802.11ac only is supported in wireless-fp, so yes, of course only for this package.wireless - improvements for nv2 and 802.11ac
What are the improvments? Please give some more information. It works with fp-wireless only or not?
Does the "and" means the improvements are for NV2 working on a 'ac' radio? Or does it mean improvements are for nv2 systems (a/b/c/g/n/ac) AND also for 802.11ac working radio link?What's new in 6.19 (2014-Aug-26 14:05):
*) wireless - improvements for nv2 and 802.11ac
both. there are many changes in wireless. improvements for nv2, for ac, and for nv2 on acDoes the "and" means the improvements are for NV2 working on a 'ac' radio? Or does it mean improvements are for nv2 systems (a/b/c/g/n/ac) AND also for 802.11ac working radio link?What's new in 6.19 (2014-Aug-26 14:05):
*) wireless - improvements for nv2 and 802.11ac
In other words, do these improvements have effect on nv2 working on 'n' protocol?
I'm dying to hear results or comments from the field of users. My CCR is the only device not running 6.18 yet (its on 6.13) and I dare not to change it before I am confident it works...... its my gateway to my connection to the internet and can't afford to loose its functionality... so please anyone let me know how it works on the CCR.*) CCR - improved performance;
*) simple queue performance optimisation/improvement for multi-core RouterOS devices (especially CCR)
Most likely you just had to wait a while, until the list populatedJust updated an RB951-2n and all the firewall filter rules were gone. They all came back on a second restart
i did give it some time, was looking at what backups i had and even i tested a filter rule. the firewall rules were 100% gone and not applied - the router was open to the world until I reset it again.Most likely you just had to wait a while, until the list populatedJust updated an RB951-2n and all the firewall filter rules were gone. They all came back on a second restart
looks like it works for others. what is the problem? did you refresh the page?You can download the latest versions from the site, any problem normis?
you are clicking on the wrong thingwhen I want to download the zip file returns me to the main page of mikrotik
It also explain whyIf you check logs after an update it will tell you why the user manager import failed.
[admin@MikroTik] > tool [admin@MikroTik] /tool> bandwidth-server e-mail graphing mac-server netwatch sms sniffer traffic-generator traffic-monitor user-manager bandwidth-test dns-update export fetch flood-ping ip-scan mac-scan mac-telnet ping-speed profile torch traceroute wol [admin@MikroTik] /tool> .. / : [admin@MikroTik] /tool> user-manager [admin@MikroTik] /tool user-manager> limitation profile profile-limitation router session user user-counters user-profile edit export get print set [admin@MikroTik] /tool user-manager> .. / : [admin@MikroTik] /tool user-manager> set accounting-port authentication-port enabled [admin@MikroTik] /tool user-manager> set enabled= no yes [admin@MikroTik] /tool user-manager> set enabled=yes [admin@MikroTik] /tool user-manager> limitation profile profile-limitation router session user user-counters user-profile edit export get print set [admin@MikroTik] /tool user-manager> pri enabled: yes authentication-port: 1812 accounting-port: 1813 global-active-sessions: 0 [admin@MikroTik] /tool user-manager>database entry no longer exist, user-manager must be activated, etc.???
you are clicking on the wrong thingwhen I want to download the zip file returns me to the main page of mikrotik
here is the download section
you are clicking on the wrong thingwhen I want to download the zip file returns me to the main page of mikrotik
here is the download section
when I click on the link me back to the main page of mikrotik!!!where do you see such file?
such file doesn't exist.
For some reason he tries to download the RC...where do you see such file?
such file doesn't exist.
You click on the wrong linkwhen I click on the link me back to the main page of mikrotik!!!
Tle "old" 6.19rc link left on the page cause confusion.I already posted a screenshot where the v6.19 links are located, please see above.
I know, we will remove it. I already wrote where to download correct versions.Tle "old" 6.19rc link left on the page cause confusion.I already posted a screenshot where the v6.19 links are located, please see above.
Please,I know, we will remove it. I already wrote where to download correct versions.Tle "old" 6.19rc link left on the page cause confusion.I already posted a screenshot where the v6.19 links are located, please see above.
this is from the above ticket:Ticket#2014032566001217 (2014-03-25) BUG 6.12: Replicable kernel crash when try to discover why winbox not working well from 6.8 over IP obtained from pppoe-client
From "xxx" <info@xxx>
To: <support@mikrotik.com>
Subject: Fw: [Ticket#2014032566001217] BUG 6.12: Replicable kernel crash when try to discover why winbox not working well from 6.8 over IP [...]
Created: 04/15/2014 16:11:05
Solved on 6.12 final,
Thanks!
Why did you not respond to the ticket?this is from the above ticket:Ticket#2014032566001217 (2014-03-25) BUG 6.12: Replicable kernel crash when try to discover why winbox not working well from 6.8 over IP obtained from pppoe-client
From "xxx" <info@xxx>
To: <support@mikrotik.com>
Subject: Fw: [Ticket#2014032566001217] BUG 6.12: Replicable kernel crash when try to discover why winbox not working well from 6.8 over IP [...]
Created: 04/15/2014 16:11:05
Solved on 6.12 final,
Thanks!
The problem happen again after 6.12 "non-final" (simply check all the 6.12->6.18 topic, everytime I repost the bug), simply do the test I have posted on the forum.
If is needed I submit again the same email for open another ticket.
Please remove "from" on the mail...
Seeing that I have re-download all the other packages, same build of Aug 26 @ 14:05 but I still have problem with user-manager.we only released one version. you probably had the pre-release installed.
Finally one reply about thatLooks like Usermanager has a bug. Nothing was changed.
Changelog has moved from file to database, check download page.Normis, since 6.16, there's no CHANGELOG file in torrent - is it expected behaviour? why did you remove it?
Yes something is wrong, tried to setup a new usermanager with 6.19, state is enabled, but database stay at "backup", tried 2 reboots without success, webinterface is not working.Looks like Usermanager has a bug. Nothing was changed.
I'm not the only, I'm happy for not do some wrong.Yes something is wrong, tried to setup a new usermanager with 6.19, state is enabled, but database stay at "backup", tried 2 reboots without success, webinterface is not working.Looks like Usermanager has a bug. Nothing was changed.
oh yes, that partition thing is now working very well on CCR1009, i was able to split and copy the partition + config, finaly a fix for thatI'm not the only, I'm happy for not do some wrong.Yes something is wrong, tried to setup a new usermanager with 6.19, state is enabled, but database stay at "backup", tried 2 reboots without success, webinterface is not working.Looks like Usermanager has a bug. Nothing was changed.
I think is some related to:
*) partitions - copying partitions did not work on some boards;
but on /tool user-manager are missing database and customer fields.
We fixed the issue. We had accidentally released the incorrect userman package, please re-download the userman package now.I'm not the only, I'm happy for not do some wrong.Yes something is wrong, tried to setup a new usermanager with 6.19, state is enabled, but database stay at "backup", tried 2 reboots without success, webinterface is not working.Looks like Usermanager has a bug. Nothing was changed.
I have upload now the user-manager package from site and from downoad from auto upgrade...We fixed the issue. We had accidentally released the incorrect userman package, please re-download the userman package now.
I'm not the only, I'm happy for not do some wrong.
So changes was made to userman that's not in the changelog? What else was changed that isn't documented -sigh-We fixed the issue. We had accidentally released the incorrect userman package, please re-download the userman package now.
at least in the current torrent all user-manager's files are more than 700k =)The file still 80kb, the regular user manager is over 700Kb.
/system shutdownworks.
21:41:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 01d4db047a60b9bc:0000000000000000
21:42:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 77ef7ebbe6072755:0000000000000000
21:43:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 84b2038687046a7f:0000000000000000
21:44:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 42deffb07e877772:0000000000000000
21:45:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 51399cc76d9cf438:0000000000000000
21:46:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 06bded99cac5be7f:0000000000000000
21:47:40 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 89a97510102ce77c:0000000000000000
21:48:40 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 3f89e001a721cbab:0000000000000000
21:49:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 218823fc05c11ed0:0000000000000000
21:50:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. b6863d33d03abd58:0000000000000000
21:51:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 56afaac137289cf2:0000000000000000
21:52:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 3ba12327f25ba182:0000000000000000
21:53:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 9772820fef218c03:0000000000000000
21:54:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. e0f9cea084fc72f2:0000000000000000
21:55:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. f699872d6c861076:0000000000000000
21:56:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. d14bf652f5792b1d:0000000000000000
21:57:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 29f50f1bcfb494ed:0000000000000000
21:58:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 0d818de75296c237:0000000000000000
We fixed the issue. We had accidentally released the incorrect userman package, please re-download the userman package now.
[admin@DCCCR01.RT] /mpls traffic-eng interface> print Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid # INTERFACE BANDWIDTH TE-METRIC REMAIN... 0 sfp-sfpplus1 4294Mbps 1 4.2Gbps 1 sfp-sfpplus2 4295Mbps 1 32.7kbps [admin@DCCCR01.RT] /mpls traffic-eng interface> print detail Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid 0 interface=sfp-sfpplus1 bandwidth=4294Mbps k-factor=3 resource-class=0 refresh-time=30s use-udp=no blockade-k-factor=3 te-metric=1 igp-flood-period=3m up-flood-thresholds=15,30,45,60,75,80,85,90,95,97,98,99,100 down-flood-thresholds=15,30,45,60,75,80,85,90,95,97,98,99,100 remaining-bw=4.2Gbps 1 interface=sfp-sfpplus2 bandwidth=4295Mbps k-factor=3 resource-class=0 refresh-time=30s use-udp=no blockade-k-factor=3 te-metric=1 igp-flood-period=3m up-flood-thresholds=15,30,45,60,75,80,85,90,95,97,98,99,100 down-flood-thresholds=15,30,45,60,75,80,85,90,95,97,98,99,100 remaining-bw=32.7kbpsThis keeps us from fully utilizing our 10GbE environment with MPLS on-top. Almost two months and even though I was following up, still this wasn't fixed. That's like offering a Porsche w/o a steering wheel. Know what I mean?
No. the user manager package that was included, was broken. We re-released the version with a working user-manager package. No changes were made.So changes was made to userman that's not in the changelog? What else was changed that isn't documented -sigh-We fixed the issue. We had accidentally released the incorrect userman package, please re-download the userman package now.
Each and every single release, it's the same thing over and over... It's actually becoming laughable now.
Could be browser cache. Rextended, check if you don't have a proxy or browser cache.at least in the current torrent all user-manager's files are more than 700k =)The file still 80kb, the regular user manager is over 700Kb.
Try yourself, just re-downloaded:Could be browser cache. Rextended, check if you don't have a proxy or browser cache.at least in the current torrent all user-manager's files are more than 700k =)The file still 80kb, the regular user manager is over 700Kb.
Try yourself, just re-downloaded:
This is the official download link on download page:
http://download2.mikrotik.com/routeros/ ... 6-6.19.zip
user-manager is only 82.001 byte Aug/27/2014 09:52
Also the auto upgrade inside the routerboard download only 80.1Kbyte file
I have download also all_packages-ppc-6.19.zip and all_packages-mipsbe-6.19.zip, never downloaded before,
and the file is 73k and 65k instead the usual 800KB.
Are you using a proxy? I have tried to download the newer version from two different computers, each connected differently to the internet.I still see on download page "RouterOS v6.19 release candidate special release"
If you use multiple servers, the IP of http://www.mikrotik.com for my DNS is 159.148.147.196
Are you s ure the webisite is updated with new files?
I do not know if torrent containing right files, but auto-upgrade and webserver still release wrong user-manager packages.
And inside the ZIP on the server?This is what I see in the server:
yes.And inside the ZIP on the server?This is what I see in the server:
Are the same server used for auto-update inside the routerboard?
they use DNS load balancing, you will get different IP each time. single package is the same as in auto update.The server download2.mikrotik.com are solved as d355q2xs8kb5oj.cloudfront.net 54.230.79.3 and single user-manager package are ok, but on the zip on same server are wrong.
The server used from auto-update funcion from the routerboard is 54.230.77.67 and everytime obtain corrupted user-manager-6.19.npk of 80KB
they use DNS load balancing, you will get different IP each time. single package is the same as in auto update.The server download2.mikrotik.com are solved as d355q2xs8kb5oj.cloudfront.net 54.230.79.3 and single user-manager package are ok, but on the zip on same server are wrong.
The server used from auto-update funcion from the routerboard is 54.230.77.67 and everytime obtain corrupted user-manager-6.19.npk of 80KB
It could take a while until all AWS Cloudfront servers receive the "invalidation request".they use DNS load balancing, you will get different IP each time. single package is the same as in auto update.The server download2.mikrotik.com are solved as d355q2xs8kb5oj.cloudfront.net 54.230.79.3 and single user-manager package are ok, but on the zip on same server are wrong.
The server used from auto-update funcion from the routerboard is 54.230.77.67 and everytime obtain corrupted user-manager-6.19.npk of 80KB
Yes, yes, I know, but seems one server with that address >>54.230.77.67<< still not updated, I have try another server on cloudfront for the auto-update and now has the right file...
Again: i do not use cache or proxy. Or you intend Cloudfront cache?You could try adding a query string after the URL to cause a cache miss:
http://download2.mikrotik.com/routeros/ ... stion-mark
I just downloaded the zip and see this:
876625 Stored 876625 0% 08-27-14 14:28 00000000 user-manager-6.19.npk
~850KB
You use EoIP tunnel?Hello.
We upgrade our CCR to 6.19 and get "kernel failure" and "reboot by watchdog timer"
I can send autosupout.rif file if needed.
Now we rollback to 6.14...
ANY cache - including transparent proxy caches run by your connectivity provider, Cloudfront transparent reverse proxies, browser cache, etc.Again: i do not use cache or proxy. Or you intend Cloudfront cache?You could try adding a query string after the URL to cause a cache miss
INSANE IS USE ONE "JUST OUT" VERSION TO UPGRADE MULTIPLE DISTANT DEVICE ON PRODUCTION ENVIRONMENT!!!This is insane! I've updated RouterOS to 6.19 last evening in multiple organizations and today they are calling me that WiFi authentication is not working, since I'm using userman How can you offer "stable" version with such a huge mistake?
I really need to download PPC version of fixed package ASAP, presented links are not working, there is still the old broken one, I tried http://download2.mikrotik.com/routeros/ ... sgdfgwgwer - contains broken package. I don't use any cache.
I thought that since there are public RC versions to download, each "stable" version is tested enough. Now I know that I was wrong. Why I upgraded so early? Because today is the last working day of public holiday here and there is only small part of users in those organizations working. Next week it would be worse.INSANE IS USE ONE "JUST OUT" VERSION TO UPGRADE MULTIPLE DISTANT DEVICE ON PRODUCTION ENVIRONMENT!!!
Not only MikroTik, but also Cam... Cis... and Ubi... haved the same problem on some release...
Yes, it is containing big file, but now I don't know how RouterOS force to update this package. I tried to save it to router and reboot, it is not working.EDIT: It seems that the last torrent file is containing bigger working package, I am downloading...
Uninstall the wrong package then install the new one.Yes, it is containing big file, but now I don't know how RouterOS force to update this package. I tried to save it to router and reboot, it is not working.EDIT: It seems that the last torrent file is containing bigger working package, I am downloading...
I was worrying that I will loose configuration and data, but it is working: I've set this package to uninstall, saved new one to router and than just one reboot - old package was uninstalled and the new one installed, it is working again.Uninstall the wrong package then install the new one.
I just upgrade my x86 with user-manager...
WHERE IS GONE USER MANAGER AND ALL THE USERS DATABASE????
Why on changelog that is not present?
THE WEB INTERFACE DO NOT APPEAR AND "new" USER-MANAGER IS DISABLED BY DEFAULT AND ALL THE USERS AND PROFILE ARE GONE...
Reverting to 6.18 have solved the problem...
I love backups...
NOw I check on another board what mess you have done with usermanager.
It is the question of trust. If I trust Mikrotik (doing well working), I will not hesitate to upgrade and I will not check each update on forum if somebody had worse luck before me. Last few months I didn't experienced any problems, so I had trusted.@zervan: If you read the forum...
Yes, we use EoIP...You use EoIP tunnel?Hello.
We upgrade our CCR to 6.19 and get "kernel failure" and "reboot by watchdog timer"
I can send autosupout.rif file if needed.
Now we rollback to 6.14...
It is why I ask you about EoIP, I'm expecting you have it because this:Yes, we use EoIP...You use EoIP tunnel?Hello.
We upgrade our CCR to 6.19 and get "kernel failure" and "reboot by watchdog timer"
I can send autosupout.rif file if needed.
Now we rollback to 6.14...
Strange thing... also we have same problem on RB951Ui-2HnD with Eoip tunnel, with software 6.15, rollback to 6.14 don't solve problem, rollback to 6.13 - solve.
Looks correct...
It is why I ask you about EoIP, I'm expecting you have it because this:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... 44#p444591
On the last 6.19 version I see memory problem with EoIP tunnel, oversized (> 14xx) UDP packet go to router memory and never be discarded, causing the router go out of memory...
I must write the correct procedure and submit it to support, the problem are easly REPLICABLE....
Surely 6.19, i do not use 6.8 till 6.16.Looks correct...
It is why I ask you about EoIP, I'm expecting you have it because this:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... 44#p444591
On the last 6.19 version I see memory problem with EoIP tunnel, oversized (> 14xx) UDP packet go to router memory and never be discarded, causing the router go out of memory...
I must write the correct procedure and submit it to support, the problem are easly REPLICABLE....
on RB951Ui-2HnD BOX we upgrade to 6.19 and shut down EoIP tunnel, and box works fine...
One of our CCR with 6.18 and EoIP works fine, but RB951Ui-2HnD with 6.14 reloading...
Which releases affected this problem?
Checking again I've found the firewall rules had been re-arranged somewhat. Some of them seem to have been re-added in order that I last added them. For example I've always had drop everything else rules on forward and input as the last rules, but these moved up ahead of some rules I had added recently. A jump rule has moved below the whole chain it's supposed to jump to, a couple of accepts that had the same comment were next to each other but they're now split, a couple of log rules that used to be prior to their matching drop rules have also moved around.i did give it some time, was looking at what backups i had and even i tested a filter rule. the firewall rules were 100% gone and not applied - the router was open to the world until I reset it again.Most likely you just had to wait a while, until the list populatedJust updated an RB951-2n and all the firewall filter rules were gone. They all came back on a second restart
It has always been like this. (Well, at least since 4.something, when I first learned about RouterOS). It has always been creating a rule upon comment addition, even though the rule might have not showed up immediately in the list in previous ROS releases.Bit of an odd one: begin creating a drop rule. Before saving it with OK or Apply, give it a comment and click OK to close the comment entry. You'll see it immediately creates an Accept rule. It correctly changes after hitting OK or Apply to close the already created rule.
Good! +1 karma will be appreciatedYes, it is containing big file, but now I don't know how RouterOS force to update this package. I tried to save it to router and reboot, it is not working.EDIT: It seems that the last torrent file is containing bigger working package, I am downloading...
EDIT: I have found hint from Alessio Garavano: need to set "uninstall" the previous package and reboot with the new package in the root folder of Files and ready!
What netflow version do you use? V9 is supposed to report flow stats on a per-connection basis.Netflow is patchy
reboot -> works
reboot -> doesn't work
But I have a supposition it has some thing to do with my a sync routing, its not starting records unless it seems a syn packet ... i think !
definitely need more data on this.What netflow version do you use? V9 is supposed to report flow stats on a per-connection basis.Netflow is patchy
reboot -> works
reboot -> doesn't work
But I have a supposition it has some thing to do with my a sync routing, its not starting records unless it seems a syn packet ... i think !
[admin@x] > ppp active print
Flags: R - radius
# NAME SERVICE CALLER-ID ADDRESS UPTIME ENCODING
<snip>
13 probe sstp xxxxx 0.0.0.0 1h19m42s AES256-CBC
14 probe pptp xxxxx 0.0.0.0 1h19m42s MPPE128 stateless
It shows 0.0.0.0 but is not. And was not showed this way in v5.26
[admin@xxx] > ip address print
Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid, D - dynamic
# ADDRESS NETWORK INTERFACE
0 91.230.51.86/27 91.230.51.64 ether1
<snip>
14 D 172.30.252.255/32 XXX.36.170.52 <sstp-probe-13>
17 D 172.30.252.255/32 XXX.28.108.110 <sstp-probe-14>
[admin@x] /ppp> export
/ppp profile
set 1 idle-timeout=3m local-address=172.30.252.255
/ppp secret
add name=probe password=xxxx profile=default-encryption
[admin@x] /ppp> /interface
[admin@xx] /interface> export
/interface ethernet
set [ find default-name=ether2 ] disabled=yes
/interface ovpn-server server
set mac-address=AA:AA:AA:AA:AA:AA
/interface pptp-server server
set authentication=mschap2 enabled=yes max-mru=1460 max-mtu=1460
/interface sstp-server server
set authentication=mschap2 certificate=cert1 default-profile=default-encryption enabled=yes
/ip pool
add name=default-dhcp ranges=192.168.0.20-192.168.0.254
/ip dhcp-server
add address-pool=default-dhcp disabled=no interface=ether5 name=default
/interface pppoe-client
add ac-name="" add-default-route=no allow=pap,chap,mschap1,mschap2 comment=\
"" dial-on-demand=no \
disabled=no interface=ether1 keepalive-timeout=60 max-mru=1480 max-mtu=\
1480 mrru=disabled name=pppoe-out1 password=password profile=default \
service-name="" use-peer-dns=no user=user
/queue type
add kind=pcq name=ether5-PCQ-Upload pcq-classifier=src-address pcq-limit=40 \
pcq-rate=1M
add kind=pcq name=ether5-PCQ-Download pcq-classifier=dst-address pcq-limit=40 \
pcq-rate=13M
/ip address
add address=192.168.0.1/24 comment="default configuration" interface=ether5 \
network=192.168.0.0
add address=1.1.1.1/24 interface=ether5 network=1.1.1.0
/ip cloud
set enabled=yes
/ip dhcp-server alert
add disabled=no interface=ether5 on-alert=print
/ip dhcp-server network
add address=192.168.0.0/24 comment="default configuration" dns-server=\
192.168.0.1 gateway=1.1.1.1
/ip dns
set allow-remote-requests=yes cache-size=5000000KiB max-udp-packet-size=512 \
servers=8.8.8.8,8.8.4.4
/ip dns static
add address=192.168.0.1 name=router
/ip firewall filter
add action=drop chain=forward disabled=yes p2p=all-p2p
add action=passthrough chain=unused-hs-chain comment=\
"place hotspot rules here" disabled=yes
/ip firewall nat
add action=passthrough chain=unused-hs-chain comment=\
"place hotspot rules here" disabled=yes to-addresses=0.0.0.0
add action=masquerade chain=srcnat out-interface=pppoe-out1
add action=masquerade chain=srcnat comment="masquerade hotspot network" \
src-address=192.168.0.0/24 to-addresses=0.0.0.0
/ip proxy
set parent-proxy=0.0.0.0
/ip route
add check-gateway=ping distance=1 gateway=pppoe-out1 routing-mark=to_ether1
add check-gateway=ping distance=1 gateway=pppoe-out1
/ip service
set telnet disabled=yes
set ftp disabled=yes
set www port=81
set ssh disabled=yes
set api disabled=yes
/system clock
set time-zone-name=Asia/Bangkok
/system ntp client
set enabled=yes primary-ntp=17.82.253.7 secondary-ntp=17.72.255.11
/tool graphing interface
add interface=pppoe-out1
I have already made new static dhcp leases .... if this situation occurs again with 6.20 (as it did with 6.18 and 6.19) I will provide you with support out file for sure.
JanezFord,
please provide us (support@mikrotik.com) with support output file from 6.19 version, when DHCP-leases are erased.
roadracer96,
please provide us (support@mikrotik.com) with support output file from your router.
Yes, correct.parinya1957,
pppoe-client configuration is lost, is it correct?
5.19 or 6.19RB711-5HnD
I upgraded to 5.19 and then tried a btest.
Within 3-4 seconds it lost wireless connection.
I changed to several AP's and got no connections.
I also tried a scan for a AP, there was nothing listed.
When I rebooted everything started working.
Tried two times with same resolts.
I did make a supout.rif.
After downgrading I ran the same btest and it was working okay.
Sergejs, a friend of mine called me a week ago when he upgraded his router to 6.19, and all his static leases disappeared, so definitely problem does exist JFYIWe had multiple routers with big number of static and dynamic leases, and none of them had issues during the upgrade.
/ip dhcp-server lease
add address="TEST_POOL" comment=\
id_E0282F67-ED0E-4116-A743-03435D123444 mac-address=00:0F:02:68:43:7C \
server="TEST_SERVER"
add address="TEST_POOL" comment=\
id_B506877C-D021-4335-AC7A-C4AA03E2EAFE mac-address=20:89:84:61:30:7F \
server="TEST_SERVER"
add address="TEST_POOL" comment=\
id_7C845A2E-870F-48A8-83CE-6675E9F3F3B4 mac-address=00:8E:F2:EB:0C:F1 \
server="TEST_SERVER"
what exactly did you test? is it repeatable on v6.19? how?because of that routing marks (used for policy based routing) is still broken on all later releases we tested.
For years we have tagged source address: scmgateway protocol: tcp/smtp with mailroute.what exactly did you test? is it repeatable on v6.19? how?because of that routing marks (used for policy based routing) is still broken on all later releases we tested.
So does that mean if it doesn't see the syn it will not start the counters ?What netflow version do you use? V9 is supposed to report flow stats on a per-connection basis.Netflow is patchy
reboot -> works
reboot -> doesn't work
But I have a supposition it has some thing to do with my a sync routing, its not starting records unless it seems a syn packet ... i think !
Please tell me where you can find a description of this function in the documentation. Follow the link below, found nothing. http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Interface/BridgeWhat's new in 6.19 (2014-Aug-26 14:05):
*) bridge - added "Auto Isolate" stp enhancement (802.1q-2011, 13.25.6)
In the aforementioned 802.1q-2011 standard, obviously. You can get yourself a copy of the standard document here.Please tell me where you can find a description of this function in the documentation.What's new in 6.19 (2014-Aug-26 14:05):
*) bridge - added "Auto Isolate" stp enhancement (802.1q-2011, 13.25.6)
13.25.6 AutoIsolate
A Boolean. Set by management if isolate (13.25.20) is to be set, causing a Designated Port to transition to
Discarding if both AdminEdge (13.25.1) and AutoEdge (13.25.5) are FALSE and the other bridge presumed
to be attached to the same point-to-point LAN does not transmit periodic BPDUs—either as a Designated
Port or in response to BPDUs with the Proposal flag set (see 13.21). The recommended default of this
parameter is FALSE. AdminEdge and AutoEdge are both reset only on ports that are known to connect to
other bridges.
/ip dhcp-server lease
add address=192.168.1.91 address-list=klient mac-address=00:1E:74:DD:A3:9F server=dhcp-local
/ip dhcp-server lease
add address=192.168.1.91 mac-address=00:1E:74:DD:A3:9F server=dhcp-local
/ip dhcp-server lease set address-list=klient numbers=[find server=dhcp-lan2]
dhcp,error dhcp-lan2: failed to add address-list klient for IP 192.168.3.62: already have such entry (6)
set {entry number(s)} things to set
/ip dhcp-server lease set [find server=dhcp-lan2] address-list=klient
I am not using 3g modem, and my router is RB951G-2HnD, but on each 7 day after reboot cpu process rise to 100%.i use rb751u2hnd, if i enable ppp-out 3g use usb 3g modem, cpu process suddenly rise to 100%
if i disable ppp-out, cpu process back to normal again, why? this problem began after RoS 6.xx
There is no need to reboot - closing Winbox and opening again is enough. I have reported to support.I found a very simple way to reproduce the problem: add an Address List to some DHCP lease, reboot, check the DHCP lease - there is no Address List mentioned in 6.19.
No problem with that using RB951Ui-2HnD + ZTE modem, nor RB2011UiAS-2HnD + Huawei modem, both with RouterOS 6.19 and previous. Check Tools -> Profile, which process is using CPU, maybe it is related to firewall rules or something like that.i use rb751u2hnd, if i enable ppp-out 3g use usb 3g modem, cpu process suddenly rise to 100%
if i disable ppp-out, cpu process back to normal again, why? this problem began after RoS 6.xx
Hi zervan!No problem with that using RB951Ui-2HnD + ZTE modem, nor RB2011UiAS-2HnD + Huawei modem, both with RouterOS 6.19 and previous. Check Tools -> Profile, which process is using CPU, maybe it is related to firewall rules or something like that.i use rb751u2hnd, if i enable ppp-out 3g use usb 3g modem, cpu process suddenly rise to 100%
if i disable ppp-out, cpu process back to normal again, why? this problem began after RoS 6.xx
Sorry, but I don't know the reason. Try to export configuration and check if there is really no forgotten ipsec / l2tp mentioned. Is this problem related to RouterOS 6.19? Was it working in previous versions? If not, you should create new post / topic in appropriate section of this forum and somebody will know to help, I think.May be you know what is better to do in case ipsec show 96% of cpu in profile, but at this moment I have no any ipsec connection? I don't know why, but I have configured l2tp/ipsec vpn server before, but now there no any ipsec proposal and peers. If i open PPP->l2tp configuration and save it again, then the system re-create ipsec proposal, but after some period of time, this proposal will be "deleted" again.
I've got answer from Mikrotik support - this problem should be fixed in 6.20rc6. I will try in the evening, but I worry - what if there are some new bugs? Early implementation of 6.19 brought serious troubles to me.There is no need to reboot - closing Winbox and opening again is enough. I have reported to support.I found a very simple way to reproduce the problem: add an Address List to some DHCP lease, reboot, check the DHCP lease - there is no Address List mentioned in 6.19.
SERIOUSLY? IS STILL FULL OF BUG AND IS NEEDED FOR 6.20!!!???What's new in 6.20rc6 (2014-Sep-08 10:16):
*) pppoe client - increase connection timeout to make connection establishment
possible on busy pppoe server;
*) dhcp server - change default lease time from 3 days to 10 minutes
to avoid running out of IPs;
*) ipsec - allow binding modeconf address to username;
Winbox v3 is required for router’s configuration.
Unfortunately, yes. I have upgraded one of my routers to 6.20rc6 to test if Address List of DHCP Lease is fixed (it is not) and it is not possible to connect with the old good WinboxSERIOUSLY? IS STILL FULL OF BUG AND IS NEEDED FOR 6.20!!!???What's new in 6.20rc6 (2014-Sep-08 10:16):
...
Winbox v3 is required for router’s configuration.
solution is:I am connecting through Dude, because it is more convenient to work with a lot of devices. If I will not be able to that anymore because it is using old winbox version that is a major problem for me.
WTF!!!??? The Beta3 of Winbox v3 is buggy and you "lock us" to work with this version?What's new in 6.20rc6 (2014-Sep-08 10:16):
*) pppoe client - increase connection timeout to make connection establishment
possible on busy pppoe server;
*) dhcp server - change default lease time from 3 days to 10 minutes
to avoid running out of IPs;
*) ipsec - allow binding modeconf address to username;
Winbox v3 is required for router’s configuration.
I must agree. The v3 beta3 cannot reliably re-open the windows and their arrangements when I open an old session auto-imported from winbox2. This effectively makes it completey useless in production. Please save us from testing your half-baked code. There are a lot of small problems and mistakes one can tolerate when forced upon. This is certainly not among them.WTF!!!??? The Beta3 of Winbox v3 is buggy and you "lock us" to work with this version?What's new in 6.20rc6 (2014-Sep-08 10:16):
*) pppoe client - increase connection timeout to make connection establishment
possible on busy pppoe server;
*) dhcp server - change default lease time from 3 days to 10 minutes
to avoid running out of IPs;
*) ipsec - allow binding modeconf address to username;
Winbox v3 is required for router’s configuration.
Are you crazy?
It´s a JOKE?
if confirmed I think ros 6 series will stop at 6.19 for me ..SERIOUSLY? IS STILL FULL OF BUG AND IS NEEDED FOR 6.20!!!???What's new in 6.20rc6 (2014-Sep-08 10:16):
*) pppoe client - increase connection timeout to make connection establishment
possible on busy pppoe server;
*) dhcp server - change default lease time from 3 days to 10 minutes
to avoid running out of IPs;
*) ipsec - allow binding modeconf address to username;
Winbox v3 is required for router’s configuration.
If this will be the case for all firmwares going forward, I will take my switch off my network and set it on fire...
I am a linux user and having to install wine to run another buggy ass application... Hell no!... You can keep the spoon.
how is your watchdog configured? maybe it is pinging some addressThere is a problem with RB SXT G-5HPnD r2. This board restarting itself because of kernel failure and log is like this "00:42:21 system,error,critical router was rebooted without proper shutdown by watchdog timer ".
Welp... no more rc testing (or upgrading, for that matter) for me then...Winbox v3 is required for router’s configuration.
why?Welp... no more rc testing (or upgrading, for that matter) for me then...Winbox v3 is required for router’s configuration.
I'll stay on 6.18 on all of my devices, since EoIP (which I use it a lot) is broken on 6.19.
6.18 was a great release (the first really stable and usable one with no major bugs for my use-cases in the whole 6.x branch) and I hold on to it dearly.
Watchdog is configured by default, no configuration is set.how is your watchdog configured? maybe it is pinging some addressThere is a problem with RB SXT G-5HPnD r2. This board restarting itself because of kernel failure and log is like this "00:42:21 system,error,critical router was rebooted without proper shutdown by watchdog timer ".
Hi all,Watchdog is configured by default, no configuration is set.how is your watchdog configured? maybe it is pinging some addressThere is a problem with RB SXT G-5HPnD r2. This board restarting itself because of kernel failure and log is like this "00:42:21 system,error,critical router was rebooted without proper shutdown by watchdog timer ".
See if your CPU jumps to 100%.Watchdog is configured by default, no configuration is set.how is your watchdog configured? maybe it is pinging some addressThere is a problem with RB SXT G-5HPnD r2. This board restarting itself because of kernel failure and log is like this "00:42:21 system,error,critical router was rebooted without proper shutdown by watchdog timer ".
I also have this problem.We upgrade a pair of 493AH routers to 6.19, and saw EoIP start dropping packets > 1422 bytes. Rolled back to 6.17, no problems.
We did not, however, upgrade the far end of the EoIP tunnels, which may or may not have wound up working better.
It is your choice. You can also go to Cisco and pay thousand euro for the device and many more for the service...t's terribly sad that we have to pay for underdeveloped software.
Also a shame that mkrotik tests its software on the clients
Man, you pay for it. I really want to buy the product on a half fit?It is your choice. You can also go to Cisco and pay thousand euro for the device and many more for the service...t's terribly sad that we have to pay for underdeveloped software.
Also a shame that mkrotik tests its software on the clients
MKT do a very good job...
I'm using EoIP on CCR, RB2011, RG951 without any issues with 6.19, work stable...Welp... no more rc testing (or upgrading, for that matter) for me then...Winbox v3 is required for router’s configuration.
I'll stay on 6.18 on all of my devices, since EoIP (which I use it a lot) is broken on 6.19.
6.18 was a great release (the first really stable and usable one with no major bugs for my use-cases in the whole 6.x branch) and I hold on to it dearly.
And for me as you can see in the graph is not stable. I uwielu people also is not stabile, that in itself is already available 6.20rc shows that there are errors.I'm using EoIP on CCR, RB2011, RG951 without any issues with 6.19, work stable...Welp... no more rc testing (or upgrading, for that matter) for me then...Winbox v3 is required for router’s configuration.
I'll stay on 6.18 on all of my devices, since EoIP (which I use it a lot) is broken on 6.19.
6.18 was a great release (the first really stable and usable one with no major bugs for my use-cases in the whole 6.x branch) and I hold on to it dearly.
we have hundred mkt devices under 6.19 without any big issues, may be your problem is coming to specific usage in your config, your case must be analysed by MKT support...And for me as you can see in the graph is not stable. I uwielu people also is not stabile, that in itself is already available 6.20rc shows that there are errors.
Apparently, your network will not fully benefit from the opportunities mikrotik.
I lite5 restart once a day, so do not tell me that it is stable, because it is not.
Bueller?Sometime between 6.16 and 6.19 L2TP VPN between my mac and iPhone and my routerboard has broken.
I went in and made sure that the configuration was correct (so far as I know), including "enable IPSec" and adding the shared secret on the L2TP server page.
What I get on the mac side is "IPSec connection failed <IKE Error 65535 (0xffff) Unknown error>"
and in the system log,
IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 4).
try to get pskey by the peer's address.
couldn't find the pskey by address [routerboard].
couldn't find the pskey for [routerboard].
I'm really, really, REALLY sure the shared secret is the same on both sides.
WTF?
Bueller?Bueller?Sometime between 6.16 and 6.19 L2TP VPN between my mac and iPhone and my routerboard has broken.
I went in and made sure that the configuration was correct (so far as I know), including "enable IPSec" and adding the shared secret on the L2TP server page.
What I get on the mac side is "IPSec connection failed <IKE Error 65535 (0xffff) Unknown error>"
and in the system log,
IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 4).
try to get pskey by the peer's address.
couldn't find the pskey by address [routerboard].
couldn't find the pskey for [routerboard].
I'm really, really, REALLY sure the shared secret is the same on both sides.
WTF?
In my case it helped to /system reset-configuration no-defaults=yes and the configuration of RB again.See if your CPU jumps to 100%.
U is not so with Lite5 update 5.26 -> 6.19. Yesterday I turned off the wireless-fp and it did not work. Today, some three hours ago in August alone restarted.
Watchdog also have a default set.
Mikrotik a confused and August restaruje.
With due respect zervan, the mistake is upgrading production routers to the latest version quite so quick. I would advise testing before deploying any software or if not possible watch the forum while others testThis is insane! I've updated RouterOS to 6.19 last evening in multiple organizations and today they are calling me that WiFi authentication is not working, since I'm using userman How can you offer "stable" version with such a huge mistake?
I really need to download PPC version of fixed package ASAP, presented links are not working, there is still the old broken one, I tried http://download2.mikrotik.com/routeros/ ... sgdfgwgwer - contains broken package. I don't use any cache.
http://download2.mikrotik.com/routeros/ ... e-6.18.npkI put CCR-12G-4S-EM with ROS 6.19, made configuration of SNTP client. Put DNS name instead of IP.
Then I upload ntp package and restart device, after that I completelly lost connections.
I have to go at morning and immediattely fix the problem. Could anyone tell me which version is good for CCR?
It looks like NTP is broken here and this is the worst release ever! Please provide me link to official package 6.18 for Tile.
+1 we are still running 6.5 in prod, and are only now an entire year later evaluating 6.19 for our next upgrade.With due respect zervan, the mistake is upgrading production routers to the latest version quite so quick. I would advise testing before deploying any software or if not possible watch the forum while others testThis is insane! I've updated RouterOS to 6.19 last evening in multiple organizations and today they are calling me that WiFi authentication is not working, since I'm using userman How can you offer "stable" version with such a huge mistake?
I really need to download PPC version of fixed package ASAP, presented links are not working, there is still the old broken one, I tried http://download2.mikrotik.com/routeros/ ... sgdfgwgwer - contains broken package. I don't use any cache.
What about other end?Tested 6.19 on SXT5G-HnD Link... but Throughput is very bad.
Link is Only-N, 20/40 above, nv2 signal -40dB to -45dB on both chains. no wireles-fs enabled
6.19 winbox freeze ... try BTest and Throughput is 1-10mbps (WTF?) in 1TCP connection
Downgrade to 6.18 Try Btest and Throughput si 70-80Mbps in 1TCP connection.
Zdenek
Well, -40 to -45 is a bit strong. Try adjusting it to -50 to -55.Tested 6.19 on SXT5G-HnD Link... but Throughput is very bad.
Link is Only-N, 20/40 above, nv2 signal -40dB to -45dB on both chains. no wireles-fs enabled
6.19 winbox freeze ... try BTest and Throughput is 1-10mbps (WTF?) in 1TCP connection
Downgrade to 6.18 Try Btest and Throughput si 70-80Mbps in 1TCP connection.
Zdenek
in console not possible.......i think only netinstall can helpNetinstall? Or maybe from console if possible?
I was explaining that: I thought that since there are public RC versions to download, each "stable" version is tested enough. Now I know that I was wrong. Why I upgraded so early? Because today is the last working day of public holiday here and there is only small part of users in those organizations working. Next week it would be worse.With due respect zervan, the mistake is upgrading production routers to the latest version quite so quick. I would advise testing before deploying any software or if not possible watch the forum while others test
/system package disable security
/system reboot
#waiting for restart
/export file=conf
/system package enable security
/system reboot
#waiting for restart
/system reset-configuration no-defaults=yes keep-users=yes run-after-reset=conf.rsc
#waiting for restart
#A couple of times I did not work, so I need inputs on the mac and perform again
Downgrade ALL to v5.26 and firmware 3.10.Looks like some problems with installation. Would it be possible to netisntall
that boards, It will format all partitions and install valid RouterOS version
The server has 12GB of memory, not 2GB. It looks like the 1 before the 2 has been cut off (both in winbox, as well as console).[admin@MikroTik] > /system resource print
uptime: 10m55s
version: 6.19
build-time: Aug/26/2014 14:05:51
free-memory: 1841.2MiB
total-memory: 1893.6MiB
cpu: Intel(R)
cpu-count: 16
cpu-frequency: 2127MHz
cpu-load: 0%
free-hdd-space: 146.5GiB
total-hdd-space: 146.7GiB
write-sect-since-reboot: 14730
write-sect-total: 14730
architecture-name: x86
board-name: x86
platform: MikroTik
[admin@MikroTik] >
These units are probaly to old to run ros v63 rb133c's (using mipsle code)
Then why would they release 6.x code for them then?These units are probaly to old to run ros v63 rb133c's (using mipsle code)
in general units support 2v updates and these boards are from around 2006
http://routerboard.com/pdf/rb133ugA.pdf
Our system is running a mixture of 6.1 on the AP's and 5.6 on the clients.
I pulled copies of 6.9 and decided to first upgrade the miscellaneous units that I had here in the office.
Out of 13 units upgraded to 6.9, 6 units would not restart or respond after reboot.
3 rb133c's (using mipsle code)
1 rb 411 (using mipsbe code)
1 rb 750 (using mipsbe code)
1 rb 911 ((using mipsbe code)
I managed to recover the 411, 750 and 911 units using netinstall and did manage to get 6.9 on it.
The rb133c's won't take any version that I offer them. Though I am going to take them home this weekend and try using a an old win xp machine com ports due to the usb com port option I am trying to use in a Win 7 machine.
I simply can not take the chance of upgrading clients and not having there units upgrade as expected. I can not pay for service calls to go replace units when they fail to upgrade. And I have probibly 20% of my network still on rb133c's which I have had a 100% failure rate on.
Has anyone else's experience been this way?
Regards,
Michael Perdue
SmythNet, CEO
http://www.smyth.net
276-783-3333
just refering to what i read in some older posts like this oneThen why would they release 6.x code for them then?These units are probaly to old to run ros v63 rb133c's (using mipsle code)
in general units support 2v updates and these boards are from around 2006
http://routerboard.com/pdf/rb133ugA.pdf
It states "RB111, RB112, RB133C, RB150 devices are not supported in v6, please use v5." on the download web page. http://www.mikrotik.com/downloadThen why would they release 6.x code for them then?These units are probaly to old to run ros v63 rb133c's (using mipsle code)
in general units support 2v updates and these boards are from around 2006
http://routerboard.com/pdf/rb133ugA.pdf
+121:41:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 01d4db047a60b9bc:0000000000000000
21:42:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 77ef7ebbe6072755:0000000000000000
21:43:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 84b2038687046a7f:0000000000000000
21:44:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 42deffb07e877772:0000000000000000
21:45:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 51399cc76d9cf438:0000000000000000
21:46:30 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 06bded99cac5be7f:0000000000000000
21:47:40 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 89a97510102ce77c:0000000000000000
21:48:40 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 3f89e001a721cbab:0000000000000000
21:49:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 218823fc05c11ed0:0000000000000000
21:50:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. b6863d33d03abd58:0000000000000000
21:51:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 56afaac137289cf2:0000000000000000
21:52:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 3ba12327f25ba182:0000000000000000
21:53:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 9772820fef218c03:0000000000000000
21:54:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. e0f9cea084fc72f2:0000000000000000
21:55:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. f699872d6c861076:0000000000000000
21:56:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. d14bf652f5792b1d:0000000000000000
21:57:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 29f50f1bcfb494ed:0000000000000000
21:58:50 ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 0d818de75296c237:0000000000000000
> ipsec,error failed to get valid proposal.
> ipsec,error failed to pre-process ph1 packet (side: 1, status 1).
> ipsec,error phase1 negotiation failed.
Hello Folks!I was about to deploy an RB450 as a router to an OOB management network where rock solid stability is a must. I will throw this RB450 in the trash and use another thing.
- Beta testing in a production environment is not for me.
- Reading a thread on a forum to determine if a stable version is really stable is not for me. It takes time. Time is money. With this development pattern MK is not that cheap.
Alternatives? I will be using pfSense on an ALIX board for this situation. For everything else: Cisco. It's expensive but it works! They publish firmware updates with small changes and they tell exactly what has been changed. The software version I am using in my ASAs is 8.4.7(22). They will stop providing corrections for the 8.4 line in March, 2016. This is 18 months away. This kind of information is required for a production environment. I don't understand MikroTik. I really don't.
Cheers,
Miguel
One mandatory feature is Per VLAN Spanning Tree, which prevents us from switching old Cisco switches to CRS ones.The same goes for CRS 125 switches, they have been successfully implemented on our datacenter and replacing older cisco switches, but they do lack one cruical function and that is spanning tree, which makes them impossible to build redundant layer 2 network.
Hello ste,Now I run into a MPLS Problem with v6.19. After a connected bridge was updated/rebooted the bridged
network (even MPLS routers own address) is no longer reachable from our network. The route distributes
in ospf and LDP but packets do not get through. I cant repair it be disabling enabling the interface. Seems
I have to reboot the router and kick some hundred customers.
I am really pissed to debug all the time. Sent supout ...
There are bridges (physicaly) connected. The interface to this bridges is not bridged within ros.Hello ste,Now I run into a MPLS Problem with v6.19. After a connected bridge was updated/rebooted the bridged
network (even MPLS routers own address) is no longer reachable from our network. The route distributes
in ospf and LDP but packets do not get through. I cant repair it be disabling enabling the interface. Seems
I have to reboot the router and kick some hundred customers.
I am really pissed to debug all the time. Sent supout ...
try to disable rstp on affected bridges.
A nightly reboot solved the problem ... for a while.Now I run into a MPLS Problem with v6.19. After a connected bridge was updated/rebooted the bridged
network (even MPLS routers own address) is no longer reachable from our network. The route distributes
in ospf and LDP but packets do not get through. I cant repair it be disabling enabling the interface. Seems
I have to reboot the router and kick some hundred customers.
I am really pissed to debug all the time. Sent supout ...