Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
mikruser
Member
Member
Topic Author
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:28 pm

MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 12:06 pm

What is MT technical support (https://help.mikrotik.com/servicedesk/servicedesk) for?
I created a request.
They simply refused to fix the problem and forcibly closed the request.
do not ask me why it is necessary.
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 24824
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 12:12 pm

Please mention the issue number so I can investigate
No answer to your question? How to write posts
 
mikruser
Member
Member
Topic Author
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:28 pm

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 12:26 pm

SUP-37480
do not ask me why it is necessary.
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 24824
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 12:50 pm

We have requested several things for you to test, but have not received results. In our tests, there was no issues found. As you know, support accepts bug reports, but is not for debugging configuration issues.

Also, can you test the same installation with another, computer, cables, etc, int order to make sure that indeed the router causes this issue?
No answer to your question? How to write posts
 
mikruser
Member
Member
Topic Author
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:28 pm

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:08 pm

We have requested several things for you to test, but have not received results.
I sent you everything I could. what other things do you want?

Also, can you test the same installation with another, computer, cables, etc
maybe you will read the entire conversation with technical support?
I tested directly from the computer - no problem.
I tested through a router from another vendor - no problem.
I tested through CCR - problem.
I tested through RB3011 - problem.
do not ask me why it is necessary.
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 24824
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:14 pm

We did the same tests, no problem. You do have a lot of other configuration on the device. This is the only difference. We asked if you can test with basic config, you refused. What else can we do? There is no other difference, the issue is not in RouterOS. The only difference is your custom settings.
No answer to your question? How to write posts
 
mikruser
Member
Member
Topic Author
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:28 pm

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:26 pm

You do have a lot of other configuration on the device.
Any router in real life have some configuration. Your routers are not designed for this? Do they only work with very basic configuration? Why then there is no warning about this on the site?

We asked if you can test with basic config, you refused.
This CCR router is in use in head office, and it is impossible to reset its configuration.
do not ask me why it is necessary.
 
Paternot
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 802
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:01 am
Location: Niterói / Brazil

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 2:04 pm

You do have a lot of other configuration on the device.
Any router in real life have some configuration. Your routers are not designed for this? Do they only work with very basic configuration? Why then there is no warning about this on the site?
The first step in debugging problems is to get a baseline - so we know where we are. The way to do this is taking out everything that has nothing to do with the problem - a router with minimal configuration.

You refused. There is nothing more to be done, except close the bug as "works for me", since there is no extra information to go on.

Usually Mikrotik support tries very hard to solve problems. Sometimes we don't like what they say - like "it will be fixed in v7" - but they DO answer and try to fix things.
 
eddieb
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:53 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 2:30 pm

Usually Mikrotik support tries very hard to solve problems. Sometimes we don't like what they say - like "it will be fixed in v7" - but they DO answer and try to fix things.
I fully agree on that, they are very cooperative and ask you to do things to test so they can try to reproduce that in their test environment.
If they can not reproduce a problem, it is not generic enough or they do not have enough info to reproduce it. (just like in "real" software bugfixing ...)
They fixed a couple of bugs I reported in the past after I provided the correct info that way.
Running 6.48.1 (stable) on :
CCR1009-8G-1S (2x ipsec/l2tp site-to-site, ipsec/l2tp roadwarrior, dhcpd, dns), CRS125-24G-1S, RB1100, RB962UiGS-5HacT2HnT (10pc), RB931-2nD, RB951, RB750GL ,RB2011UAS-RM, PWR-LINE-AP, RB750Gr3 running dude
 
mikruser
Member
Member
Topic Author
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:28 pm

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:34 pm

Paternoot
The way to do this is taking out everything that has nothing to do with the problem - a router with minimal configuration.
I already wrote why this is impossible.
I also tested on RB3011 with simple configuration and sent them the result, but they ignored it for contrived reasons.

Usually Mikrotik support tries very hard to solve problems.
maybe, if the problem is simple and they can solve it. if they cannot solve the problem, they keep it quiet or refuse to admit it.
do not ask me why it is necessary.
 
blingblouw
Member
Member
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:43 am

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:57 pm

Why don't you share the issue, the suspense is killing me
 
mikruser
Member
Member
Topic Author
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:28 pm

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Fri Jan 29, 2021 6:06 pm

blingblouw

this issue: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=171165

(and I very much suspect that my other problem is caused by the same reasons viewtopic.php?t=146665 )
do not ask me why it is necessary.
 
Paternot
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 802
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:01 am
Location: Niterói / Brazil

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:43 am

Paternoot
The way to do this is taking out everything that has nothing to do with the problem - a router with minimal configuration.
I already wrote why this is impossible.
I also tested on RB3011 with simple configuration and sent them the result, but they ignored it for contrived reasons.

Usually Mikrotik support tries very hard to solve problems.
maybe, if the problem is simple and they can solve it. if they cannot solve the problem, they keep it quiet or refuse to admit it.
If the next problem solving step can't be done, then it will not go much farther than this. If support asks You to do something, there is a reason. Even that "stupid" question "Is it on?" is a valid one. The number of calls I got, that where just something turned off... even when they say "Of course is on!". No, not always.

And we see, time and again, huge threads about very complex problems here on the forum. Sometimes Mikrotik support take their sweet time - but they are like a bulldog with a bone: they chomp it, and don't let go.

True, sometimes they answer "No, will not fix it until v7", or "will fix in the future" - and future is one year from now. These are the "suboptimal" (the awful ones, really) answers - but one answer nonetheless.

I went looking into your post, and the formatting of the CCR iperf results made my head hurt. Please, put that mess in a sane formatting.

One iperf3 testing, from one PC to another.
PC -> hEX (IPSec/L2TP) -> internet -> 1100AHx2 (IPSec/L2TP) -> PC
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd
[ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 10.8 MBytes 90.9 Mbits/sec 80 131 KBytes
[ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 4.97 MBytes 41.7 Mbits/sec 108 49.9 KBytes
[ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 5.53 MBytes 46.4 Mbits/sec 25 59.9 KBytes
[ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 5.47 MBytes 45.9 Mbits/sec 27 68.6 KBytes
[ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 5.47 MBytes 45.9 Mbits/sec 34 53.7 KBytes
[ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 5.47 MBytes 45.9 Mbits/sec 15 63.7 KBytes
[ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 4.97 MBytes 41.7 Mbits/sec 15 79.9 KBytes
[ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 5.53 MBytes 46.4 Mbits/sec 40 62.4 KBytes
[ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 5.47 MBytes 45.9 Mbits/sec 18 71.1 KBytes
[ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 4.97 MBytes 41.7 Mbits/sec 24 53.7 KBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr
[ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 58.7 MBytes 49.2 Mbits/sec 386 sender
[ 5] 0.00-10.04 sec 57.7 MBytes 48.2 Mbits/sec receiver

1100AHx2 is on RoS 6.47.1
hEX is on RoS 6.47.7
One link is 60/60 Mbps
Other link is 90/90 Mbps
Latency is about 10ms

I know, You want better speeds than this. Problem is: I don't have a faster link to test it. But getting almost 50Mbps from a 60Mbps limit is good enough for me.
 
mikruser
Member
Member
Topic Author
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:28 pm

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:15 pm

True, sometimes they answer "No, will not fix it until v7", or "will fix in the future" - and future is one year from now.
One year - is still optimistic. Issue with CCR Ipsec packet reordering they fixes ~5 years (and for a long time did not even admit that there was a problem).

I went looking into your post, and the formatting of the CCR iperf results made my head hurt.
In my side formatting is good, this forum broke formatting.

One iperf3 testing, from one PC to another.
to completely reproduce the issue, the following conditions must be met:
1) use GRE+IPsec tunnel, do not use fasttrack
2) minimum one side should be CCR
3) latency should be as much as possible
4) WAN speed should be as much as possible (100Mbps and higher)
5) both PC should be Windows
6) for testing: copy big file via shared folder
do not ask me why it is necessary.
 
Paternot
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 802
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:01 am
Location: Niterói / Brazil

Re: MT support refused to fix issues

Sat Jan 30, 2021 4:28 pm

One iperf3 testing, from one PC to another.
to completely reproduce the issue, the following conditions must be met:
1) use GRE+IPsec tunnel, do not use fasttrack
2) minimum one side should be CCR
3) latency should be as much as possible
4) WAN speed should be as much as possible (100Mbps and higher)
5) both PC should be Windows
6) for testing: copy big file via shared folder
1) I could setup such a thing
2) I don't have one CCR to test it. Is it only with CCRs? Have you tried the same setup with another router? Even out of production: just to see if this is CCR dependent.
3) I don't have access to high latency links between two Mikrotiks.
4) Same thing here. One of my links is officially 90/90, but in practice 100/100. Problem is: it's the faster one.
5) Why Windows? Couldn't one use samba? Does it affect just SMB protocol? SSH, HTTP/HTTPS, FTP work ok?
6) Well, I could test with my setup, but I can't meet 3 of the 5 conditions. Is it worth testing anyway? Forgot to say: the encrypted traffic is IPv6 only, the clearnet traffic is IPv4 only.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests