We are still improving this rate selection algorithm, but you can now look how it is working for you now. We recommend it to test first on the test links before testing on production links.what about rate selection / advanced, legacy/ in wireless - data rates ?
Internet Explorer seems to work. Same issue here with FirefoxHi,
I just updated my router. This is just a 'cosmetic' thing. When connecting to WebFig v5.3
and clicking on New Terminal. I'm getting a message like:
Firefox prevented this site from opening XX pop-up windows.
XX is incrementing every half of a second.
In Firefox, if I go to settings and click on view: 'http://xx.xx.xx.xx/webfig/terminal.html?u8=0'
Terminal opens.
Very easy to fix on Firefox: just authorize the site using the button at the right of the message (where "site" means the RouterOS device) and there will be a nice terminal. Note that (at least on OpenBSD) you will probably get ten or so terminals next time you try to open one from WebFig, so I would you suggest closing Firefox, after authorizing the RouterOS device to open pop-up windows on your browser, and open Firefox again.Internet Explorer seems to work. Same issue here with FirefoxHi,
I just updated my router. This is just a 'cosmetic' thing. When connecting to WebFig v5.3
and clicking on New Terminal. I'm getting a message like:
Firefox prevented this site from opening XX pop-up windows.
XX is incrementing every half of a second.
In Firefox, if I go to settings and click on view: 'http://xx.xx.xx.xx/webfig/terminal.html?u8=0'
Terminal opens.
-tp
Have you done firmware updates?
Did you see this on 5.2?
I never had any issues with 5.2 and ethernet ports either.We had 5.2 deployed on a number of boards including the 411, didn't see such an issue. Are you sure it's not hardware/cable related?
Hi,
I've been testing with v5.3 userman for few hours - seems finally production ready:
"Start at first login" in profiles is fixed, along with some other problems.
Sure Sure, we all know how to fix this in Firefox, but WebFig should try to open just 1 (one) popup window and not 1 (one) every half of a second.Very easy to fix on Firefox: just authorize the site using the button at the right of the message (where "site" means the RouterOS device) and there will be a nice terminal. Note that (at least on OpenBSD) you will probably get ten or so terminals next time you try to open one from WebFig, so I would you suggest closing Firefox, after authorizing the RouterOS device to open pop-up windows on your browser, and open Firefox again.Internet Explorer seems to work. Same issue here with FirefoxHi,
I just updated my router. This is just a 'cosmetic' thing. When connecting to WebFig v5.3
and clicking on New Terminal. I'm getting a message like:
Firefox prevented this site from opening XX pop-up windows.
XX is incrementing every half of a second.
In Firefox, if I go to settings and click on view: 'http://xx.xx.xx.xx/webfig/terminal.html?u8=0'
Terminal opens.
-tp
It is not a ROS bug, it is a Firefox feature used to prevent sites opening pop-up windows by default.
1. it doesn't do thatWebFig should try to open just 1 (one) popup window and not 1 (one) every half of a second.
we are unable to repeat it, we have many RB411 devices on our test system right now, we don't see any port flapping. Can you email us a complete description of your setup, and supout.rif file?I confrm the ETHERNET PROBLEM onm RB4XX
up/down costantly, no problem with prevous releases.
regards
Ros
we are unable to repeat it, we have many RB411 devices on our test system right now, we don't see any port flapping. Can you email us a complete description of your setup, and supout.rif file?I confrm the ETHERNET PROBLEM onm RB4XX
up/down costantly, no problem with prevous releases.
regards
Ros
we are unable to repeat it, we have many RB411 devices on our test system right now, we don't see any port flapping. Can you email us a complete description of your setup, and supout.rif file?I confrm the ETHERNET PROBLEM onm RB4XX
up/down costantly, no problem with prevous releases.
regards
Ros
I am experienging it on rb433.
i get it flapping with real internet traffic, when i test with bandwidth test it is stable.
i think they need small packets to get flapping.
but i see many others complaining.
So i am pretty sure it is a big bug.
regards.
Ros
1. no sir, it somehow does1. it doesn't do thatWebFig should try to open just 1 (one) popup window and not 1 (one) every half of a second.
2. firefox will block even one popup.
OK, so i'll go and open a bug in firefox's bugzilla.This is a bug in firefox. Chrome works fine. Webfig asked to focus on the new window, but as the window was blocked, the focus couldn't be completed. Chrome handles this correctly, and reports that focus request was done.
We will find a workaround.
we have found a possible fix for the port-flapping issue on RB4XX series for ports that are not connected to the switch chip. please email to support to get a pre-release fix for this issue.
Finally, everything is fine. Thank you!What's new in 5.3 (2011-May-25 15:19):
*) fixed RB450G, RB750G switch chip slow ethernet problem;
What went wrong? You are not tested on rb4xx?v5.3 better late than buggy
port flapping only occurs on certain configurations on specific ports after 40 minutes of traffic, the port can then disconnect/reconnect for less than a second. this should not cause any major problem, just an entry in the log.What went wrong? You are not tested on rb4xx?v5.3 better late than buggy
we made a workaround for next release. the easy fix is to allow popups from the router's ip, then it will stop doing that.I'm seeing the same firefox v4.0.1 problem in ROS v5.3
Popups are trying to be open every 1/2 sec.
LOLWhat went wrong? You are not tested on rb4xx?v5.3 better late than buggy
Normis,port flapping only occurs on certain configurations on specific ports after 40 minutes of traffic, the port can then disconnect/reconnect for less than a second. this should not cause any major problem, just an entry in the log.What went wrong? You are not tested on rb4xx?v5.3 better late than buggy
IF features are implemented in order of "popularity" i'm afraid you are in back rowIs long time feature requested PPPoE Option 82 support Implemented in this version ?
I actually do not drink coffee - customer mails, forums are refreshing enoughYour coffee isn't strong enough.
did you test v5.4 prerelease? email support to get it.Normis, ethernet problem is serious enough, please see the attached image in the first post in less than 5 minutes switched on and off the port, that port bridge still has a delay of 8 seconds to normalize (lost more 6-pings) and is enough to cause such disconnection of winbox, fail if you browse a web page and closing sessions of MSN, I'm mikrotik user for over 5 years and ISP, actually this problem negatively affects I had to return immediately all to a version 5.2 or 4.17
The problem affects my RB 450, 433 and 493ah (in this case more sporadic)
also install in 532A and 333, these do not cause problems
My two cents... be helpful and/or respectful and you get a more positive response. Nobody wants to spend their time helping a jerk. This "I told you so!" post is pretty much useless.Funny how a couple of us reported the port flapping issue a few weeks ago with loss of data also causing lock ups and watchdog reboots but not only did my thread get deleted twice..!, we also didnt get any resolve in our issues.... Now all of the sudden there bug affects more boards and boom! issue almost fixed immediatly. "so they say!"
Pfffff
Hey Normis, remeber my post that you deleted about loss of packets and ethernet ports being up and down constatly with also wrong duplex info in the log?
Just saying :p
and yes its a major issue having packets completly drop out for a second or two..
I didnt like the "its not a major issue" statement from Normis...
port flapping only occurs on certain configurations on specific ports after 40 minutes of traffic, the port can then disconnect/reconnect for less than a second. this should not cause any major problem, just an entry in the log.What went wrong? You are not tested on rb4xx?v5.3 better late than buggy
false alarm - built in radius server returns only speed limiting AV pairs, no session uptime limits or transfer limits ..Hi,
I've been testing with v5.3 userman for few hours - seems finally production ready:
"Start at first login" in profiles is fixed, along with some other problems.
you don't have to reboot, the only effect is an entry in the log, and a less than a second timout. the router continues to work and pass traffic. if you need the fix urgently, please email support as stated above.Cool so now rather than having to reboot every week from a memory leak we have to reboot every 40min now, great release.
10:46:36 interface,info ether1 link down
10:46:36 route,ospf,info OSPFv2 neighbor 10.252.0.5: state change from Full to Down
10:46:36 route,ospf,info OSPFv2 neighbor 10.252.0.3: state change from Full to Down
10:46:37 interface,info ether1 link up (speed 100M, full duplex)
10:46:37 route,ospf,info Discarding packet: no neighbor with this source address
10:46:37 route,ospf,info RouterId=10.252.0.5
10:46:37 route,ospf,info source=10.252.0.5
10:46:38 route,ospf,info Discarding packet: no neighbor with this source address
10:46:38 route,ospf,info RouterId=10.252.0.3
10:46:38 route,ospf,info source=10.252.0.3
10:47:02 route,ospf,info OSPFv2 neighbor 10.252.0.5: state change from Exchange to 2-Way
10:47:02 route,ospf,info OSPFv2 neighbor 10.252.0.3: state change from Exchange to 2-Way
10:47:25 route,ospf,info OSPFv2 neighbor 10.252.0.3: state change from Exchange to 2-Way
i think V5 is in Release Candidate stage still, not ready for production, consider yourself "Beta tester"Thank you for MikroTIK failure. Your ignore errors caused the malfunction 60 seconds.
I had no major problems with V5 until now.i think V5 is in Release Candidate stage still, not ready for production, consider yourself "Beta tester"Thank you for MikroTIK failure. Your ignore errors caused the malfunction 60 seconds.
Me too . Unfortunately some little ( simple to programming ) enterprise features did not implemented because they are not popular .IF features are implemented in order of "popularity" i'm afraid you are in back rowIs long time feature requested PPPoE Option 82 support Implemented in this version ?
a few, but greater that 24? %)A fix is scheduled within a few hours