In other words, doh cannot be used as a backup dns server(second dns server)? No. I have a similar question but a little bit different. :-) If DoH is configured and a regular DNS is also set, in case the DoH becomes unresponsive or the certificate expires, will the regular DNS be used by ROS as a b...

Just remove the keep alive for the peer and you should be fine

thanks
found an explanation on reddit about these settings
did exactly that and without responder, my log looks fine now :-)

well, you set persistent keep alive. what do you expect? because nothing was changed regarding wireguard on my side, I was expecting the log having the same entries that I had on 7.12 can you please suggest better setting for this situation? should I disable persistent-keepalive completely? or disa...

tick Responder

sorry, forgot to mention, found it in wiki and already tried it, nothing changed

I have a "problem" with wireguard spamming in log Before 7.15.2 I was using 7.12.x and had no such issue Normis was saying that this issue should be fixed in 7.15, but for me it's still here, so I'm suspecting that something is off with my settings Looking for help to spot the problem This...

del

Will be answering for myself :-)

Both options are valid and working fine

Hi, In my IP - DNS - Static I have 4 records dns.nextdns.io 111.111.111.111 dns1.nextdns.io 111.111.111.111 dns.nextdns.io 222.222.222.222 dns2.nextdns.io 222.222.222.222 as you can see, first and a second pair have matching IP addresses I'm thinking about combining every pair into one record and I'...

Thus, what RouterOS picks in DoH is unknown. But almost certain it be same result as

Code: Select all

:put [:resolve dns.nextdns.io]

for every use of this command, I receive my static addresses one after another

thank you for explanation!

First to be clear: static DNS records are not forwarded at all. They are answered by the router itself. Only DNS records not in the static list are forwarded. yes, thank you, was lost in translation :-) When you have different IP addresses for a static name, and the client asks for it, they will ge...

Hi, I have a general question about static DNS logic in Mikrotik Let's say in I have 3 records in IP -> DNS -> Static: 1 dns.nextdns.io 214.183.163.111 2 dns.nextdns.io 215.184.164.222 3 dns.nextdns.io 216.185.165.333 Questions: When a new DNS request is received and there is no answer in cache, is ...

All it needed is a working srcnat masquerade rule with the Wireguard subnet

nobody mentions this option, but for me it was the one that was missing
was going crazy trying to solve the same problem
thank you for sharing the solution!

random reboots on RB4011 running this firmware from day 3 it was released on my 4011 (no wifi version) had first random reboot this week, but have no idea why it happened because it was at night when for sure nobody was doing anything didn't found anything to blame (was suspicious about watchdog) a...

I have the same problem with my MiBox S it's spamming through logs and there is nothing I can do about it for the moment I found 4 possible solutions (none of them helped me): disable loop protect on a port disable auto negotiation on a port and indicate correct fixed speed disable loop protect and ...

there are no other versions between them

long-term isn't a different firmware branch
it's a regular firmware (6.45.7 in our case) plus bugfixes and improvements only, without adding new functionality

are we getting long-term version with this fix?

del

the netinstall link on the download page doesnt work

try changing https://www.mikrotik.com/routeros/6.40.7/... link to https://download.mikrotik.com/routeros/6.40.7/...

tile - fixed IPSec hardware acceleration out-of-order packet problem, significantly improved performance is this fix present in this bugfix version? This has been fixed in the initial 6.39 release, so this particular release should be absolutely fine/safe to use on tile with HW-accelerated IPsec. t...

tile - fixed IPSec hardware acceleration out-of-order packet problem, significantly improved performance

is this fix present in this bugfix version?

port flapping is not going to get fixed on the 2011?

not in this branch, only in the next one

RB2011 problem was fixed today in v6.36rc39

Code: Select all

...
*) rb2011 - fixed ether6-ether10 flapping when two ports from both switch chips are in the same bridge;
...

Would be nice to see this make it to the bugfix channel.

unfortunately, only in next one

Does 6.35.4 fix the issue on RB2011 devices? There was a bug noted on version 6.34.6 with the 2nd switch group.
Is that fixed in this release?

fixed in in RC brunch (starting v6.36rc39) only

RB2011 problem was fixed today in v6.36rc39

I've got an answer today from support

We have reproduced this particular problem in the test lab and are looking for solution now.

I am happy it wasn't my configuration problem

my report has the number Ticket#2016062866000114

I have huge issues on RB2011's and don't use them  anymore. I'm sure the second switch group has a firmware bug.

it's possible
my problem (mentioned above) can be reproduced with any second switch group port
can anybody else confirm this?

I have a strange problem with this bugfix. I noticed this after upgrading to v6.34.6 from v6.32.4 and rebooting my RB2011UiAS-2HnD-IN http://i35.servimg.com/u/f35/11/95/78/30/clipbo19.jpg http://i35.servimg.com/u/f35/11/95/78/30/clipbo19.jpg Ethernet ports 8-9-10 are in bridge and receive IPTV signa...

only all-rates-fixed option is working

sorry, I did not get it
it`s the only option, that is working with AR9300?
what about "manual" or "defaul" options?