MikroTik - Search

JRayfield

"I have seen no evidence that the bottleneck is the switch". Not sure what you mean by this, since you haven't seen my network and no very little about it (especially how much traffic my network is handling). Do you mean in other networks, you've never seen a case where a switch was a 'bot...

JRayfield

I see what you guys mean. Whether it's running RouterOS or SwitchOS, it's using the same hardware, assuming that the RouterOS is configured so that Hardware Offloading is functional.

The only way to something faster is to change hardware.

John Rayfield, Jr.
Rayfield Communications

JRayfield

Right now, speed (maximum throughput) is the most critical thing.

Maybe I just need to upgrade to a faster switch, like the CRS326-24S+2Q+RM (or faster).

John

JRayfield

I'm using MikroTik routers and switches in my WISP network (Mimosa radios). Overall, they work well. But I think I may be getting some bottlenecks in the network. I have a backhaul network, using switches, and then each site as a 'site router', that connects to the switch that is at that site. The a...

JRayfield

This is interesting with reference to 6.48.6. I'll try that and see what happens. It's pretty easy to duplicate this problem. I really don't understand why MikroTik engineers haven't been able to see this for themselves.

John

JRayfield

I think you're right, Jishi. I want to set up a test on the bench here in my lab with the latest firmware running on an RB951G with a Mimosa C5x radio and see if the new firmware makes any difference with the ethernet ports.

John

JRayfield

Good info, Jishi. I'll do some testing here in our lab with 6.49 and I might update one router to the newest 7.x firmware to see what happens, too.

Thanks!
John

JRayfield

谢谢发布这条信息,Jishi。这个might be very useful to me. I've managed to get MikroTik interested in looking into this problem further, since I have been able to duplicate this problem in my lab on the bench. I'm going to try to get some more data on this problem and forward it to...

JRayfield

First of all, I don't accept just anyone's comments regarding problems with any product. It's possible that Mimosa has a problem, but the Mimosa units appear to work fine with Ubiquiti Air Cube routers. So no one can claim with 100% certainty that this problem is all Mimosa's. So Mimosa doesn't work...

JRayfield

Thanks for the thoughts on this. In our case, and the case of another WISP (located in Arizona), this problem has been 'common'. In fact, I just had a call from another customer who was complaining of 'slow speed'. I checked the log in the Mimosa C5x and it shows that the ethernet port has been flap...

JRayfield

I've been using MikroTik routers with Mimosa equipment for about 4 years now. An ongoing problem that I've had is port flapping of the ethernet port on the MikroTik that is connected to the Mimosa radio. When possible (not needing over 100 Mbps of speed) I've set the Mimosa radios to 100 Mbps (inste...

JRayfield

Cabling is good at all sites. Cat6, shielded with connectors put on properly (we've seen a lot that aren't put on properly). Mimosa radios are powered with POEs from Mimosa. We do have lightning protection on the Cat6 cables and I'm beginning to wonder about that, at some sites. Last night and this ...

JRayfield

I've already tried defaults. That's why I've tried other settings, because defaults were terrible, with a lot of 'port flapping'.

John Rayfield, Jr.

JRayfield

I tried setting Mimosa to Auto 1 Gbps and MikroTik at Auto 1 Gbps and had a 'flap' fairly soon after that. So this did not fix the problem.

John Rayfield, Jr.

JRayfield

So set Auto Negotiate on both Mimosa and MikroTik, but it is ok to set both to only Negotiate at 1 Gbps. Is that what you mean?

I had not tried this combination of settings.

John Rayfield, Jr.

JRayfield

I'm having a problem with multiple MikroTik Routers, such as the CRS326 and CCR1036. I'm using Mimosa wireless equipment connected to these routers/switches. Mimosa radios are locked to 1 Gbps on the ethernet ports and the MikroTik equipment is all set to Auto Negotiate but is set to only use 1 Gbps...

JRayfield

I've been using the Bandwidth Test that's built into RouterOS and it works nicely. I have one router that I use as a 'test router'. But, I can only get it to work with TCP packets. If I select UDP, then I don't see any traffic flowing at all in the Bandwidth Test window. I do have ports set to Input...

JRayfield

I think you've got a good idea. Try it in the lab. As to travelling off the less traveled path, I've always done that. Push the envelope. Try things that no one else has done before. It's amazing what you can learn and do, by trying 'untried' things.

John

JRayfield

Thanks for the link. I understand that using STP or RSTP are the 'standard' way of doing what I need to do. But, if I understand correctly, MESH takes into consideration the 'condition' of the connections between routers/switches (such as packet loss), which will be important in this network, since ...

JRayfield

I have an application where I'll be setting up a ring network for redundancy in a multi-site, countywide network. I'll be using CRS326-24G-2S+RM Switches/Routers, in RouterOS mode, at each site. I'm thinking about using the MESH in RouterOS for this. But there will be no wifi. I'm only interested in...

JRayfield

I did find information on how to set a NAT rule to correct the problem of clients not showing the correct public ip address. That works fine now. I also found that I needed a couple of filters in the firewall rules to allow inbound and outbound traffic that's using the public ip addresses. I also fo...

JRayfield

So, this does work to give internet access from a Client Router/Network/Device. But, the IP address that always shows as the public IP, such as when I browse to ipchicken.com, is my Edge Router's WAN IP address (the 'default' IP address for my network), and not the public IP address that is set in t...

JRayfield

So, here's what I'll do: Edge Router - Route: 198.1.2.128/27 Gateway: 10.0.247.101 'This gives me 30 usable IP addresses through Site Router 1. Route: 198.1.2.160/29 Gateway: 10.0.247.102 'This gives me 6 usable IP addresses through Site Router 2. Route: 198.1.2.168/29 Gateway: 10.0.247.104 'This gi...

JRayfield

Ah, yes. I had forgotten about needing the gateway ip for the 198.1.2.x network up addresses, in each site router.

John

JRayfield

Or would this be more correct: Edge Router route: Destination Address: 198.1.2.128/29 Gateway Address: 10.0.247.101 where 198.1.2.128/29 sets up 6 usable IP addresses and routes those to the Network 2 (which is the first Site Router network) Destination Address: 198.1.2.136/29 Gateway Address: 10.0....

JRayfield

And I made a mistake. It's 198.1.2.128/26, not /29. Let me back up here a bit. Edge Router-->Network 1-->Site Router 1-->Network 2-->Client Router-->Network 3-->Client PC So, on the Edge Router, I set up a route to Network 2: Destination Address: 198.1.2.131 Gateway: 10.0.247.101 where 198.1.2.131 i...

JRayfield

No, the 38.1.2.128/29 range is provided by the upstream provider as a 'transport' only. The client 'block is the 198.1.2.128/29 range. Something else that others, with whom I've spoken to about this subject, had mentioned was the necessity to break the 198.1.2.128/29 block into smaller blocks to ass...

JRayfield

I think I've got it! That actually sounds pretty simple. :-) So I just need to set up incoming routes to get traffic to the correct Client Router/Network. You mention the firewall and NAT. Even with the routes, this incoming traffic will still be going through the firewall/NAT, correct? So I might n...

JRayfield

So now I would like to go a step further, now that I -think- I understand the routing aspects of this. :-) I've used port forwarding a lot to get outside connections into specific machines in networks. But the routing public IP addresses to Clients' networks is not clear to me. Currently, I have one...

JRayfield

That makes sense. ICMP is enabled with Input, but not forward. That's going to stop it from passing -through- the router to the next router. And yes, it worked. So, other 'regular' traffic should pass then, correct? Unless it's specifically blocked in the firewall of one of the routers. Correct? I r...

JRayfield

我输入/ 24太多次。是的,这是0.0.0.0/0on all routers.

John

JRayfield

They are set up as a chain. Client Router has 0.0.0.0/24 with Gateway as 10.1.1.254 (which is one of the LAN IP addresses on the Site Router). Site Router has 0.0.0.0/24 with Gateway as 10.0.247.254 (which is one of the LAN IP addresses on the Edge Router). Client routers have internet access just f...

JRayfield

Let me set up this scenario (which is real). Here's how it's physically set up. The IP addresses shown for each Router are the WAN port IP addresses (Gateways for the 'next' network). Edge Router-->Network 1-->Site Router 1-->Network 2-->Client Router-->Network 3-->Client PC ::::::::::::::::::10.0.2...

JRayfield

I sure appreciate all of this help. I need to 'digest it', but this is the kind of help that I need.

Thank you both!

John

JRayfield

mducharme, I think I understand what you're saying. I think this again goes back to my background in communications. I'm definitely going to have to 'reshape' my thinking. :-) And there's obviously going to have to be routes in the Client Router to reach the internet, correct? Jebz, I see what you m...

JRayfield

These IP addresses will definitely not be 'going to waste'. This is a network for a new WISP network, not a private network.

John

JRayfield

One problem that I think I'm having is that I don't think in terms of 'networks'. I think in terms of 'devices'. I do think of a point-to-point 'network' as a 'path', but I think of it as a 'path' between two 'devices'. And one 'device' doesn't communicate with a 'network', but communications with a...

JRayfield

Ok. Now let's expand this a bit. If the 'device' is another route that's on the other side of another router, like this: Edge Router --> Router 1 --> Client Router Then, I would need a route (static or use something like OSPF) in the Edge Router, to route a public IP to the Client Router, since the ...

JRayfield

I understand that each 'device' on the network would be programmed with it's own public IP address. I realize that I didn't mention that I understood that.

Would I still have to have routes to reach each device from the 'outside world'?

John

JRayfield

I understand how to set up a Mikrotik router in an office environment where there's one public IP on the WAN port and there's a route such as "0.0.0.0/" with the Gateway IP address to the ISP's gateway router, and then using NAT in the router. But now I'm trying to learn how to set up a Mi...

JRayfield

This is the kind of help that I was hoping to get. Thanks to both of you. No management system at this point. Everything is done manually, which can continue for a little while. We're not building out fast (yet). So,it sounds like setting up each site router as a PPPoe server would work. And if I el...

JRayfield

Pretty obvious that I need to be using PPPoe. I've found a good article on setting up PPPoe, both server side and client. It actually looks pretty simple to set up. What the article doesn't address is how this can work (or not) where there are multiple NATs involved. So, if I have the client router,...

JRayfield

You were correct. There is one main router/firewall (with NAT), multiple site routers/firewalls (with NAT), and then client routers/firewalls (with NAT). I can see now that this was a bad idea, at least for this type of network. As I've been thinking about this, I can see that I don't need the main ...

JRayfield

My idea was to have three 'private' networks: Backhaul, Tower/AP, Client.

John

JRayfield

I know that this topic has come up before in these forums and I have found some posts regarding it. But, I know that certain specific things in a network may have a bearing on how using public IP addresses for clients is done. I have a lot of experience with RF (over 40 years), but some experience w...

JRayfield

I've got a CRS125-24G-1S that has Routerboard 3.41 in it and RouterOS is 6.40.4.

I've tried several times to upgrade the RouterOS version to 6.42.6 as well as to 6.40.5. Neither will work. After rebooting, the CRS125 still shows RouterOS at 6.40.4.

Suggestions?

John Rayfield, Jr.

JRayfield

I have two RB951 units on which the ETH1 LEDs are ON all the time, whether there's anything plugged into the ETH1 port or not.

Seems like a hardware failure, but I thought I'd ask here to see if anyone else has ever see this before?

John Rayfield, Jr.

JRayfield

I thought that would be the case, but wanted to confirm. Thanks!

John

JRayfield

When using the Sniffer Tool to stream data to Wireshark, if the Sniffer Tool is set to get data from Interface ether1, then is the data being captured before or after the firewall (before filtering and NAT or after filtering and NAT)?

John Rayfield, Jr.

JRayfield

We just put up a 900 Mhz MikroTik Metal 9 AP set to 20 Mhz wide channel and NV2 protocol. The antenna is a 4db gain omni at about 140 feet. Download speed is limited to around 15 Mbps on the network connection to the AP, but upload will top out at about 90 Mbps on the network connection to the AP. I...

JRayfield

I've set up a PTP link using Netmetal 5 radios (dual chain) with mANT30 antennas. The path is good with signal levels at around -55dbm. I'm feeding this PTP link from a fiber connection through a Hex Lite router. The other side of the PTP link is connected to an RB2011 router. A speed test at either...

JRayfield

我终于放弃了准确的(甚至close to accurate) tests with the MikroTik bandwidth test software. I found a couple of other software packages that worked much better. One is even free: www.tamos.com. Download their Throughput Test software and try it. You'll need to run the ...

JRayfield

I’ve got two Metal 9HPn units that I’m trying to set up for testing. I have dummy antenna loads connected to them, and they’re within a few feet of each other, so they should ‘see’ each other. I've confirmed that they're both transmitting (using a commercial communications service monitor/spectrum ...

JRayfield

I’m trying to set up an RB2011, which will feed an access point and several other routers, as follows: I have multiple public IP addresses, coming in on a fiber connection through a media converter, which I need to put into Eth1, and then route those public IP addresses out Eth2, Eth3, etc. I do not...

JRayfield

我想在applicatio使用Mikro雷竞技网站Tik路由器ns where it's required that the router be FIPS 140-2 certified. I know that the MikroTik routers, as a complete 'unit' are not certified, but it appears that as long as a router uses a cryptographic module that is FIPS 140-2 certified, then the 'unit...

JRayfield

From a performance standpoint, I think the CRS125 would work fine for both router and switch. Thanks for the help. This is exactly what I needed to know. I couldn't see why this wouldn't work, but I just wanted to make sure that I wasn't overlooking something, since I'm so new to working with MikroT...

JRayfield

I have a customer who has a Netgear router and two TP-Link 8-port switches. I want to replace this equipment with MikroTik equipment. I need more 'diagnostics' in the equipment, to determine what's happening in the network, and I need to set up bandwidth limiting and prioritization based on IP addre...

JRayfield

我需要帮助ting up some routing in an RB750. Here's a diagram showing how this system is put together. The blue lines designate the 1st physical ethernet network, and the red lines designate the 2nd physical ethernet network (which must remain physically separate from the 1st ethernet ...

JRayfield

I've got a couple of CRS226-24G-2S+RM Routers/Switches with which I'm trying to use MikroTik S-85DLC05D Transceivers. According to the documentation, these should work in the SFP+1 cages. I can install Mikro-Tik S-85DLC03D Transceivers in these two routers, in the SFP+1 cages, connect a short cable ...

JRayfield

I've been wondering if using VLANs would be the answer. I'm not real familiar with using VLANS, so I need to read up more on setting them up.

John

JRayfield

After looking over the document referenced, I don't think that's exactly what I need. It's close, but not quite. Here's a drawing that shows the current configuration of the system/network. Basically, I need to get the WAN2 port on the RB2011iL connected to the Internet connection at the Courthouse,...

JRayfield

I'm going to jump in here and ask a related question:

I saw somewhere, where "netmap" was used, instead of "dst-nat", in the Action field, for IP/Port Forwarding.

What would be the difference in operation between using these two different Action settings?

John Rayfield, Jr.

JRayfield

That might work. I actually only need the failover in 'one direction' right now, but we did intend on setting it up the other 'direction', too.

I'll study over this and may have more questions later.

Thanks!

John Rayfield, Jr.

JRayfield

I have a requirement for an unusual system configuration and I think the RB2011iL will work. I'm new to these routers, so please bear with me. I have network (10.0.0.x) in building A, for an IP phone system, that is fed from a cable modem through a Netgear router. A second network (192.168.1.x) exis...

Search found 64 matches