One question: is there any change in behavior when using these configs on RouterOS 7.x?
I prefer to avoid any usage with IP addresses. If I use IP addresses in firewall rules, it would make my configs less robust. A better approach in my opinion is to use VLAN interfaces names.
ok more and more people reporting problems so 7.8 is not that stable :) needs a lot of fixes
... the last netinstall was 7.4, or 7.5 ... it can´t be the way to netinstall every new stable version ...
... with 7.8 my core router (CRS326-24S+2Q+RM) did 3 times spontaneous reboots initiated from watchdog in the last 12 days ... back to 7.7 solves the problem.
Do go on ...
Ability to specify domain name with some kind of a "none" action is on its way. We do not know how it will look yet, but you will be able to add dummy DNS record that will override DNS name lookup.
you are using 1.1.1.1 for an ISP address?
Is PCC also going to be part of the scope ?
Could you please confirm me the configuration in my context to make recursive routing work ?
Maybe thisvideocan be of help in ROS v7.
What adapter mods did you have to do to get the EM160R-GL in there? Was setup seamless?
Suggesting your use ofFINDnomenclature is too academic or CLI focused for many.
Since you have now done most of the work, why not add it toUsing RouterOS to VLAN your network, or at least add a link to your post so someone could more easily find it in the future?
Got to use a CRS328-24P+S4-RM today ... They have been out of stock for forever ... could definitely get used to this platform.
What do you mean bymodern?
First I screwed those brackets to both units and then joined those two brackets together. The separation between those 2 units is sufficient for a quite easy access to those nuts.
Change IMEI
just too much ] at the end...
... run the script from console with/system scripts runcommand then you will see the errors ...
I hope that the new logo is just a bad joke. It must be...
Not sure what you mean?
Routing traffic out a specific WANIP, should not interfere with LAN to LAN traffic or VLAN to VLAN traffic which is more controlled by firewall rules.
@ work, we run everything v6,except1 device with v7 for WireGuard.
Is unapproved because you do not use two C14, one for low, and one for high voltage...
Recently there's this new wave of "smart" spammers ...
Would this fix be related to running scripts such as theATT gateway bypass? My ATT gateway bypass was broken in 7.2 but working in 7.1.5 EDIT: Just tested on an RB4011, ATT gateway script still not working. Reverted back to 7.1.5.
Or, you can do what many people do: wait for some brave souls to install and test it and report the experience.
I think the annoying thing about wall warts is how to properly rack them. If there was a way to tie the wall wart to the back or side of the MikroTik device, that would be enough for most of us.
RouterOS version is 6.44.6, device is a CCR1036-8G-2S+
Not gonna happen. With that port spec, it would be CRS320-16P-4S+RM.
All working fine when setting Wan to ether1.
Intel AX200 connected at 1.2Gbit/s at Aruba AP-555 with 80 MHz channel == stable 800 Mbit/s up and down while copy a big file to and from a SMB file server.
The PoE issue was introduced in 6.46.8, as the comments from that release prove it.
I upgraded a hAP mini from 6.47.8 and got the same WiFi problem as with 6.48, fixed by downgrading.
normis says: You can adjust Tx-power by selecting "all rates fixed" in Tx Power Mode and afterwards setting a lower Tx power.
Antenna-gain is now a CLI-only parameter.
All MikroTik routers should be running
6.47.4 [stable]
6.46.6 [long-term]
or 7.0beta6 [testing]
due toCVE-2020-11881
To run the scan on Groove there are prerequisites
Sure, but does the RB3011 have wifi? I think he wants devices at both sites to provide wifi!
A crs318-16P-2S+ would be great. I would like it in an "IN" desktop form factor, although I am sure a RM version would be popular too.
I just find out thatnetPower 16Pis CRS318-16P-2S+OUT. So, we suggest mikrotik can release CRS318-16P-2S+IN-2HnD.
The best option would be for the bridge to be able to strip VLAN 0, but isn't that something MT needs to fix?