Hello,
I would like to know if there is a version of ROS that supports RFC 3021 which allows the use of /31 in point to point.
I have a rather particular setup which consists in announcing a /31 in eBGP and to configure the /31 on the port 3 of one of my routers in order to connect a firewall.

I used the method of putting the IP in /32 and put that of the firewall in address of the network I manage to ping between my two equipment but I do not manage to leave on Internet the Mikrotik does not let pass the traffic.

I did my test on the last version in 6 (6.49.7)

Thank you

No. Need to use /30's

You do not need /30

/32 works with /31 on the remote side.
It may not work if your mentioned firewall is not set up properly and blocks the traffic or incorrectly set up a routing table that does not allow route traffic through the router.

Using /31 directly on RouterOS v7.6 works fine for BGP over here.

You do not need /30

/32 works with /31 on the remote side.
It may not work if your mentioned firewall is not set up properly and blocks the traffic or incorrectly set up a routing table that does not allow route traffic through the router.

Huh? Why would you use different masks?

Using /31 directly on RouterOS v7.6 works fine for BGP over here.

Hi, can you confirm that /31 is working stable with BGP on rosV7.6 / 7.7?
I want to use it for public ip redistribution via iBGP to end clients in VRFs.

In /routing/bgp/connection remote.address of the form x.x.x.x without a mask will not work.
If you enter the remote address in the format x.x.x.x/31, it will be ok.

/32 works with /31 on the remote side.

Why on Earth, would you need to use /32 on local and /31 on remote? This is a very poor implementation of RFC3021, if you could even call it an attempt.

Why on Earth, would you need to use /32 on local and /31 on remote? This is a very poor implementation of RFC3021, if you could even call it an attempt.

RFC3021 is simply not supported on MikroTik platform, I can't imagine what's taking them so long to support this.

Why on Earth, would you need to use /32 on local and /31 on remote? This is a very poor implementation of RFC3021, if you could even call it an attempt.

It isn't an attempt, there is no attempt, RFC3021 doesn't work on RouterOS.. That is another user telling you what will work, if you can't use a /30 for some reason.

It isn't an attempt, there is no attempt, RFC3021 doesn't work on RouterOS.. That is another user telling you what will work, if you can't use a /30 for some reason.

I thought so too but it seems MikroTik has apparently added RFC3021 support at some point (though I can't find anything in any of the changelogs referencing "3021" or "/31"). I just joined the forum so hopefully the screenshot I'm attaching of a box running 7.13.3 successfully using a /31 will be allowed. This particular test was on a pair of CHRs but I also tested using a spare RB5009 running 7.13.3 and no problems there either.