EDIT: After router restart everything is OK.action timed out - try again, if error continues contact MikroTik support and send
a supout file (13)
Have you set administrative mac address for the bridge? If not, do it.Update problem.
Given:
mAP lite 6.34.2, latest FW 3.29
Config very basic, just bridge ether1 and wlan1 and dhcp client on bridge1.
PROBLEM:
After standard update procedure ( packages update via winbox 3.1) from 6.34.2 to 6.34.3 mAP lite does not accept DHCP server offered address. (i general any address)
I also noticed that DHCP is being offered to another MAC address than originally as i had it reserved.
Original: 4C:5E:0C:14:58:61
After update requested from/offered to: 4C:5E:0C:14:58:60
Cannot access AP now to pull the plug and verify solution on second mAP lite
Solution:
Unplug and plug back LAN cable into mAP lite.
I had this issue with 2 mAPlite's
Beware of doing this update if you cannot access mAPlite physically to unplug/plug LAN cable.
You don't seem to be an experienced person working for a long time in the industry...6.34.3 is in the "Current" channel. That's not beta. I'm running a number of 6.35 RC systems which are the "Release Candidate" channel and expect different issues with those - and am communicating with MikroTik on various issues found and fixed in the Release Candidate channel. I don't expect "this release breaks your Internet connection" issues with "current" releases.
Production users/systems should not be the unknowing beta testers for a commercial company.
Winbox 3.2 "honors" a new user group policy: RoMON. To connect using Winbox 3.2 via RoMON ROS need to be >= 6.35Oh, it seems that a nice feature of Winbox 3.2 is that it will no longer connect to RoMON on routers running 6.34.2
*) users - added separate RoMoN policy (Winbox v3.2 and above required);
6.34.3 is in the "Current" channel. That's not beta. I'm running a number of 6.35 RC systems which are the "Release Candidate" channel and expect different issues with those - and am communicating with MikroTik on various issues found and fixed in the Release Candidate channel. I don't expect "this release breaks your Internet connection" issues with "current" releases.
Production users/systems should not be the unknowing beta testers for a commercial company.
I can live with those definitions. I'm just so used to (many years, decades actually) of where a Beta is called a beta, not current. And Alpha is called Alpha, not Release Candidate (after all, "Release Candidate" generally means "if we find no bugs in this, this will be the next release - hence the name "Release Candidate").In MY HEAD the release chains translate approximatly like this:
Legacy= Well explains itself, for old Routerboards that cant handle newer ROS.
RELEASE CANDIDATE chain = ALPHA TESTING = of BRAND NEW features, solutions and bugfixes in ROS = NEVER USE IN PRODUCTION unless you like the adrenaline of living on the edge! ;D
CURRENT Chain = Effectivly BETA TESTING = Polishing of new features, solutions, and bugfixes. It CAN become Bugfix-version at some point in refinement of version = Only us in production AFTER EXTENSIVE TESTING on lab/non critical and easy acessible routers! If you after the testing find it to be stable, and see little complaints on Forum, then you may CONSIDER to use it on production routers if you feel confident to do so.
BUGFIX ONLY Chain = Considered as STABLE version = ONLY adding BUGFIXES between versionsnumbers, NO NEW FEATURES! = This version is the one that you should generaly use on production envirnoment! I personally STILL TEST EVEN these versions BEFORE i upgrade my production routers from one bugfix release to the next! But these are the versions that you theoretically could use as default auto update on production routers, and generally should not encounter new problems because of it! But as I said, I personally would do a test before I unleash ANY version on my production envirnoment, and especially critical routers!
Generally I have noticed that these forums also give you a hint about the stability of a ROS version!
Not working.Have you set administrative mac address for the bridge? If not, do it.Update problem.
Given:
mAP lite 6.34.2, latest FW 3.29
Config very basic, just bridge ether1 and wlan1 and dhcp client on bridge1.
PROBLEM:
After standard update procedure ( packages update via winbox 3.1) from 6.34.2 to 6.34.3 mAP lite does not accept DHCP server offered address. (i general any address)
I also noticed that DHCP is being offered to another MAC address than originally as i had it reserved.
Original: 4C:5E:0C:14:58:61
After update requested from/offered to: 4C:5E:0C:14:58:60
Cannot access AP now to pull the plug and verify solution on second mAP lite
Solution:
Unplug and plug back LAN cable into mAP lite.
I had this issue with 2 mAPlite's
Beware of doing this update if you cannot access mAPlite physically to unplug/plug LAN cable.
I understand about MACs, but the question and problem is that it DOES NOT ACCEPT ANY IP given/offered by DHCP server :/If you have dhcp client active on the bridge and it actually asks the dhcp server with different mac, it means the mac had changed. The mac on bridge can be changing when no administrative mac is set to it. Once you set the administrative mac, it becomes "fixed" for the bridge and all its ports. Re-check it once again. If no luck, make supout and send it to support, let them investigate what went wrong in your case.
After countless tests and resets its seems to be faulty hardware.Isn't there any mac conflict in the network? Does mac ping work in both ways? Any firewall rule Coul be blocking that?
I already did that too .... i even don't see this router on neighbours list ... all filter rules are disabled. Default config loaded.Hard to help you more remotely. Try to reset without any config and set the dhcp directly to the ether port. Then try to make a bridge and move the dhcp client to it.
MikroTik RouterOS 6.34.3 (c) 1999-2015 http://www.mikrotik.com/
For 99% it seems that there is a problem with 6.34.3 release using mAPliteI meant not to load any config. Then set the dhcp clients on maybe each port and to move the cable from one to other. Also try other devices to test the port auto negotioation. Last option is to netinstall the ros. If it does not help, you should return it to the dealer.
Small bug in console:
It was released in 2016Code: Select allMikroTik RouterOS 6.34.3 (c) 1999-2015 http://www.mikrotik.com/
already fixed in RCWhat's new in 6.35rc29 (2016-Mar-14 15:30):
*) console - update copyright notice;
is it v6.34.3 problem? can you reproduce it on v6.35rc?Avoid using magnet to attach your mAP Lite.
It's a hardware problem apparently. http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... t=mAP+Liteis it v6.34.3 problem? can you reproduce it on v6.35rc?Avoid using magnet to attach your mAP Lite.
Thanks, cap! You apparently missed the point. I'm pretty sure Chupaka meant there's no point in reporting hardware-related problems in a branch dedicated to a particular software release.It's a hardware problem apparently. http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... t=mAP+Liteis it v6.34.3 problem? can you reproduce it on v6.35rc?Avoid using magnet to attach your mAP Lite.
upgrading from what version?Hi all,
Justo to report that after upgrading RB951G-2HnD to 6.34.3 , IPsec/L2TP VPN stopped working .
What's new in 6.34 (2016-Jan-29 10:25):
*) ipsec - fix phase2 hmac-sha-256-128 truncation len from 96 to 128
This will break compatibility with all previous versions and any other
currently compatible software using sha256 hmac for phase2;
What's new in v3.3:Winbox 3.2 "honors" a new user group policy: RoMON. To connect using Winbox 3.2 via RoMON ROS need to be >= 6.35Oh, it seems that a nice feature of Winbox 3.2 is that it will no longer connect to RoMON on routers running 6.34.2
Per 6.35 changelog:
*) users - added separate RoMoN policy (Winbox v3.2 and above required);
is there any improvement in queue tree being assigned to a single core in a multi-core router?*) queue-tree - improved nested queue limit calculation;
is it with parent=global or parent=<interface>?is there any improvement in queue tree being assigned to a single core in a multi-core router?
globalis it with parent=global or parent=<interface>?
Do you plan to release 6.34.4 with this bugfix?As far as we know all problems with PPP should be fixed in latest 6.35rc version. If you upgrade and still experience issues, then please send supout file from your device (6.35rc) to support@mikrotik.com