Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
syadnom
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Topic Author
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:29 am

hw routing crs3xx/np16 best practice?

Tue Nov 09, 2021 7:57 am

Hi all. I'm wondering which method would be better for hardware routing on the crs3xx hardware, specifically the netpower 16p


a) leave everything in a bridge, turn on vlan filtering and ingress filtering, set the site's backhaul port to a VLAN and add IP and routing config on that VLAN

or

b) just remove the backhaul's port from the bridge and set IP etc on the 'natural' port.

Thoughts? Any performance differences you think might pop out? I'm leaning on 'a' here because it would allow me to also push other VLANs over the port if I want without extra bridging etc.
 
User avatar
mkx
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 11433
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:23 pm

Re: hw routing crs3xx/np16 best practice?

Tue Nov 09, 2021 8:38 am

b) just remove the backhaul's port from the bridge and set IP etc on the 'natural' port.

This scheme won't allow for HW offload of any kind (neither L2 nor L3). L3 HW routing only works if ports in question are all logically handled by switch chip directly. And that is achieved by configuring ports as members of same bridge.
 
syadnom
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Topic Author
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:29 am

Re: hw routing crs3xx/np16 best practice?

Tue Nov 09, 2021 8:42 am

Says it’s hardware offloaded in this config. Is the UI incorrect?
 
User avatar
raimondsp
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 267
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2020 10:14 am

Re: hw routing crs3xx/np16 best practice?

Tue Nov 09, 2021 1:15 pm

b) just remove the backhaul's port from the bridge and set IP etc on the 'natural' port.

This scheme won't allow for HW offload of any kind (neither L2 nor L3). L3 HW routing only works if ports in question are all logically handled by switch chip directly. And that is achieved by configuring ports as members of same bridge.

This statement is not entirely true. L3HW routing can run directly on a switch port. There is no need to put a port under Bridge/VLAN unless required. However, hardware VLAN tagging requires a bridge, so you cannot assign a VLAN interface directly on a switch port - there must be a bridge in-between. But if all you need is hardware routing on a standalone VLAN-unaware port - go ahead and do it.

Performance-wise, both cases are almost identical.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: NxtGen [Bot] and 10 guests