- Public - talk.mikrotik.com.au

IPv6 Prefix delegation?
by Damien Gardner Jnr 06 Nov '14

06 Nov '14

Hi Folks, Not sure if I'm doing something wrong here, but I'm having trouble getting prefix delegation to work the way I'd expect. On my old 877, it was fairly easy to do. Dialer0, i'd add ipv6 dhcp client pd ipv6-prefix rapid-commit and then the delegated prefix was available as ipv6-prefix. Then on each internal lan interface (or vlan, or whatever), I'd simply do: ipv6 address ipv6-prefix ::1:0:0:0:1/64 ipv6 enable ipv6 nd ra interval 60 and bingo, Neighbour Discovery was handing out IP's in the ::1:0:0:0:0/64 subnet (Or ::2:0:0:0:0/64 etc as defined for each interface) Trying to do that on the CRS isn't quite working right. it seems like to use the PD, I need to do something like this: /ipv6 address add from-pool=TID_PD interface=bridge-local address= ::1:0:0:0:1/64 But that results in this: 8 G 2001:8000:1000:3d00::1/64 TID_PD bridge-local yes I've played with a few virtual interfaces, and it simply assigns the subnets in ascending order - so the second one defined will be 3d01::, the next will be 3d02:: etc. Now it's not a HUGE issue, as my v6 delegation from TID isn't going to change, but it's more the principle of the thing ;) Is 'proper' defined PD usage possible on RouterOS? Thanks, Damien -- Damien Gardner Jnr VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust rendrag(a)rendrag.net - http://www.rendrag.net/ -- We rode on the winds of the rising storm, We ran to the sounds of thunder. We danced among the lightning bolts, and tore the world asunder

2 4

How to allow external traffic into a VRF?
by Damien Gardner Jnr 04 Nov '14

04 Nov '14

Hi Folks, (Sorry, this is long, and rather convoluted) I'm not sure if I'm trying to do something that I shouldn't be, but here's what I'm doing. I have a CCR1009 at SY3, acting as our core router. Dual-gig bond to our upstreams (delivered as VLAN's from three different providers), and dual-gig bond to our main switch. All customer and internal vlans live on that internal bond interface, with interfaces up on each for routing. A few of those vlans live in VRF's (backup network, management network, SAN network(s), etc), and the CCR has IP's on the vlans for those VRF's, so I can do NAT out so the devices on them have internet access. That's all good, though I do have the question - should I be able to ping the CCR IP for one of the VRF VLAN's from another subnet on our network? Can't ping the IP's inside the VRF, just the one on the CCR itself. Now I've finally replaced the flock of cisco 877W's at my home office with a CRS109 and an RB951 (Ethernet-over-Power link to the garage doesn't pass vlan tags, so I've been running GRE tunnels on the 877's, and now I'll just run an EoIP tunnel with bridged vlans). So today I've fired up an EoIP tunnel, which works nicely. I then tried extending one of the VRF's across the tunnel, and it seems to be working nicely. i.e. moved the IP address on the CCR vlan1202 to bridge_vlan1202 (which is a bridge with vlan1202 and eoip_wyong_vlan1202 in it). And then on the CRS, I created a vlan1202 on ether2-master, and on eoip_sy3, and then created bridge_vlan1202 on both interfaces, and then added bridge_vlan1202 into a new VRF, and added an IP address in. Now, I can ping from a host on the VRF at SY3, to the router at home, so Im assuming the bridging etc is working. So now, I want workstations at home to be able to route into that VRF. But not hosts in the DMZ (publicly addressable), and not hosts on our 'visitors' vlan. can I do that? If so, any suggestions on how? :) And while I'm asking.. I need to bring up two more of those VRF+VLAN combo's bridged from SY3 - and then take them from the CRS to the RB951 in the garage for easy provisioning and testing of new servers before taking them to sydney.. Is there an easier way to simply bridge from the CRS to the RB951 across an ethernet link which doesn't support vlan tags? Or do i use EoIP and config and bridge the vlans? Thanks, Damien -- Damien Gardner Jnr VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust rendrag(a)rendrag.net - http://www.rendrag.net/ -- We rode on the winds of the rising storm, We ran to the sounds of thunder. We danced among the lightning bolts, and tore the world asunder

2 3

Hotspot Server Export
by Paul Julian 04 Nov '14

04 Nov '14

Hi guys, just wondering if anybody who uses the Mikrotik Hotspot system has ever been able to successfully export the hotspot server entries ? You can export everything else it seems but the actual hotspot servers themselves. Has anybody come across a way around this ? It seems to be an issue with a full export and just the hotspot branch export. Regards Paul

2 2

Queue Priority
by Paul Julian 04 Nov '14

04 Nov '14

Hi guys, just wondering if somebody could tell me whether a single host simple queue would take priority over a more broad ranged simple queue. For example, if we had a queue which covered say 10.1.1.0/24 IP's and that queue was set to 50M, if we then created a another queue with a target of 10.1.1.5 at a speed of 10M would that client get throttled down to 10M or 50M ? I am thinking that it would probably matter which position the queue was in, but even in that case would it be the last matching target definition that took effect or the first..... I would appreciate any thoughts on this. Thanks Paul

1 0

Re: [MT-AU Public] simple, sensible modem for pppoe-passthrough bridge
by Thomas Jackson 01 Nov '14

01 Nov '14

Outlook decided to send that message before I was done with it... attempt #2... Yet another +1 for the TP-links, I have them deployed all over the place (8810 or 8817 depending on the age of the site) - I've only ever had one fail, it was a simple job of swapping it with one of the spares (we keep spares of every Mikrotik, TP-Link, etc device we use throughout the organisation - works out much cheaper than getting fast response warranties from Cisco etc, and we can often respond faster than a 3rd party would anyway - nothing beats having a spare sitting on the shelf ready to go!) -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Jackson [mailto:thomas@thomax.com.au] Sent: Sunday, 26 October 2014 11:22 AM To: 'MikroTik Australia Public List' Subject: RE: [MT-AU Public] simple, sensible modem for pppoe-passthrough bridge Yet another +1 for the TP-links, I have them deployed all over the place (8810 or 8817 depending on the age of the - I've only ever had but it was a simple job of swapping it with one of the spares (we keep spares of every Mikrotik, TP-Link etc device we use throughout the orgnaisation, -----Original Message----- From: Public [mailto:public-bounces@talk.mikrotik.com.au] On Behalf Of Andrew Cox Sent: Friday, 24 October 2014 5:45 PM To: MikroTik Australia Public List Subject: Re: [MT-AU Public] simple, sensible modem for pppoe-passthrough bridge Hey Mike, TD-8840T is the bee's knees in our experience. Have deployed over 150~ of the things and only time we've ever had a problem was with one getting sandwiched between a Cisco 4948 and a server (which was dropped on it) which caused the plastic to start browning/melting and the device stopped working. Bought it back into the office and it came back up just fine :-) They cost around $20-30AUD depending on where you source them from. - Andrew On 24 October 2014 16:17, Mike Everest <mike(a)duxtel.com> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > Seeking recommendations for a good dsl modem that supports all of the > typical dsl variants that also supports a decent pppoe passthrough > bridge mode. No wireless, no multiple ethernet etc - just adsl port > and 1 ethernet port is ideal :-D > > I recently bought a couple of draytek vigor 120, and hope I don't > upset anyone by describing it as a piece of crap. I've wasted too > much time trying to get them to work like a bridge, reliably and > without losing config updates every second reboot. I have two of them > in place and almost in production (project goes live ib a couple of > weeks) at location almost 4 hours drive away, and I really want to bin > them and replace with something that I have more confidence in :-} > > Any suggestions, comments, (and abuse, if you feel the need, ;-) are > most welcome! > > Thanks, > > Mike. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > Public(a)talk.mikrotik.com.au > http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com. > au > _______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public(a)talk.mikrotik.com.au http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com.au

2 1

ADSL: The Sequel
by Ben Jackson 28 Oct '14

28 Oct '14

Hi all, Two questions: 1) Any idea why a routerboard which has not had an admin password assigned to it would suddenly not accept the blank password and give a “incorrect password” error through winbox? Firewall rules were in place to only allow ip addressed from the internal LAN to connect so I’m pretty sure they weren’t hacked and the password changed. 2) ADSL and MikroTik - the ongoing saga. I was following with much interest the recent thread started by Mike about which ADSL modem to use. Seems the TP-Link 8817 is the one to go for, however I have tried this modem in various installs and have still has intermittent slowness and just plain weird packet loss / latency. When I use MikroTik’s as a simple DHCP client in conjunction with a cable modem everything seems fine, which means there is something amiss with the PPPoE dialler? I have tried messing with MTU settings in various places, but I really can’t see MTU misconfiguration accounting for a loss of 8-10Mbps at times? I have had so many problems with residential ADSL performance with MikroTik routers I am unfortunately now looking for alternatives to MikroTik. Configurations I have tried: - Bridging various brands of modem, setting up PPPoE client on gateway interface of MikroTik. Performance using this method (in my experience) is terribly inconsistent and sometimes just downright awful. Modem sync speed is normally fine, download speeds are inconsistent and often very poor. ISP reckons they can see “authentication dropouts” from the PPPoE client. - Using the modem as a router and routing between the two (192.168.x.x) subnets using the MikroTik. This leads to double NAT issues, although strangely performance seems more consistent than option 1. - Using the MikroTik as a simple layer 2 bridge / switch which is assigned a static IP in the DHCP range assigned to the gateway (have also tried DHCP). This seems to give the best performance but it seems to obviate buying a MikroTik when it is not even being used as a router. Also means that I have to rely on the (often inferior) feature set of the modem to manage the network. It seems to me (and I don’t really have any hard evidence to back this up, just experience) that the PPPoE client on the MikroTik is rather unstable compared to those running on the various modems I have tried, and any noise / glitches on the line will cause it to misbehave. So, anyone have any suggestions on alternate configurations (static routes?) Thoughts? Ben

6 10

simple, sensible modem for pppoe-passthrough bridge
by Mike Everest 26 Oct '14

26 Oct '14

Hi Folks, Seeking recommendations for a good dsl modem that supports all of the typical dsl variants that also supports a decent pppoe passthrough bridge mode. No wireless, no multiple ethernet etc - just adsl port and 1 ethernet port is ideal :-D I recently bought a couple of draytek vigor 120, and hope I don't upset anyone by describing it as a piece of crap. I've wasted too much time trying to get them to work like a bridge, reliably and without losing config updates every second reboot. I have two of them in place and almost in production (project goes live ib a couple of weeks) at location almost 4 hours drive away, and I really want to bin them and replace with something that I have more confidence in :-} Any suggestions, comments, (and abuse, if you feel the need, ;-) are most welcome! Thanks, Mike.

7 9

Re: [MT-AU Public] simple, sensible modem for pppoe-passthrough bridge
by Greg McLennan 25 Oct '14

25 Oct '14

+1 on the 7800's We use them in bridge mode onto mikrotiks at work. And i have used one at home recently until i moved from adsl to iiNETs HFC network. -------- Original message -------- Subject: Re: [MT-AU Public] simple, sensible modem for pppoe-passthrough bridge From: Kilburn Abrahams <kilburna(a)gmail.com> To: MikroTik Australia Public List <public(a)talk.mikrotik.com.au> CC: Hi Mike We had done a further bit of DSL testing with different ISP providers and manufacturers. In the end we ended up using Billion 7800 series, in our case 7800NXL. They use the Broadcom chipset for DSL and it is very stable but you must use D firmware. The previous firmwares were unstable. The D firmware has been out for almost a year. We use them on 150+ sites. We have started to pull out onsite PoE switches and replace with Microtik then use the billion in pppoe passthrough bridge mode. So far as good. I don't like to loud mouth other manufactures, but tplink, dlink and others business models do not allow enough time for bug hunting or they continue to add features (draytek) and make the firmware unstable. There is always the Cisco path but for mass deployment stability 7800 is the pick of the bunch and the price is right. Billion also makes a chaep 7700 but I would not touch it. Cheers /K On 24 October 2014 17:17, Mike Everest <mike(a)duxtel.com> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > Seeking recommendations for a good dsl modem that supports all of the > typical dsl variants that also supports a decent pppoe passthrough bridge > mode. No wireless, no multiple ethernet etc - just adsl port and 1 > ethernet > port is ideal :-D > > I recently bought a couple of draytek vigor 120, and hope I don't upset > anyone by describing it as a piece of crap. I've wasted too much time > trying to get them to work like a bridge, reliably and without losing > config > updates every second reboot. I have two of them in place and almost in > production (project goes live ib a couple of weeks) at location almost 4 > hours drive away, and I really want to bin them and replace with something > that I have more confidence in :-} > > Any suggestions, comments, (and abuse, if you feel the need, ;-) are most > welcome! > > Thanks, > > Mike. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > Public(a)talk.mikrotik.com.au > http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com.au > _______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public(a)talk.mikrotik.com.au http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com.au

6 6

POE Conversion help....
by Paul Julian 23 Oct '14

23 Oct '14

Hi guys, we have a Mikroitk QRT on a mast running from a POE injector down below in the building, it's all working fine. We now need to add an IP camera on the mast which will use the same cable and needs to run from POE as well. The QRT only has one port and we need that radio, an omnitik with poe out won't work, so we need to split the cable somehow with a hardened switch or something, but the catch is that the Mikrotik passive POE won't run the camera as it's 802.3af, I am looking for some quick to implement and relatively cheap ways of making this happen and was hoping somebody would have some simple suggestions ? There is no option to run a second cable so I have to make this work somehow with one cable L Regards Paul

4 9

Re: [MT-AU Public] POE Conversion help....
by Damien Gardner Jnr 22 Oct '14

22 Oct '14

Ahh, true, depends on which mode, and whether it's dedicated DC or mixed DC.. If it supports mixed DX, then you're in business :) Found an image a while back (not sure where from :( ) which gives a good rundown on the pinouts used for the various modes :) See http://echelon.pinegap.net/~damien/stuff/POECablePins.png On 21 October 2014 20:03, Damien Gardner Jnr <rendrag(a)rendrag.net> wrote: > Ahh, true, depends on which mode, and whether it's dedicated DC or mixed > DC.. If it supports mixed DX, then you're in business :) > > Don't know if the list allows attachments - hopefully, found an image a > while back (not sure where from :( ) which gives a good rundown on the > pinouts used for the various modes :) > > On 21 October 2014 19:58, Paul Julian <paul(a)oxygennetworks.com.au> wrote: > >> Thanks for the suggestion Damien, I only need 100M and did think about >> this option but wasn't sure about the pins/cables that the POE used for >> each type of POE, there seems to be two standards for 802.3af which use >> different pairs..... >> >> Regards >> Paul >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Public [mailto:public-bounces@talk.mikrotik.com.au] On Behalf Of >> Damien Gardner Jnr >> Sent: Tuesday, 21 October 2014 7:46 PM >> To: MikroTik Australia Public List >> Subject: Re: [MT-AU Public] POE Conversion help.... >> >> Do you require Gig on either? If not, turn it into two two-pair cables >> which are only able to do 100mbps? Green and orange on one, Blue and brown >> on another.. Used to be standard practice if you needed to put two devices >> on one cable.. You used to be able to be ready-made splitters to go on >> either end of the cable too, not sure if you still can.. >> >> On 21 October 2014 19:24, Paul Julian <paul(a)oxygennetworks.com.au> wrote: >> >> > Hi guys, we have a Mikroitk QRT on a mast running from a POE injector >> > down below in the building, it's all working fine. >> > We now need to add an IP camera on the mast which will use the same >> > cable and needs to run from POE as well. >> > The QRT only has one port and we need that radio, an omnitik with poe >> > out won't work, so we need to split the cable somehow with a hardened >> > switch or something, but the catch is that the Mikrotik passive POE >> > won't run the camera as it's 802.3af, I am looking for some quick to >> > implement and relatively cheap ways of making this happen and was >> > hoping somebody would have some simple suggestions ? >> > >> > There is no option to run a second cable so I have to make this work >> > somehow with one cable L >> > >> > Regards >> > Paul >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Public mailing list >> > Public(a)talk.mikrotik.com.au >> > http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com. >> > au >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Damien Gardner Jnr >> VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust >> rendrag(a)rendrag.net - http://www.rendrag.net/ >> -- >> We rode on the winds of the rising storm, We ran to the sounds of >> thunder. >> We danced among the lightning bolts, >> and tore the world asunder >> _______________________________________________ >> Public mailing list >> Public(a)talk.mikrotik.com.au >> http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com.au >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Public mailing list >> Public(a)talk.mikrotik.com.au >> http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com.au >> > > > > -- > > Damien Gardner Jnr > VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust > rendrag(a)rendrag.net - http://www.rendrag.net/ > -- > We rode on the winds of the rising storm, > We ran to the sounds of thunder. > We danced among the lightning bolts, > and tore the world asunder > -- Damien Gardner Jnr VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust rendrag(a)rendrag.net - http://www.rendrag.net/ -- We rode on the winds of the rising storm, We ran to the sounds of thunder. We danced among the lightning bolts, and tore the world asunder

2 1