MikroTik

bevhost

Looks like other router vendors are supporting this feature

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/io ... direct.pdf
https://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/ ... write.html

bevhost

Or, try this... use the other brand access point that you know works. Then, with your 751, make a bridge between two of the ethernet ports (bridge, not switch). This would force all the data to go through the mikrotik's system, but would bypass the mikrotik wireless radios. So to be clear, this is ...

bevhost

Did you try upgrading os+fw?

Yes, Currently running 5.15 os and 2.38 fw

bevhost

More testing has revealed that it actually has nothing to do with authentication. Actually changing the auth mode makes it appear like its working because, it actually works when the phone is newly connected to the wireless. Changing the auth mode disconnects and reconnects the wireless association,...

bevhost

Actually sometime the problem still occurs with WPA.
Switching authentication to none works.

bevhost

Have just changed the Authentication from WPA2 to WPA and it appears we might have a solution.
More testing to be done.

bevhost

Just tried the same Handset at another site.
This site has a Billion BiPAC 7404VGO Wireless ADSL Modem Router with active VoIP Ports.

The phone works just fine here, without a Mikrotik.

bevhost

/interface wireless security-profiles set default authentication-types=wpa2-psk group-ciphers=aes-ccm group-key-update=5m interim-update=0s management-protection=disabled \ management-protection-key="" mode=dynamic-keys name=default radius-eap-accounting=no radius-mac-accounting=no radius-...

bevhost

Is the Mikrotik the wireless access point for the wireless phones, or do you have a separate wireless access point? If it is the Mikrotik that has wireless radio, look at the wireless hardware settings (HW Retries, quality, tx/rx power, etc) I have looked at this and tried to change anything I thou...

bevhost

Even if the voice cuts out, there is no reason the pings should stop working. How do you "fix" it? Do the pings start working at call termination? Do you have to reboot Mikrotik, phone, or unplug the network? What a great question, I just tried it and something amazing happened. 64 bytes ...

bevhost

[admin@BEVHOME] /ip firewall filter> export # apr/24/2012 06:31:47 by RouterOS 5.7 # /ip firewall filter add action=log chain=forward disabled=yes log-prefix="BIt Torrent" p2p=all-p2p add action=drop chain=input comment="drop ssh brute forcers" disabled=no dst-port=22 protocol=tc...

bevhost

but right now no rules at all.

In the bridge anyway, I'll get the IP firewall rules and export them.

bevhost

You say that the pings stop working with the voice stops.

Do you have any filter rules in your firewall or bridge? If so, export them here.

I've tried rules that log things, but right now no rules at all.
Pass through IP Firewall also turned off.

bevhost

I have also disabled the Bandwidth Test Server in case port 2000 conflicts with SCCP Skinny Protocol.

bevhost

Turn off the SIP Helper in Mikrotik.

IP -> FIREWALL -> SERVICE PORTS
DISABLE SIP

Please let us know the results after you do that.

No change.

bevhost

Since my home setup is a little less complicated than work I tried to configure a different SSID just for the phone, so I could get rid of the Bridge between the wireless interface and my LAN. I setup a separate IP subnet on the new wireless interface with a DHCP server and NAT rules to let it route...

bevhost

Have you done any bypass troubleshootig yet to make sure the wireless phones work properly without the Mikrotik? Should be testing that tomorrow on a Cisco Wireless AP. I'll let you know. Have now tried it on a few networks. Our phone system provider tried it in their office on a Cisco and it works...

bevhost

Have you done any bypass troubleshootig yet to make sure the wireless phones work properly without the Mikrotik?

Should be testing that tomorrow on a Cisco Wireless AP. I'll let you know.

bevhost

We have deployed a new phone system using wired Cisco 7941 phones and Wireless 7921G phones. We have the wired phones running on a VLAN on top of our normal LAN. We have HP switches which give priority to the VLAN traffic. The wireless network has two SSID's one for the PC's and one for phones. The ...

bevhost

Does anyone know if this is still unsupported, or have things changed in newer releases?

bevhost

Last time we had this discussion, january and february 2011 were mentioned.

But you've seen our ToDo list, so don't worry.

I hope that DHCPv6 is high up on the to do list.

bevhost

Two /8s allocated to APNIC from IANA https://www.apnic.net/publications/news/2011/delegation Published on: Tuesday, 1 February 2011 Dear Colleagues The information in this announcement is to enable the Internet community to update network configurations, such as routing filters, where required. APN...

bevhost

E-mail support, Keep asking. Make sure they know that you want v6 worked on. RIPE (Europe RIR) chews through a /8 every 3-5 months so it looks like RIPE is out sometime between June 2011 and Jan 2012 Its every 2-3 months for APNIC who have China and India churning through them. APNIC will run out w...

bevhost

Vint Cerf, vice-president of Google who is known to many as one of the ‘fathers of the Internet’, declared at a 6UK launch event held in London recently that the UK will run out of IPv4 addresses well before the end of 2011. He said “There’s no question we’re going to be out of address space by spri...

bevhost

There is a liveCD floating around Ok, so I found the CD, downloaded it, had a play. Read the specs., It's really only designed to allow IP6 only clients to access IPv4 legacy servers. It's not meant for Ipv4 to Ipv6 connections and not designed to do P2P applications. It might allow for Hole Punchi...

bevhost

Web browsing worked fine, never ran into an issue. Skype worked for voice but I didnt try video (Never had a need) Existing NAT-busting methods used in alot of software works fine but will run into issues in a NAT444 setup. SIP and FTP had issues due to IP info carried inside the application level ...

bevhost

I can see some benefit of NAT64 for some of the Mobile phone providers in countries like India and China that are turning on new mobile devices at a staggering rate. Some newer mobile devices do support IPv6 quite well and they need access to legacy web servers on IPv4 and that is a good reason to u...

bevhost

Do you really think manual port forwarding at the ISP level is ever going to work?? I doubt we'll see NAT64 in ROS but the big players are deploying it, It will likely end up another transition step after large scale ISP's find that NAT444 is just not worth the hassle. Have you actually used NAT64 ...

bevhost

I would think that NAT444 + Dual Stack would work much better than NAT64/DNS64. If you would need a gun to your head to do NAT444 then you'll need an even bigger gun to do NAT64. If you think NAT64 will solve any of your problems think again. Heaps of stuff doesn't work with NAT64. About the only th...

bevhost

HI, Just returned from the IPv6 Forum Conference in Melbourne, Australia and the current advice is.

Dual Stack where you can.
Tunnel where you can't
Use NAT if you have a gun to your head.

bevhost

Count me in. I live in Brisbane so that's fantastic.

bevhost

For those wanting IPv6 Hotspot now, see
http://www.4ipnet.com/en/aboutus_news.p ... ases&no=47

bevhost

Has anyone had a look at this? http://www.isc.org/software/aftr AFTR (Address Family Transition Router) is the latest product in ISC's family of open source Internet infrastructure products. Developed in concert with Comcast, AFTR 1.0 is intended to ease the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 by allowing ...

bevhost

If you can't do DHCPv6 client/server yet can you at least do DHCPv6 relay? If hotspot with IPv6 can't be made to work then we need to fall back to PPPoE Server working with IPv6 and we need DHCPv6 relay. This won't be too good for Hotels and the like, but for sites with longer term users they can us...

bevhost

not this discussion again ... please search before you post Which part do you think I have wrong. Please tell me it's the part that Mikrotik has decided not to implement hotspot and that you are in fact going to do it soon. And please don't tell me that IPv6 doesn't do NAT so hotspot won't work bec...

bevhost

And how well does skype work?

Or MSN ?

bevhost

Can anyone who has a NAT64/DNS64 setup try a couple of tests for me.

http://66.102.11.104/

And how well does skype work?

bevhost

allowing pure v6 CPE users to access the v4 world, But perhaps this is a tech that should be kept in the big boys league of Cisco/Juniper as those that will actually run into the NAT44 issues will have the money to buy them Finally we actually agree on something. Although I was not aware that Junip...

bevhost

You dont need hole punching unless the application your attempting to use sends the IP contact info within the packet i.e SIP/RTP/FTP etc

I think you're confusing Hole Punching with ALG (Application Layer Gateway) kernel modules.

bevhost

I suggest you gain access to NAT64 devices a v6 client accessing v4 space will use the same port on v4 that the v6 address is attempting to use thus its normal mode is only to address translate and will port translate only when the v4 pool assigned to the NAT64 box is exhausted for the v6 side port...

bevhost

double NAT is neither acceptable nor legal here in Italy for ISPs. You can legislate all you like, but once there is no more IPv4 space to go around thats the end of the game. I still don't see how NAT64 solves this problem especially if the ISP is not allowed to use NAT. Because there is no port N...

bevhost

Hotspot can be made to work on IPv6, Mikrotik has just chosen not to implement it yet.

bevhost

It's a work in progress. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-xlate-stateful-12 I think I like this one better. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xli-behave-ivi-07 Translates both ways not just IPv6 to IPv4. Stateless, so no NAT timeouts. Has been in production for some time at CERTNET ...

bevhost

double NAT is neither acceptable nor legal here in Italy for ISPs.

You can legislate all you like, but once there is no more IPv4 space to go around thats the end of the game.

I still don't see how NAT64 solves this problem especially if the ISP is not allowed to use NAT.

bevhost

I see DNS64/NAT64 as a way of getting rid of Dual Stack. It means that a client can have a single IPv6 Stack and connect to IPv6 directly and IPv4 through NAT. Incoming connections must be made to IPv6 address. Outbound connections (to IPv4 anyway) must use the provided DNS. If you have dual stack P...

bevhost

I don't see how it solves that problem. It's not like there is a NAT46 and DNS46 as well. We are already an ISP doing Double NAT and we want to get an IPv6 Stack to allow customers to support incoming connections more easily. I don't see how NAT64 can help us. Currently customers have to use UPNP to...

bevhost

Do you separated layer 2 between your "Hotspot" and Normal lan? If not having 2 subnets is a complete waste of time since v6 local link address would be able to be used between then

of course, how silly do you think I am?

bevhost

True, No need to be wastful from the start tho, Residential's have no need for multiple subnets yet so handing out /64's is fine, /48's for Business clients If you want to be really stingy just allocate a /60, I have a residential internet service and I use more than one LAN. I have two SSID's on w...

bevhost

Dual stacking only works when you have v4 space to dual stack with, If you dual stack with private v4 space you run into double nat issues, NAT64 is a way around this for some but not all applications What problems does it solve? I don't see how it's any better, and considering it's not well tested...

bevhost

However it has to be ready (and tested) by the time the address space is exhausted otherwise we are in deep s....

Why can't you run Dual Stack?

bevhost

Is there a working implementation of this on Linux or *BSD that we can play with?
Is there an RFC?
Or is this just a Cisco Proprietory thing?

bevhost

I have never sold a public IPv4. Never will.

So you're not an Internet Service Provider then.

bevhost

If you have just 1 public v4 (with enough speed attached), you can have plenty of IPv4 private space to make a Mint.

We're doing this now, but clients want a public Internet reachable address. Stateful NAT doesn't do this. Perhaps we should implement Stateless IVI on the MT instead.

bevhost

I can Google !

Can i get MTCG now ?

http://www.kernel.org/doc/ols/2003/ols2 ... -34-43.pdf

This looks like a whitepaper, not an actual implementation?

Also, it only appears to allow access to IPv4 hosts from IPv6 where the IPv4 address is a public one AND the host is registered in DNS.

bevhost

Clients want IP addresses that are reachable from he Internet Right now we already have to use PPPoE client instead of Hotspot login for clients that want a public IP address. It requires a lot more helpdesk time to get it setup. And some sites have downstream routers with more clients behind them....

bevhost

Clients want IP addresses that are reachable from he Internet

Right now we already have to use PPPoE client instead of Hotspot login for clients that want a public IP address. It requires a lot more helpdesk time to get it setup.

bevhost

Not to ask a blatently stupid question, but given that the current HotSpot code runs IPv4, why would you *need* it to support IPv6 (on the client-facing side) in your own lifetime ? IPv4 NATing, IPv4->IPv6 translation on the HotSpot router sorts it doesn't it ? 'Legacy' IPv4 support will be around ...

bevhost

From reading the discussion I deduced that there is not currently IPv6 support for the hotspot. I then decided that adding IPv6 support for the hotspot would be a good thing and posted my support for the proposal in addition to IPv6 support for PPPoE server. so, you didn't understand the main point...

bevhost

What you're suggesting might help in the interim (and I'm not at all saying Mikrotik shouldn't consider it) but as IPv6 usage increases it becomes less valuable as a solution.

I am well aware of that, but it's still better than no solution at all.

bevhost

Let's forget the captive portal (ip6nat) problem for a moment and let us assume that the client begins with a request to an IPv4 web page. Our clients are already trained to visit a web page before attempting to use outlook, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to ask them use an IPv4 home page. Tha...

bevhost

To bevhost : Code you provided link to captures all IPv6 traffic to user space for processing and that will mean massive performance penalty. Actually it only captures IPv6 traffic that is directed to the QUEUE target in iptables, so it's not all traffic. And that is the one reason why it is better...

bevhost

Those are non standard hacks. We will only use approved standards in our ipv6 implementation

So it's official then, Mikrotik is getting out of the hotspot with captive portal business?

bevhost

Here's the feature set ros needs; everything we can do with v4? Make it so we can do it with v6

I don't think this is helpful, yes we all want to get all the features eventually, but surely some are more urgent than others?

bevhost

So which step are you at now?

bevhost

Starting to sound like a broken record here but MT need to front up and tell us their plans with v6 are, If MT's implementation is going halfassed and feature-sparse then I'll be planning for Cisco rollout in our network. Maybe I've not read all your posts, but I'm not sure what features you'd need...

bevhost

This might help.... see http://www.suse.de/~krahmer/ip6nat/ what is that? It's been suggested that the lack of a NAT capability for IPv6 is a roadblock for IPv6 Hotspot. Here is an implementation of NAT allowing IPv6 Redirect. ip6nat ====== Requires libnefnetlink (libnfnetlink-0.0.39 tested) and li...

bevhost

This might help....

see
http://www.suse.de/~krahmer/ip6nat/

bevhost

I have been trying to get MT to come out and give us an idea of what and when v6 items will be supported in ROS however the only offical response is that v6 hasnt been getting enough request from clients I suspect that many router manufacturers are going to be caught off guard when the consumer dem...

bevhost

IPv6 DHCP is not the same as you are used to. There is no need for DHCP client at all. Hosts receive RA messages and generates IPv6 address based on MAC. This is a part of IPv6 autoconfiguration features. Also according to RFC Routers are ignoring RAs and does not perform address autoconfiguration,...

bevhost

NAT64 looks to me as unnecessary, incomplete feature that is not that popular (judging from my Google search). tbh it looks like it addresses only HTTP transition - i can't see other services (like FTP) working in this. So if you need IPv6 customers to be able to browse IPv4 HTTP pages - use a simp...

bevhost

Since this is a feature we need I have been giving this some consideration. I have developed the back end software / client hotspot website, radius servers etc that run our hotspots. So I am keen to see how we can support IPv6 clients on our hotspot networks. Since I don't now the internal workings ...

bevhost

I don't vote for NAT64 for one simple reason. We don't actually need it, at least not yet, I think there are higher priorities. I would like to see Mikrotik complete the IPv6 stack for things such as Hotspot_v6, DHCPv6, Winbox, ssh etc. NAT64 / DNS 64 allows clients to be setup in a single stack IPv...

bevhost

I'm also not sure that your meant to dynamically change the v6 prefix handed out to the CPE as this would require an address update for every v6 device in the lan when the dsl/wifi/sat/whatever link drops Unlike DHCPv4, DHCPv6 has a reconfigure capability where the server can announce to it's clien...

Search found 73 matches