See this: http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... 4&p=320493

RouterOS ignores the OSPF LSA from a loopback address. The workaround is to add static routes for your loopback addresses.

I have an EVO 4G LTE phone that apparently does not like Mikrotik's WPA2 implementation. As long as WPA2 is enabled the phone fails to associate. Nothing is logged, my guess is that the initial handshake is failing. Setting the security profile as WPA only on solves the problem and allows the phone ...

Thanks for the update.

The changelogs for 6.0 betas don't say anything about this issue but I guess it's worth a look.

AirFiber is an FPGA based radio, nothing like the low cost 802.11 based stuff (from both Mikrotik and UBNT) built with off the shelf Atheros chips and whatnot. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but you can see it in the price difference of using pre-engineered stuff vs. making something in ...

I've been meaning to revisit this issue using an RB751 I have on my test bench but I've been busy.

I don't have any Juniper devices, but I have tested OSPFv3 with Cisco, Vyatta (quagga-based) and OpenBSD. Everything but RouterOS carries the /128s properly.

give these a try: http://ubnt.com/8023af Sorry, do NOT try these. We installed a bunch of them with UBNT NSM2s and almost all of them failed after a couple of months. There are loads of complaints on UBNT's forum about this product failing due to heat, but ours were installed underground with a con...

Unfortunately RouterOS does not support mini PCI crypto accelerators based on my experiments, although I feel that such a thing would be nice to set up VPN endpoints (or even small concentrators) without taking a hit on CPU for crypto. The Hifn cards are already pretty popular under Linux. Being abl...

Can anyone from Mikrotik comment about GPS sync support for wireless AP's? We are 100% Mikrotik but the need for GPS Sync and the availability from UBNT is forcing our hand. We will be moving from MT to UBNT unless MT can show us some movement in that direction. Would like to have a comment asap as...

I tried on an RB433 and the Hifn card showed up as an unknown device. On the x86 build of RouterOS it was recognized by name in the resources window. I'll have to do some additional testing and post some screenshots when I have time.

Thanks for the responses. I have a Hifn card so I ordered a RB433 and I'm going to give it a try for fun to see what happens.

Has anyone tried adding a mini-pci crypto card (like this Hifn one) to their Mikrotik?

Thanks, you're right. And indeed, I see no /128s from the rest of my network which is primarily Cisco. I do see some /127s and /126s however. Without /128 it appears that I cannot use loopbacks for ipv6 bgp. I saw exactly the same thing: RouterOS will pick up everything except the /128s, and I too ...

I seem to have the opposite problem. I can see /128s from its OSPFv3 neighbor but I'm unable to find a way to advertise my loopback (bridge) interface's /128. This bridge has no ports associated with it. The same bridge is used for OSPFv2 for IPv4 and works fine when I add a network statement. Ther...

OSPFv3 in v5.1 can advertise /128. Did you set mac address on the bridge on which loopback address is set? It's advertising a /128 from a loopback bridge OK, but it's not seeing any received /128 from any other routers (all Cisco) on the network. I checked to see if there is an LSA received for the...

A side effect of this problem is that it all IPv6 BGP routes are invalid because it thinks all of the nexthops (the loopbacks) are invalid.

RouterOS 5.1 talking OSPFv3 with a an existing Cisco network seems to ignore /128 routes which are used as loopback addresses for things like BGP peers and nexthops. Can this be fixed?

(Before someone jumps in about using a /64 for loopbacks, see RFC 5375 section B.2.3.)

For me the amount of noise a rackmount device makes is irrelevant. It can be as noisy as at likes because it's going in the server room with stuff that's just as loud if not louder. I suspect this was MikroTik's design planning as well. I would not want to pay extra for a "quiet" version.

And when the switch is in a other net behind a vpn. All Other managable switch have a changable gateway and netmask.

I just installed a 250GS at a client location to utilize the traffic shaping properties; it can be accessed remotely just fine.

Has anyone followed up on this issue yet? The thread seems to have ended unresolved...