dynamic IP address) as the "S.A. Src. Address" on IPsec Police.
yes, in the version v6.31rc8 problem with pptp missing. thankscould you please try latest 6.31rc it should be fixed android and ppp there
We had a VPLS Problem with 6.29.1 which was a deal breaker for us.Starting from v6.21 almost every version was "stable" - 99,9% of features was working just fine, only selected few had problems.Also, I think you guys should really just have a stable branch, and not stable... would be far easier and nicer for us as end users. The new system still does not address this. It's pretty much Russian roulette when upgrading, even if you lab it first.
You need to realize that this forum doesn't reflect real situation, forum is place to complain .