Current Mikrotik Terragraph situation, explained:Still no news about 802.11ay / Terragraph devices?
. Please fix it.
For any kind of funky setups, surely you need the normal MikroTik app, where a lot more options are available. This is for home users with no configuration needs.Home app - goes thorugh nothing to do with WAN setup.
What if its PPPoE? Does this just purely rely on a DHCP WAN?
That should then read "home users in some countries where there are no configuration needs".For any kind of funky setups, surely you need the normal MikroTik app, where a lot more options are available. This is for home users with no configuration needs.Home app - goes thorugh nothing to do with WAN setup.
What if its PPPoE? Does this just purely rely on a DHCP WAN?
I assume and hope this is first building block for future Wifi AP "home" products to come (with wifi 6). Today home users in the sense of this new app, are retail customers buying an AP only to have better Wifi at home. Disabling their Wifi on their box and drop in the Wifi AP, nothing else. But this means AP must have Wifi 6, band steering etc.That should then read "home users in some countries where there are no configuration needs".For any kind of funky setups, surely you need the normal MikroTik app, where a lot more options are available. This is for home users with no configuration needs.Home app - goes thorugh nothing to do with WAN setup.
What if its PPPoE? Does this just purely rely on a DHCP WAN?
At least here a home internet connection is usually using PPPoE and almost always there is also a VLAN tag to be inserted.
That is not too uncommon I think.
Most equipment manufacturers solve this by having "profiles" that you select when you run the setup wizard. They ask you your country and ISP name and then it knows how to set it all up without bothering the user with questions like "do you want to use DHCP or PPPoE" or "what is the VLAN for your internet connection".
Of course it will require some effort to compile a list of profiles for all the markets where you want this to work.
And the ISP is really asking the end-user to do this? If there are any VLANs and such, normally the ISP technician configures / provides the router and does not give access to the end user. This video is not for that situation.That should then read "home users in some countries where there are no configuration needs".
At least here a home internet connection is usually using PPPoE and almost always there is also a VLAN tag to be inserted.
No, instead they provide a router that has a first-start wizard which works as I described above: it asks you which country you live in and which ISP you have, and then it configures the internet side of the router accordingly. The APP could do the same thing.And the ISP is really asking the end-user to do this? If there are any VLANs and such, normally the ISP technician configures / provides the router and does not give access to the end user. This video is not for that situation.
I am starting to wonder if Wi-Fi 6 or Wi-Fi 6e is even on the road map.Wifi 6 when?
PPPoE is still widely used here at least (Australia) - and most consumer routers in their quick setup allow for configuring PPPoE as the WAN type - if its truly to be a no-fuss option for home users I'd say it needs to support configuring PPPoE WAN at a minimum (perhaps a screen that defaults to DHCP but has a button to say 'My ISP gave me a username and password' or something)For any kind of funky setups, surely you need the normal MikroTik app, where a lot more options are available. This is for home users with no configuration needs.Home app - goes thorugh nothing to do with WAN setup.
What if its PPPoE? Does this just purely rely on a DHCP WAN?
So that isn't used in Australia then? Here in the Netherlands you would have a different VLAN for "internet" and "IPTV multicast" and additionally there could be another VLAN for "IP telephony".PPPoE is still widely used here at least (Australia) - and most consumer routers in their quick setup allow for configuring PPPoE as the WAN type
I agree though that VLAN id's and the like on WAN is getting a bit involved.
Those users mostly never change the password that is set initially so, although it may look like a nice touch, it seems like a bit of waste of developers time IMHO...For any kind of funky setups, surely you need the normal MikroTik app, where a lot more options are available. This is for home users with no configuration needs.
It would be better to spend developers time on a "unique password" scheme. And do it right the first time.Those users mostly never change the password that is set initially so, although it may look like a nice touch, it seems like a bit of waste of developers time IMHO...
Well, other vendors (Cisco, Aruba, Extreme Networks, ... ) already support 802.11ax for years. Meanwhile all 802.11ax major features work, too:I prefer a longer wait, for a good implementation of WiFi 6. Now you see, implementations of it with other brands that are not yet mature.
PPPoE is a "funky setup"? 100% of our deployments are PPPoE.For any kind of funky setups, surely you need the normal MikroTik app, where a lot more options are available. This is for home users with no configuration needs.Home app - goes thorugh nothing to do with WAN setup.
What if its PPPoE? Does this just purely rely on a DHCP WAN?
PPPoE became pointless as soon as dialup got replaced by cable modems and optic fibers. Today, DHCP and plain old ethernet work just as well and you have no PPPoE limitations to deal with.PPPoE is a "funky setup"? 100% of our deployments are PPPoE.
We really need this, but for now I would just give users access to a custom user that can only be used with WebFig and has only the read + write permissions. Then, assign that user an ultra-limited WebFig skin so they can't mess anything up.(aka a login that is limited specific to the Home App so you don't also have to give full device permission to the user in order to use it).
You seem to be confusing it with PPP.PPPoE became pointless as soon as dialup got replaced by cable modems and optic fibers. Today, DHCP and plain old ethernet work just as well and you have no PPPoE limitations to deal with.
Weird, as my provider (AT&T) only does DHCP with public IPs. Is this something that's especially popular with WISPs?Sure there often are workarounds possible but apparently it still is the protocol of choice for large-scale ISPs.
It's not just WISP networks, but in networks where the operator sells wholesale access, using PPP they can hand the login off to the relevant service provider's AAA server. I am sure you could eventually achieve similar results with MPLS, or one-VLAN-per-SP in your wholesale network, or whatever, but PPPoE + L2TP is a widely-accepted solution for multiple service providers on a wholesale network.Not sure why you need an extra layer for authentication and encapsulation when you control the last mile?
In sweden thats usually solved with simply using VLANs (usually QinQ) for the different providers *or* Layer3-switched network with port security and DHCP-relay. The wholesale access provider simply configures this per customer. No need for further authentication/encapsulation.It's not just WISP networks, but in networks where the operator sells g, using PPP they can hand the login off to the relevant service provider's AAA server. I am sure you could eventually achieve similar results with MPLS, or one-VLAN-per-SP in your wholesale network, or whatever, but PPPoE + L2TP is a widely-accepted solution for multiple service providers on a wholesale network.
Wow. My personal opinion, instead of blaming apps, these types of providers should re-think their network setup. Why would home users have to know such stuff?A customer just wanting to connect to internet using their own router would usually configure only the internet VLAN and PPPoE over that.
They don't.Wow. My personal opinion, instead of blaming apps, these types of providers should re-think their network setup. Why would home users have to know such stuff?A customer just wanting to connect to internet using their own router would usually configure only the internet VLAN and PPPoE over that.
Users that don't know why they need a router of their own - usually sticks with the ISP provided one.But you can ask "select your country and ISP from this list".
Why would mikrotik, make a niche product for that band plan by FCC.I am starting to wonder if Wi-Fi 6 or Wi-Fi 6e is even on the road map.Wifi 6 when?
Over a year ago , the FCC opened up the 6 GHz band (5.925–7.125 GHz) and made it available for unlicensed use.
More than a year later and total lack of any official Mikrotik information, I can only assume there are zero plans for Mikrotik to update/create any products to operate in these new clear-clean-empty frequencies.
Many of you know that I am a total Mikrotik fan , but this lack of information and lack of product is wearing thin and is going to force me to look at other non-Mikrotik products to find a solution for --> 6 GHz band (5.925–7.125 GHz)
Niche? 6 GHz is used for 802.11ax world wide (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ax-2021). Within Q3/Q4 2021, vendors start selling their enterprise access points. Consumer routers with triple radios (2.4GHz, 5 GHz, 6GHZ) and end devices started selling some months ago. As users want more bandwith 6 GHz support is a must for our seminar rooms and lecture halls. I hope Mikrotik will release some new Mediatek based routers (RB750grX) and wireless access points with 2x2:2 for 2.4GHz, 5 GHz and 6 GHz with Mediatek´s current Wi-Fi 6E branded chipset (https://www.mediatek.com/blog/mediatek- ... on-program) and proprietary drivers.
Why would mikrotik, make a niche product for that band plan by FCC.
Lets start by talking about legal band plans per country with ITU/WRC consultation, not technology types/protocols/or what a manufacturer has created.Niche? 6 GHz is used for 802.11ax world wide (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ax-2021). Within Q3/Q4 2021, vendors start selling their enterprise access points. Consumer routers with triple radios (2.4GHz, 5 GHz, 6GHZ) and end devices started selling some months ago. As users want more bandwith 6 GHz support is a must for our seminar rooms and lecture halls. I hope Mikrotik will release some new Mediatek based routers (RB750grX) and wireless access points with 2x2:2 for 2.4GHz, 5 GHz and 6 GHz with Mediatek´s current Wi-Fi 6E branded chipset (https://www.mediatek.com/blog/mediatek- ... on-program) and proprietary drivers.
Why would mikrotik, make a niche product for that band plan by FCC.
Well, in some countries the 6 GHz frequencies can already be used. LPI devices (smartphones, indoor access points) are being sold already, more countries and devices will follow this and next year year:At this point FCC(America, and some other like Brazil, south Korea and Chile) have recently made those frequencies available for low power device use in those counties domestic band plans.
Other counties such as Australia and Europe( like where Mikrotik is made!), have not yet had all those frequencies allocated for such use.
POLICY AND LEGISLATION
6GHz harmonisation decision: more spectrum available for better and faster Wi-Fi
The 6GHz harmonisation decision makes 480 MHz of additional spectrum available in the 6 GHz band for Wi-Fi networks. It means further improvements in network performance and faster, more stable connections for teleconferencing, sharing content and innovative services.
I use Ubiquiti's "fancy" phone app to configure and align outdoor CPE and backbone gear all the time, and their UniFI app to manage WiFi gear.The only product-space that Mikrotik excell is in Prosumer, small ISP and small/medium Enterprise. And no one there uses some fancy phone app to setup their network.
The "app target market" will probably choose Google, D-Link, Asus, TP-Link or some generic Chinese white-label box with the most performance/$.
Many wireless and fiber providers use PPPoE + RADIUS for authentication, statistics collection (usage), and Layer 2 client isolation. (Cable modem authentication is also done with RADIUS.) It can be more efficient for IPv4 utilization, since you can get away without having to carve your networks up into as many subnets. Many large carriers already use MPLS on their networks as well, which is less taxing on CPUs and passes Layer 2 traffic very efficiently. They can therefore concentrate all the heavy lifting of Layer 3 into the BRAS and a few core routers vs. routers distributed across the network.I can see the point of PPPoE in WISP-networks with the air as a medium. PPPoE existed in the DSL-days in my country, but was only used by a few providers. For Cable/Ethernet/FTTH it's just plain DHCP. Not sure why you need an extra layer for authentication and encapsulation when you control the last mile?
That often solved with SNMP counters and PVLAN/NNI-UNI for customer to customer isolation.statistics collection (usage), and Layer 2 client isolation.