Using 1500-byte MTU with PPPoE is only possible when the ISP and the modem supports RFC4638.
When one of them doesn't, the router reverts to the safe MTU of 1480. However when manually configuring it should be
possible to get MTU 1492, when the modem at least supports VLAN tagging. When not, maybe 1488.
You cannot force the matter by setting higher values without the support. It will not work and/or it will crash the modem.
(in case of an AVM FritzBox in bridge mode it does that)

The ISP definitely supports RFC4638 as using the TG589 for VDSL+PPPoE allows non-fragmented 1500-byte pings. (I say "ISP" but it's probably true for any ISP using OpenReach network).
RouterOS allegedly has RFC4638 support since version 6.33, albeit with some bug-fixes since then!

But you have given me an idea to test:

Maybe with the TG589 in "bridge mode", doing only VDSL (and VLAN tagging) but not PPPoE, the TG589's ethernet port's MTU is only 1500?
This could mean that although everything is set up OK in RouterOS, the PPPoE negotiation fails somehow.
Should be easy enough to test next time I have some spare hours to rearrange everything again.

Couple of thoughts..

1) Re the TG589: make sure you have also increased the MTU on the TG589, or you're simply not going to be able to use packets larger than 1500 with it. You can't JUST increase packet size on the Mikrotik side..

2) Whoever said turning off autonegotiate was the way to go with the SFP's gave you a bum steer. I've never had this work. The only way I can get the 180-T SFP's to work on my CRS-109's, is to power the CRS109 on, wait for it to boot, THEN insert the 180-T. If the 180T is installed when the Mikrotik boots, it will never pass traffic even after the sync light goes solid green.

Cheers,

DG

To have MTU of 1500 on PPPoE you need to have MTU at least 1512 on ethernet (or in case VLAN tags are not counted at least 1508).
When it is not possible to raise MTU on ethernet (both on router and modem) to this value the RFC4638 protocol will detect this and the MTU of the PPPoE link will be lower.
I have had working MTU 1500 connection both with the SFP discussed in this thread and with Draytek Vigor 130 external VDSL2 modem which supports RFC4638.

Apparently your modem does not support RFC4638 and it will fail.
You are lucky that it just lowers the MTU (the RFC4638 does a ping of a large packet and it does not receive the reply), when doing the same with an AVM Fritzbox the large
packets just crash the modem and it will reboot and re-train. Likely some buffer overflow somewhere.

Update: online!

Probably the most critical aspect was this gem by rendrag:

2) Whoever said turning off autonegotiate was the way to go with the SFP's gave you a bum steer. I've never had this work. The only way I can get the 180-T SFP's to work on my CRS-109's, is to power the CRS109 on, wait for it to boot, THEN insert the 180-T. If the 180T is installed when the Mikrotik boots, it will never pass traffic even after the sync light goes solid green.

If you turn OFF auto-negotiate then you will see the "R" running flag but no packets are ever received from the SFP interface.
If you turn ON auto-negotiate, and maybe set advertise=1000M-full as needed, then the next time you insert the modem into the SFP cage it will work!
It's not enough to set advertise and auto-negotiate=on with the device already in place, it needs to be re-inserted after these settings have been changed.
Also, with my hAP ac running 6.43.4 the SFP interface will not work after a reboot, it will again need to be re-inserted.
(I'm about to raise a support ticket for that with supouts)

On the PPPoE front, I set the SFP interface's MTU to 1598 (easily enough for PPPoE + VLAN overhead) and the vlan's MTU to 1560 (easily enough for PPPoE overhead).
The other pppoe-client settings were max-mtu=1500 max-mru=1500, leaving mrru=disabled.

Really glad I don't have to use the locked-down TG589 as a glorified modem.

If you turn OFF auto-negotiate then you will see the "R" running flag but no packets are ever received from the SFP interface.
If you turn ON auto-negotiate, and maybe set advertise=1000M-full as needed, then the next time you insert the modem into the SFP cage it will work!

O that is interesting, that must be some bug/feature introduced in RouterOS recently!
When I first received my SFP, it worked fine with auto-negotiate off. I had 1500 byte MTU all working (same as how you wrote above) and the only problem was I did not get my expected line speed and there is no way to monitor why.
Recently I tried the SFP again and same problem as you write: nothing received. I feared I had damaged the SFP somehow and put it aside.
Now I will try again with what you describe.

O that is interesting, that must be some bug/feature introduced in RouterOS recently!
When I first received my SFP, it worked fine with auto-negotiate off. I had 1500 byte MTU all working (same as how you wrote above) and the only problem was I did not get my expected line speed and there is no way to monitor why.
Recently I tried the SFP again and same problem as you write: nothing received. I feared I had damaged the SFP somehow and put it aside.
Now I will try again with what you describe.

Oh that could be - You had yours quite some time before I finally got mine, and I think I was on a newer RouterOS version than you at the time, and didn't want to roll back to test it.

it's quite annoying though, as when the SFP does finally stop working (it was every 6 weeks like clockwork for a while, but it's just gone 3 months without a failure until last week..), it means I have to power cycle the CRS109 it lives in, and remove the SFP while it gets power cycled, which means I have to be at home to do it, or talk the missus through it..

If you turn OFF auto-negotiate then you will see the "R" running flag but no packets are ever received from the SFP interface.
If you turn ON auto-negotiate, and maybe set advertise=1000M-full as needed, then the next time you insert the modem into the SFP cage it will work!

O that is interesting, that must be some bug/feature introduced in RouterOS recently!
When I first received my SFP, it worked fine with auto-negotiate off. I had 1500 byte MTU all working (same as how you wrote above) and the only problem was I did not get my expected line speed and there is no way to monitor why.
Recently I tried the SFP again and same problem as you write: nothing received. I feared I had damaged the SFP somehow and put it aside.
Now I will try again with what you describe.

any news from mikrotik support?

No reply. I can't even find any "support tickets" section when I log into my Mikrotik account. I guess it's not a priority for them.
On the bright side, uptime now at 13 weeks although I did have to disable/re-enable the pppoe-client entry after being away for a week but everything SFP-wise seems stable.

Hi everyone,

these are the xDSL ATM settings of the modems mentioned above:

Hi Milotop,

How/where can we configure the VPI setting?

A screenshot from your Inbox with VPI setting would be helpful.

Many thanks,
b.L

You cannot configure it. You can only select a VPI/VCI setting from the above list.
You do that by accessing the link via a VLAN as in the last column of the table.
So to use VPI/VCI setting 8/36 you use VLAN 7.

VPI/VCI setting not in the table? -> you cannot use this modem.

You cannot configure it. You can only select a VPI/VCI setting from the above list.
You do that by accessing the link via a VLAN as in the last column of the table.
So to use VPI/VCI setting 8/36 you use VLAN 7.

VPI/VCI setting not in the table? -> you cannot use this modem.

I just used VLAN10 as the ISP has recommended me and it works like charm.

I just used VLAN10 as the ISP has recommended me and it works like charm.

So it likely is VDSL, not ADSL, so you do not have ATM and no VPI/VCI settings.
In that case this limitation does not occur.

Do you get the expected speed (same as a ISP supplied modem)?
It still is unfortunate that MikroTik does not add the display of the line parameters for these modems...

I can recommend https://www.mikrotik-shop.de/Interfaces ... :2192.html

I got mine 2 days ago and it works great on a O2 VDSL 50/10 MBit connection.
But it does not work with Dt. Telekom (T-COM) VDSL connections. That should change during 2018.

With my O2 VDSL I got 49.7 MBit down and 9.4 MBit uplink.

1. After inserting the module, it was directly recognized (sfp1).
2. I switched off autonegotiation on the sfp device.
3. I created VLAN7 (vlan7) and connected it to the sfp device(sfp1).
4. Then I created a PPPoE Client, connected it to Interface vlan7 and configured the dial-out setting with my O2 credentials.
Then finally I switched off my FB.

That's it ... Really great stuff!

Step 5: /Interfaces/Interface List => WAN => Switch to Interface SFP.

Can confirm. T-Online. Works great, but slower than a Draytek Vigor 130.
VDSL 100/50:
Vigor 130: 91/28
SFP: 75/25.

Thank you all for your inputs

Anybody tested any of those SFP modem in north america?

Rock

How far does 500Mbps VDSL G.fast reach.. 30 meters?

It appears that MikroTik operates in a quite narrow band between "oldfashioned" and "too new".

They have no interest at all in supporting DSL, not even via support of SFP VDSL modems from other sources (i.e. integrate some way to monitor the modem into RouterOS) "because today everyone has fiber and VDSL is the technology of the past and is going away" (that was already their opinion 4 years ago when this topic was started, and likely also before).
Of course quite unrealistic, it is happening in some countries but in many other countries the technology today is still VDSL from streetcabinets with ever faster rates.

But on the other hand, there is almost no support for IPv6 "because our customers do not yet ask for it". (which is even the reply when you ask for it!)
Strange that those countries that supposedly do everything using fiber to the premises, do not use IPv6 yet.

In the Netherlands we have now free router/modem choice. The KPN which is the biggest provider on telephone lines, I can't recommend any Mikrotik router to whom is asking me due to no decent VDSL support.

Many people are looking now for a better router than the one they are hiring right now from their provider.

Personally I think it's insane to keep investing in new advanced equipment for the old copper pairs, Especially when the range is only in a couple of hundreds of meters. When I had ADSL once we had a couple of kilometers to the exchange, then it had it's purpose.

Not every country has cheap labour, and it is quicker to replace a box than laying FTTH. Very few people need 10 Gbps at home.

This "NG.fast" is made for up to 100 meters, so it would be mostly for FTTB (or right outside).

modems will be ready from broadcom soon:
https://www.broadcom.com/company/news/p ... ases/52671
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.fast#G.mgfast_(XG-fast)

When we are looking for "VDSL support in MikroTik routers" what we realistically mean is "SFP modules working with MikroTik routers".
I once bought such a module and while it "worked" with my router, it did not achieve the speed a regular modem would, and there was no way to check the values in the modem to see why that was.
So what we would need is some way to check the values (like for a fiber SFP) of line attenuation, SNR, max and effective bitrate, etc.
In all these years, MikroTik has not come up with that, so for now we should just take it for granted that they are not interested in helping us.

I am using an external Draytek 130 VDSL modem running in mode 17A for 100/30 Mbps. But should I want to go higher in speed, e.g. using bundling or G.fast, there would be another challenge.
I could get a Draytek 165. But I really would like to get rid of yet another box with yet another power supply and taking up an ethernet port.
Alas, it is not going to change. Just as there is no advance in IPv6 support. "customers are not asking for it" (is being told to all customers that ask for it)

Not every country has cheap labour, and it is quicker to replace a box than laying FTTH. Very few people need 10 Gbps at home.

This "NG.fast" is made for up to 100 meters, so it would be mostly for FTTB (or right outside).

Then they should cut the old copper pair and drag an cheap fibre instead. Or at least to the basement of the apartment building. It's not about bandwidth, it's about getting rid of legacy technology. This solutions is like keeping the old phone wires on respirator.

It should be mandatory to provide IPv6 as well.

Then they should cut the old copper pair and drag an cheap fibre instead. Or at least to the basement of the apartment building.

In countries with cheap labor, fiber can be laid to every house at little extra cost.
In completely socialist countries, the cost of the government installing fiber everywhere can be paid by everyone via their taxes.

But in countries somewhere in between, there is nobody paying for the work and so it is not going to happen.
Here in the Netherlands we are right in between: some municipalities have paid for fiber to every home and in other places, housing associations have done the same thing.
But in general, fiber to the home is not available and instead we have either internet-over-cable (cable TV companies' coax) or fiber to street cabinets supplying VDSL over telephone pairs.
(in the past, telephone pairs were installed everywhere in the socialist way)

This situation is not going to change soon.

If the "NG.fast" project was supposed to result in a slower product, maybe it is now abandoned.

It is not abandoned.. "NG.fast" and "XG.fast" will be named as "G.mgfast"..

I wish mikrotik make 35b/G.fast/G.mgfast SFP/+ modules. To decrease the price on the market.

Most important, we do not require any modules from MikroTik when they think it is not worthwile to produce them.
We only need support from MikroTik so that parameters of the line can be viewed and possibly tweaked when such a module is plugged into a MikroTik router.
Similar to what is now possible for fiber modules but with values as usual for DSL.

Of course it would be helpful when there is some standard for that, which does not seem to be the case. So it relies on agreements with a couple of manufacturers.
But still that should be less trouble than design, manufacture and sell a module.

I imagine many times putting an SFP modem in Mikrotik would not be considered because of the lack of FXS ports in their routers.

Why? FXS ports and DSL are totally unrelated.

Why? FXS ports and DSL are totally unrelated.

Some phone companies shut down POTS already.

And so?
Would you want a HDMI connection on your router as well, for the IPtv that most DSL providers have? (at least, here)
I don't see why an FXS port is required on a router more than any other "application" connection.
Most people use their mobile phones also at home here. I do have a cheap VoIP phone on the LAN. External ATAs are
available for like 20 euro.

Many providers give a separate box for TV, including some that previously gave only one for everything. There's little point in replacing an ISP modem router with a VOIP box, which would also cost more than 2 FXS ports in Mikrotik. And you would also have to pay for the SFP, without really reducing clutter.

I see even LESS point in equipping every router with FXS ports that 99% of the time are completely useless.
Apparently you see a router as a telecom device that should replace an existing telephone line, but in the many MikroTik installations that I have I see only ONE single place where that would be anywhere near useful (my home installation) and I do not need it because I already bought a VoIP phone for the previous router I had which also did not have FXS ports.
All other installs are nowhere near a telephone.

An ISP could thus provide the usual 2 boxes with Mikrotik (plus an SFP) instead of 3. Or SFP plus TV box (I don't know any "pure" TV box with FXS ports). I doubt they will consider using Mikrotik if it does not have these ports.

So what? They will not consider MikroTik for such markets anyway!
They already have suitable boxes from many other manufacturers, that they can fully manage using their TR-069 systems and that their helpdesk can support.
They do not need an "advanced router for techie users that still want to connect last centuries phones".

Why should people throw away their analog phones?

Why should they throw away their AM radios or their record players?
The technology moves on, the way devices are used moves on. They are not forced to throw them away, but they should accept that support will decrease all the time.

It does not matter if many people only use mobile phones.

Well, of course this matters when a device is being designed. Today most people want WiFi. And high speeds. Not FXS ports.

The big ISPs and telco's will keep using shitty boxes that fits their need and compliance. They have no use for RouterOS features at all.

With that said, I not saying that Mikrotik shouldn't have a xDSL-media-converter like product. Most xDSL-routers are horrible in general.

We only need support from MikroTik so that parameters of the line can be viewed and possibly tweaked when such a module is plugged into a MikroTik router.
Similar to what is now possible for fiber modules but with values as usual for DSL.

Reading this got my hopes high and I plugged in a GPON ONU that I recently bought to play around with (I don't even have GPON here ) into my CSS326. I know almost nothing about GPON but AFAIK one needs to set a user-id and/or password in the module. Turns out, my MikroTik does not have the ability to tweak that aspect of the fibre (GPON's fiber, too, right ) module.

I guess what I want to say here: Lets add this to the MikroTik SFP port capability wish list!

Alex

But I would not replace my cable modem/router for SFP if I have to add an ATA box even if I could.

Don't most people that prefer a "real" router (Cisco, MikroTik, Ubiquiti, Juniper, ...) use a separate modem? The moment you switch the ISP's CPE into modem/bridge mode, the telephony capability of the box is usually lost anyway. So why not use a small SFP modem instead?

EDIT: And as routers and switches often reside in the cellar, attic, or some other "hidden" place, that's a pretty sh#tty place for a phone jack anyway.

It is not abandoned.. "NG.fast" and "XG.fast" will be named as "G.mgfast"..

But the "NG.fast" prototype was only 5 Gbps. Maybe Swisscom would only be interested in 10 Gbps now.

G.mgfast (multi-gigabit fast) will be supporting both 5Gbps and 10Gbps profiles.

You may be allowed to replace their box but you have to accept a VOIP liability, so I would not.

What do you mean with "VoIP liability"? I received the SIP credentials from my ISP, so I was able to use my own hardware for everything - DSL modem (DGA4132), router (Ubiquiti ER-X), SIP-Client-DECT-Combo (FritzBox).

Hey vortex,

Can you please take your wildly offtopic discussion to a different topic?
In this topic we try to discuss the possibility of having a VDSL-capable MikroTik router, e.g. by having a VDSL modem as an SFP module added to an SFP-equipped MikroTik router, and supported in RouterOS so it can be monitored and configured.

I could see the tangent of having a DOCSIS SFP perform a similar task and similarly supported as being valid in this topic, as it would require similar RouterOS support, but it doesn't exist and it does not seem to be planned by anyone.

However, all that babble that you started about having to support FXS and SIP for you to accept that as an alternative (noting that it is not even viable because there IS no DOCSIS SFP module) and now even wandering off into audio/video broadcast technology really isn't to the point anymore.

unfortunately Mikrotik xDSL modem is not going to be produced.. They focus on active fiber and GPON.. the response from mikrotik was:

xDSL and G.fast are old technologies. Big chip makers quited that market long time ago. Intel, Qualcomm, Marvell... they sold or closed their xDSL and G.fast groups.

unfortunately Mikrotik xDSL modem is not going to be produced.. They focus on active fiber and GPON.. the response from mikrotik was:

xDSL and G.fast are old technologies. Big chip makers quited that market long time ago. Intel, Qualcomm, Marvell... they sold or closed their xDSL and G.fast groups.

MikroTik does not need to produce a DSL modem, they only have to support DSL SFP modules that other manufacturers already produce and can be used in MikroTik routers that have SFP.
Similar to supporting USB sticks for mobile telecom (4G etc).

Of course it would not be a good idea to produce a router model with DSL builtin. It would cost a lot of money to develop such routers in every performance category.

MikroTik does not need to produce a DSL modem, they only have to support DSL SFP modules that other manufacturers already produce and can be used in MikroTik routers that have SFP.
Similar to supporting USB sticks for mobile telecom (4G etc).

Of course it would not be a good idea to produce a router model with DSL builtin. It would cost a lot of money to develop such routers in every performance category.

I disagree. The SFP VDSL modules run hot, e.g. around 80degrees Celcius. This might be OK in your country, but in Australia they are too hot and unreliable.

Mikrotik could easily make use of ODM design services from the chipset manufacturers or their partners. This is no different to the big name SOHO router manufacturers using the likes of Compex to design the PCB's in their routers.

ADSL/VDSL are still mainstream and current technologies in a lot of countries for better or worse.

Mikrotik could easily make use of ODM design services from the chipset manufacturers or their partners.

But they are not interested in that. This has been te response to several people making this query, I also tried that years ago and even then they were not interested.
Here we run in the problem that MikroTik is from a country that joined the western society later than others, and where the "disadvantage of being first" does not apply so much.
Over here the majority of internet connections is DSL and cable, fiber to the home is only a small segment. But apparently in Latvia and other countries everything is fiber.
Good for them, but not very useful for us. We would have to wait until every home and business is connected to fiber, and there is no such initiative currently going on.
I agree with you that SFPs run too hot, kind of a generic problem with SFPs, they are just designed too small. A device supporting SFP should have a fan that blows air out
through the SFP. When I would use my 180-T (which I can't, because RouterOS does not support it well enough) I would probably try to apply some heatsinking.

I don't think it's possible to fit a DOCSIS frontend in a regular SFP. DOCSIS also needs a fair bit of power for the RF-stuff.

Possible in a QSFP, but that would be ridiculous.

The SFP VDSL modules run hot, e.g. around 80degrees Celcius. This might be OK in your country, but in Australia they are too hot and unreliable.

Howdy ho!

I just thought about acquiring such a tiny SFP VDSL2 thingie, just to get rid of another device that needs to be plugged into a wall socket, wasting space... Altough this is not down under but Central Europe, temperature issues are issues to me and so not wanted. At least 80°C sounds like a serious temperature issue.

Anyone else has issues with the temperature? Are there any differences when it comes to different makers?

Thanks!

Regards
anTIKnock

Any news on working SFP VDSL2 (v35b) modem for our MT Routers?

Any news on working SFP VDSL2 (v35b) modem for our MT Routers?

I think it will not happen. They live in a part of the world where VDSL is not a thing, they think it is dead and not worth supporting.
That already was a problem 4 years ago when this topic was started, so it likely has only become worse (for us).

It is disappointing, because basically we are not asking them to design any VDSL modem or to write the (complicated) DSP code for it, but only to support the existing SFP modems from other manufacturers just like they support other SFP types (like GPON).
That should be limited to sending some commands to the SFP and retrieve the reply, and display it and/or make it available in SNMP.

Hi all,
I am trying to configure my Mikrotik hES-X to replace the DSL modem/router provided by my ISP (Orange, France).

The DSL SFP I bought is the Allnet ALL4781-VDSL2-SFP module, but I am not sure how to configure the VP/VC (8/35) in my case.

Does the table below also apply to the ALL4781 module ?



If so, it means I need to use VLAN 8 - which interface must be put in the VLAN, the sfp interface itself or the PPPoE virtual interface (or both) ?

Thank you for your help. Sorry for the noob question.

I don’t know if that module is the same, but if it is, then you’ll create a vlan 8 interface on the SFP interface, and add your pppoe dialler to the vlan8 interface

Thanks for the explanation regarding the VLAN setting, it's very clear

I bought a ALLNET ALL4781-VDSL2-SFP for my VDSL2 17a G.Vector (ITU G.993.5) line using 1&1 in germany. It's sold as a 100Mb/s VDSL2 line and syncs at around 109Mb/s on a fritzbox 7412.

Can somebody tell me if this SFP can only do VDSL or is also compatible with ADSL ?

I plugged it on my ADSL line. The green LED came ON steady - which means DSL link on. On the router I can see some traffic going through sfp1 TX/RX ... But I can't get my PPPoE to work.

Thank you for your answers.

I bought a ALLNET ALL4781-VDSL2-SFP for my VDSL2 17a G.Vector (ITU G.993.5) line using 1&1 in germany. It's sold as a 100Mb/s VDSL2 line and syncs at around 109Mb/s on a fritzbox 7412.

Can somebody tell me if this SFP can only do VDSL or is also compatible with ADSL ?

I plugged it on my ADSL line. The green LED came ON steady - which means DSL link on. On the router I can see some traffic going through sfp1 TX/RX ... But I can't get my PPPoE to work.

Thank you for your answers.

Try Different VLANs

I tried VLAN 8 which should correspond to the VPC 8/35 ... But got no luck.

I tried VLAN 8 which should correspond to the VPC 8/35 ... But got no luck.

Try them all

lol. does this thing even support ATM (ADSL) ?

thought just VDSL (PTM)

See above, it has been mentioned many times. But I have never tested it on an ADSL line and have long given up on usage on VDSL as well due to total lack of interest and support from MikroTik.
These devices essentially are unusable without a display of SFP stats that shows the line status, as has always been available for fiber and ethernet modules.

lol. does this thing even support ATM (ADSL) ?

thought just VDSL (PTM)

According to the vendor it does not support ADSL/ADSL2+
But I was surprised because clearly I can see the DSL link coming up and some traffic - around 520 bps. Also on my ISP web page it says my DSL link is up and it reports the dowload and upload speeds.

But unfortunately I did not manage to get a working setup I gave up and returned the SFP to the store while I could still do it and get a refund.

if it is not supported then it is simply not supported.

dsl - atm/ptm - pppoe are different layers. if atm is not supported it will simply not work as ADSL has to use ATM.

I've tried using the net(z)ware VDSL SFP with a UK FTTC line and had awful results (Openreach - G.993.2 VDSL2, Profile 17a. ECI/Infineon DSLAM). Here's the SFP detail: When it did sync, it would do so at a fraction of the typical speed and extremely poor latency. Using other modems 44d/18u was achieved (7.7 dB / 6.0 dB SNR). Unfortunately I don't have line stats from the SFP, but suspect <10Mbps down. Latency was often >500ms with high packet loss.

I also experienced the issues @dohmniq reported, where a strange sequence of events was required to get it to pass traffic (No PPP would come up unless pppoe was disabled / sfp-reinserted). After contacting net(z)ware, I was told the SFP was EOL and no support/updates were available.

I can't find much online about the Net(z)ware SFP, but searching the string "EDL16CV1" suggests it's similar to the Proscend (and so I guess the same as the Metanoia VDSL2 VTU-R SFP).

I have an Allnet ALL4781 on its way, which I'm hoping is going to be better - or at least functional with the windows DSLMonitor software so that I can get a better idea of what might be going on.

Posting this so that anyone considering the Net(z)ware VDSL2.180-T can find something about it. I'll try and remember to post again if things improve with the Allnet SFP.

Edit 2022-12-23
Unfortunately, the only Allnet VDSL SFP I can find int the UK has been lost by the courier (Thanks, UPS) so I decided to explore further the net(z)ware one.
Using the DSLManager application, I was able to flash the "180T-L4TA-8463-Duxtel.b" firmware. Removing and re-inserting the SFP afterwards then allowed the "DSMonitor Lite" app to work
Sync is much closer to my normal speed, normal latency etc. Early days for sure, but a somewhat more promising

It seems your results are similar to mine... much too slow, and of course impossible to monitor/debug why.
I have tossed it in the "unusable old crap" box long ago, have used a Draytek 130 for some time but now that I have profile 35b I have bought a ZyXEL VMG4005-B50A.

Hello, I would need an SFP ADSL2+ Annex B module for academic and experimental purposes. These modules used to be sold, but unfortunately they are no longer available on the market. Some models were mentioned in this topic, some models had labels e.g. SFP-VDSL2-Modem (Telco)"/"FMS-VDSL-01"/"XtendLan XL-MGB-VDSL2-R for ADSL2+ (Annex A/B/M)" etc. And they were sold, for example, here. I want to ask if here is anyone who has such a module and currently for example does not use this. Would anyone be willing to sell it? Many thanks.

I have one but I cannot guarantee that it is still working OK. It worked when I last tried but it runs very hot.
When you like to consider it I trust you can find my contact information (mail address) based on my username.

I have one but I cannot guarantee that it is still working OK. It worked when I last tried but it runs very hot.
When you like to consider it I trust you can find my contact information (mail address) based on my username.

@pe1chl I sent you mail. Thanks.

pe1chl provided me with a module for testing, thank you very much, but it is not clear whether it supports ADSL2+ Annex B. If anyone else has an SFP ADSL2+ Annex B module and is interested in selling it, please contact me. And does anyone have any new experience when using ADSL2+ and setting VPI/VCI? Thanks.

Well, setting VPI/VCI is done by setting the VLAN you use towards the module. There is a table somewhere.
But it has common values only, when your ISP uses a unique VPI/VCI it will not be in the table and it cannot be used, maybe unless you manage to read the flash from the module, find the VLAN->VPI/VCI inside it, and modify it. No idea if that is even possible.
I was using it with VDSL so no such issue.

@pe1chl good idea with read the flash from the module. I can try this with my colleagues from the university. If anyone else has any knowledge about this, please let me know.

Is possible obtain RouterOS 6.41rc20 from somewhere please?

Is possible obtain RouterOS 6.41rc20 from somewhere please?

Why on earth would anyone want a 2017 version with tons of bugs and security issues?

Is possible obtain RouterOS 6.41rc20 from somewhere please?

Why on earth would anyone want a 2017 version with tons of bugs and security issues?

And above all a Release Candidate even.

This won't be for production deployment just for testing purposes. Previous posts indicate that this version may have included some xDSL support. The screenshot also shows the possibility of setting VPI/VCI (with ADSL2+ SFP module).