*) winbox - show "Switch" menu on cAP ac devices;
*) winbox - show correct "Switch" menus on CRS328-24P-4S+;
Is that one for Broadcom IPQ4018 based cAP ac and hAP ac^2 devices?*) wireless - improved compatibility with BCM chipset devices;
[/color]
Is that one for Broadcom IPQ4018 based cAP ac and hAP ac^2 devices?*) wireless - improved compatibility with BCM chipset devices;
[/color]
Sorry, I mixed something...Is that one for Broadcom IPQ4018 based cAP ac and hAP ac^2 devices?*) wireless - improved compatibility with BCM chipset devices;
[/color]
Broadcom is not Qualcomm
Perhaps this item implies better compatibility of client devices with the BCM chip (for example: smartphones, tablets, laptops, etc.).
SUPER . I try some test and the 20 mb/ps speed problem and 54mb/ps connectivity with mobile phones is resolved ! Test Xiaomi
*) wireless - improved compatibility with BCM chipset devices (this includes phones by Xiaomi, Lenovo, etc);
Very thanks!!! Work great!
*) wireless - improved compatibility with BCM chipset devices (this includes phones by Xiaomi, Lenovo, etc)
Can the phy-rate and RSSI for 60G interfaces also be exposed over SNMP please?
Thanks!
Please advise if we should disable IRQ RPS when activating multi-queue VirtIO, I assume yes...*) chr - added support for multiqueue feature on "virtio-net";
Yeah, mine breaks too. Upgraded from 6.42 to 6.43rc3 on two difference hosts running Hyper-V Core 2012 R2Tried to upgrade Hyper-V CHR from 6.42 to 6.43rc3 - FAILED
No connection via winbox mac.
Hyper-V terminal froze.
Restored from backup, tied again - same result.
Downloaded fresh CHR VHDX image.
pasted configuration and nothing worked.
started fresh, and the only issue I could find was the interfaces changed.
ether1 > ether3
ether2 > ether1
ether3 > ether2
changed the configuration to reflect the new interfaces and it still failed.
until I removed the interface names (gateway, lan etc) it would crash.
Once it was configured with default interface names, it began working.
After a backup, changed the interface names and it accepted the changes.
Still haven't figured out why the terminal hung after the upgrade though.
Important note!!! Backup before upgrade!
RouterOS (v6.40rc36-rc40 and) v6.41rc1+ contains new bridge implementation that supports hardware offloading (hw-offload).
This update will convert all interface "master-port" configuration into new bridge configuration, and eliminate "master-port" option as such.
Bridge will handle all Layer2 forwarding and the use of switch-chip (hw-offload) will be automatically turned on based on appropriate conditions.
The rest of RouterOS Switch specific configuration remains untouched in usual menus for now.
Please, note that downgrading to previous RouterOS versions will not restore "master-port" configuration, so use backups to restore configuration on downgrade.
It was a sunny and beautiful day. Murphey was out of the town.So why you have not upgraded first to 6.40.7 (bugfix) with old bridge implementation?
Why are you upgraded working hotel infrastructure to RC version? RC is test version so upgrade could fail.
Did this work in the previous versions? If yes, how exactly does that script line look like (I'm not interested in particular IP addresses but in the way how you obtain the index forWhen I want to add a filter line using a script run at an On-UP event then "Place Before" or the whole script is not executed. The filter line is not added in the Nat table in my case.
When I enter the line manually in Terminal then the line is added without an hitch.
place-before
It worked up to 6.42. You can't find that specific index and then you have to just make it yourself easy. The index is always the second line of the Hairpin in NAT, it pushes down earlier lines. When a VPN connection is severed the then the line is removed, and if not then it is removed on the following connect. I also remove on UP, the specific dead connections that might have not timed out in the meantime for that specific VPN connection.@msatter,Did this work in the previous versions? If yes, how exactly does that script line look like (I'm not interested in particular IP addresses but in the way how you obtain the index forWhen I want to add a filter line using a script run at an On-UP event then "Place Before" or the whole script is not executed. The filter line is not added in the Nat table in my case.
When I enter the line manually in Terminal then the line is added without an hitch.)Code: Select allplace-before
/ip firewall nat remove [find where comment="temp-vpn1"]
/ip firewall connection remove [ find where connection-mark="VPN1"]
:local ip [/ip address get [find where interface="VPNprovider-1"] value-name=address ];
/ip firewall nat add chain=srcnat action=src-nat to-addresses=$ip protocol=tcp src-address-list=PrivateVPN connection-mark=VPN1 comment="temp-vpn1" place-before=1
/ip firewall nat remove [find where comment="temp-vpn1"]
That was my suspicion - numeric index can be used to identify a rule only following aIt worked up to 6.42.@msatter,Did this work in the previous versions? If yes, how exactly does that script line look like (I'm not interested in particular IP addresses but in the way how you obtain the index forWhen I want to add a filter line using a script run at an On-UP event then "Place Before" or the whole script is not executed. The filter line is not added in the Nat table in my case.
When I enter the line manually in Terminal then the line is added without an hitch.)Code: Select allplace-before
...Code: Select all/ip firewall nat ... place-before=1
print
print
place-before
place-before=[find comment="your-comment"]
:local profile "1"
/ip firewall connection remove [ find connection-mark="VPN$profile"]
:local ip [/ip address get [find where interface="permanent-vpn-$profile"] value-name=address ];
/ip firewall nat set [find comment="permanent-vpn-$profile"] disabled=no to-addresses=$ip
:local profile "1"
/ip firewall nat disable [find comment="permanent-vpn-$profile"]
/ip firewall connection remove [find connection-mark="VPN$profile"]
Finding a rule by a comment is the last resort, you can find a rule using a unique combination of other parameters as well (if a unique combination exists of course).It seems that the "comment" possibility is the BEST thing in RouterOS. Maybe Mikrotik should think of making this way of working official and implement a tag or label available so that comment can just be a comment.
...
I have inserted a dedicated passthrough&comment line for this so that I can be sure it will inserted at the correct spot.
/ip firewall nat set [find comment="permanent-vpn1"] disabled=no to-addresses=$ip
/ip firewall nat set [find comment="permanent-vpn1"] disabled=yes
/ip firewall nat disable [find comment="permanent-vpn1"]
He's dealing with a single rule and needs to remove/modify it. If it is harmless to have a jump to a custom chain which currently doesn't exist, then yes, he can add the only rule to that chain and remove it from there. Is that what you had in mind? Because the rule order within the chain does matter if there would be more than one.msatter, another solution to your task would be introducing a separate custom chain for your dynamic rules, then jumping to this custom chain at the point where you currently insert your dynamic rules. In the script you then simply add your dynamic rules to the top of your custom chain not worrying about the rule order at all.
*) ipsec - added "responder" parameter for "mode-config" to allow multiple initiator configurations (CLI only);
They do on 6.43rc. IF-MIB::ifSpeed shows the PHY rate. Before 6.43 it showed 10 Mbps.Can the phy-rate and RSSI for 60G interfaces also be exposed over SNMP please?
Responder=yes/no configures whether a specific mode-config entry will act as a initiator or a responder. Previously only the default "request-only" entry acted as an initiator. Since the newly added "src-address-list" parameter works for initiator only and may be different between multiple mode-config clients, it may be necessary for a user to add multiple mode-config initiator configurations.Can you please elaborate on what this does?
bad news, I'd rather pay more for a product with better features. My choice today is hAP AC.mozerd - This device does not have any hardware monitoring sensors on it.
Next RC release will have possible fix for thisThat we know. What we would like to know from mikrotik is if it worths to test the wifi on hap ac2 with this RC or not.
As I don't have 6.43rcX anywhere right now, I can only suggest you to try whether you could use an interval (It seems that the input of address-list is thrown out of wack and in that mode it only expects a domain name or IP address without a netmask.
192.168.0.0-192.168.0.255
192.168.0.0/24
Already reported to the Support at support@mikrotik.com in a few days ago and got the ticket number.problems should be reported to support@mikrotik.com not on this forum.
@mikrotik can you write more info there? viewtopic.php?f=21&t=132181*) wireless - improved Nv2 PtMP performance;
Tell us more, did you work on latency?
JFYI: This topic is about 6.43rcRouterOS versions:
- We only keep OS version information for the last 30 days
- 6.41 - MPLS: 04-02 - 04-03 BGP: 04-02 - 04-09
- 6.41.3 - MPLS: 04-03 - 04-29 BGP: 04-09 - 04-29
- 6.42.1 - MPLS: 04-29 - current BGP: 04-29 - current
strods,
Miner bug found on hAP ac^2, please see the board name and correct in the next release.
[admin@MikroTik] /interface wireless> /system routerboard print
routerboard: yes
board-name: hAP ac (<--This should be hAP ac^2)
model: RouterBOARD D52G-5HacD2HnD-TC
serial-number: 8D1308291FAD
firmware-type: ipq4000L
factory-firmware: 3.43
current-firmware: 6.43rc5
upgrade-firmware: 6.43rc6
To be precise, it is not a 2 in superscript, it is a unicode codepoint 0xb2. Not that knowing this would change the user experience in any wayWhen I use ssh to my routerboard, it can show the correct number "2" in superscript mode. However in RouterOS terminal mode, it does not. I guess the terminal mode does not support displaying characters in superscript mode.
is it further improvement from 6.42.1?*) wireless - improved Nv2 PtMP performance;
Hah. Nice work on this one. I've complained to my ISP that they didn't respond to my unicast renewal request.*) dhvpv4-client - fixed DHCP client stuck in renewing state;
Asking without checking ... is it possible to add interface to the bridge and a list containing this interface? What then if it is possible?....
*) bridge - do not allow to add same interface list to bridge more than once;
....
Hello, strods*) dhcpv6-server - added initial dynamic simple queue support;
Please provide more information about this issue to support@mikrotik.comAfter update to 6.43rc11 My Kodi player on Raspberry could't connect to Synology NAS via NFS or SMB!
This was bug with hEX bridge! Now all works ok!Please provide more information about this issue to support@mikrotik.comAfter update to 6.43rc11 My Kodi player on Raspberry could't connect to Synology NAS via NFS or SMB!
I'd like to know what kind of NV2 performance improvement we can expect from version 6.43? I did notice improvements in version 6.42 but heard of people saying the new 6.43rc is worse then 6.42...is it further improvement from 6.42.1?*) wireless - improved Nv2 PtMP performance;
Agreed, I've upgraded my production routers to 6.43rc7 and they are working very well.DHCP Client seems to be sorted out and working now!
Then it must be related to something you do on all the devices you manage. What are you doing that could consume diskspace and that could be nonstandard?Im seeing a disc space leak over time. Im seeing it on TILE, MIPSBE and PPC. Im seeing it on all the devices I manage.
what about selective qinq?Version 6.43rc14 has been released.
*) bridge - added initial Q-in-Q support (CLI only);
/interface bridge
add name=bridge vlan-filtering=yes vlan-protocol=802.1ad
/interface bridge port
add bridge=bridge interface=ether1
add bridge=bridge interface=ether2
/interface bridge vlan
add bridge=bridge untagged=ether1,ether2 vlan-ids=1
add bridge=bridge tagged=ether1,ether2 vlan-ids=200
/interface ethernet switch rule
add mac-protocol=ipx new-vlan-id=200 ports=ether1 switch=switch1
what exactly is fixed in protected routerboard?Version 6.43rc14 has been released.
*) routerboard - fixed "protected-routerboot" feature (introduced in v6.42);
That's just a warning that you are running overclocked CPU. If it's stable and not overheating, you can just ignore it (That is if you need this higher speed. If not, just lower it to default value). Same message is also output in the log every time router starts.Frenquensy probleem!!!
after upgrading, do not accept passwords, two different routers!Version 6.43rc17 has been released.
from where? did you read above post, that you need other Winbox version?after upgrading, do not accept passwords, two different routers!Version 6.43rc17 has been released.
same answer. please read the post until bottomWhere is the new topic about 3.14?
it is simple way - in whats new you can allways write some notes, about changesfrom where? did you read above post, that you need other Winbox version?after upgrading, do not accept passwords, two different routers!Version 6.43rc17 has been released.
I'm sorry, but have you read them? It is in the notes
it is simple way - in whats new you can allways write some notes, about changes
Love it! Wireless Wire keeps getting better.*) w60g - added 4th 802.11ad channel (CLI only);
*) w60g - general stability and performance improvements;
*) w60g - improved maximal achievable distance;
*) w60g - removed distance lock for wAP 60G devices;
I have the same problem. I was trying to install a new wAP, and the upgrade pushed it to 6.43rc17 so I triggered the upgrade on my router as well and now I'm locked out of winbox with a username/password incorrect failure. CLI is unaffected.However I cannot login, even after a configuration reset, neither with "old" winbox, nor with the proposed one, nor with telnet or MAC telnet or ssh. admin with blank password still doesn't work...
Any suggestion will be greatly appreciated!
14:12:14 system,error,critical login failure for user matthew from D4:BE:D9:9E:B4:E3 via winbox
14:12:19 system,error,critical login failure for user matthew from D4:BE:D9:9E:B4:E3 via winbox
14:13:23 system,error,critical login failure for user admin from 10.1.20.253 via winbox
14:13:28 system,error,critical login failure for user admin from 10.1.20.253 via winbox
14:13:32 system,error,critical login failure for user admin from 10.1.20.253 via winbox
14:13:37 system,error,critical login failure for user admin from 10.1.20.253 via winbox
14:13:44 system,error,critical login failure for user matthew from 10.1.20.253 via winbox
14:13:54 system,error,critical login failure for user matthew from 10.1.20.253 to romon network
Hello MikroTik team,
*) w60g - general stability and performance improvements;
*) w60g - improved maximal achievable distance;
*) w60g - removed distance lock for wAP 60G devices;
The point is that system passwords are hashed and no longer available in plain text. This is not possible.*) backup - do not encrypt backup file unless password is provided;
I like the current way it works the backup is encrypted with admin password.
Please make an option to encrypt using current admin password like before, I don't want to have my backup unencrypted neither want to put a password in a script to make the backup.
Where I can download winbox 3.14 rc ? thanks
In order to access router running this version by Winbox, please download v3.14rc Winbox loader from here:
https://www.mikrotik.com/download/share/winbox.exe
Thanks. This solved my issue. Would it be helpful for the router / winbox to do a version match check before authentication to avoid the erroneous User/Password errors?Where I can download winbox 3.14 rc ? thanksIn order to access router running this version by Winbox, please download v3.14rc Winbox loader from here:
https://www.mikrotik.com/download/share/winbox.exe
You should not install RC versions when you don't or cannot read the release notes and the announcements here on the forum!Thanks. This solved my issue. Would it be helpful for the router / winbox to do a version match check before authentication to avoid the erroneous User/Password errors?
You can install a previous version of RouterOS using the Netinstall.I made a hard reset after login error, right now with version 3.14rc1 I still receive user or password error. What should I do?
Can you tell me where I find the procedure?You can install a previous version of RouterOS using the Netinstall.I made a hard reset after login error, right now with version 3.14rc1 I still receive user or password error. What should I do?
http://www.mikrotik.com.my/reinstalling ... rial-port/Can you tell me where I find the procedure?
Normally I would have been more careful, but only an rc version higher than what I already had - I was careless. Glad it was easily rectified. That said, I'm just giving a user experience improvement suggestion. Don't bite, we're all professionals here.You should not install RC versions when you don't or cannot read the release notes and the announcements here on the forum!Thanks. This solved my issue. Would it be helpful for the router / winbox to do a version match check before authentication to avoid the erroneous User/Password errors?
This quote says it all ...Note that release candidate versions are published strictly for testing purposes and should not be used on production routers.
Hello MikroTik team,
could you please provide more details - what performance improvements have been done, what is the new maximal achievable distance and what exactly is distance lock?
Thank you in advance.
Distance was limited with frame lifetime, this limitation now is removed. We reworked RX pattern part to utilize it more efficiently. In some channels link can be established over 2km distance.Love it! Wireless Wire keeps getting better.
What's "distance lock" though?
Its not a issue for me. I can Netinstall in my sleep and I always keep a stable in a partition.. Thats not my point.. A Release Candidate should at least be checked that it does not lock out users. Ive been doing Mikrotik RCs for 8 years and the severity of the errors recently is way off the charts VS the last 8 years.This quote says it all ...Note that release candidate versions are published strictly for testing purposes and should not be used on production routers.
rc releases are BETA releases, don't use it if you can't lose it !
It would be better to move that link (and the text) to the changelog so people who update from their router without reading this thread will also see it.Link to Winbox rc is in the above post, where RC is announced. Please all read the posts. It is not that hard.
Usually when people claim "router is bricked, netinstall does not work" it simply means they do not do the netinstall correctly as they have never done it before and thus do not know what to expect.Unfortunately I did not succeed, mikrotik is bricked, it was not possible to use netinstall
Indeed it was there, it does work... Thank youLink to Winbox rc is in the above post, where RC is announced. Please all read the posts. It is not that hard.
At least read the RC announcement post by MikroTik staff. RC versions CAN and often DO break things. RC is for testing, so reading notes is important.Indeed it was there, it does work... Thank youLink to Winbox rc is in the above post, where RC is announced. Please all read the posts. It is not that hard.
It is indeed not that hard but some times we are not given the "gift of time" to read all pages of all posts. I would try to edit and stick it to the first post or some place "sticky" since 20 people asked the same think to help us (not having too much time always)
Thank you again
Hi Normis.At least read the RC announcement post by MikroTik staff. RC versions CAN and often DO break things. RC is for testing, so reading notes is important.Indeed it was there, it does work... Thank youLink to Winbox rc is in the above post, where RC is announced. Please all read the posts. It is not that hard.
It is indeed not that hard but some times we are not given the "gift of time" to read all pages of all posts. I would try to edit and stick it to the first post or some place "sticky" since 20 people asked the same think to help us (not having too much time always)
Thank you again
These are two different forumsYou are wasting time and energy, on this forum discussing bugs with your end users when you must use this forum to talk about improvements and new features.
Is now mentioned at the top of the posting. The original communication was sub par..
.
Also for those too lazy to read where to get the new winbox.exe here you go: https://www.mikrotik.com/download/share/winbox.exe that link was not in the update text of the package manager, but was in the post about the latest release.
Honestly, I dont understand what has happened. Something really changed at Mikrotik. Ive been doing RCs for 8+ years. For 7+ years the RCs were as stable as the stable version. ALMOST NO BUGS OR ISSUES. Suddenly in the last like 3-4 months things have really taken a turn in a bad direction. So much so im now buying Ubiquity. The 42.1 "stable" release was abhorrent and bug ridden in ways that were inexplicable. DHCP client did not work in a "stable" release for example. The change log from 42.1 to 42.2 is stunning. They took away a feature that was critical to me and had been in RouterOS for more then 8 years, Netwatch. For me Mikrotik seems to have become untrustworthy as almost anything could break, even in "stable" releases. Features might be taken away with no notice or explanation. Mikrotik is not addressing any of this in the forums. They need to post a apology for causing so much money loss for on site visits to Netinstall "Stable" 42.2 updates. Ive got a reproducable issue now im dealing with support on where disc space is lost during a update. If you upgrade or downgrade this can occur and if you do it twice you can no longer upgrade or downgrade and your only way is to then go on site and netinstall. This occurs on Tile, MIPSBE and PPC so far that I know of and occurs in the "stable" 42.x and when upgrading from RC14 to 17. 10MB is lost in disc space with each upgrade/downgrade. It appears some file or files is not being deleted in a update. OR. Some file is being generated. Ive given Mikrotik remote access to the router to look at it. It should be simple, log in, and with thier special access go look at files and see whats taking up too much space.
Hi Normis.
Mikrotik must implement automated tests ASAP. You must stop breaking things even in rc versions. The only way to make high quality software is doing a lot of test...since unit test, integration test, UI test, E2E test, etc. Launch a new version (even a RC) whitout automated testing is an irresponsability, at least in 2018.
BR,
Diego.
You are exaggerating "a bit". Mikrotik started releasing public RCs since mid-2015 (since v6.32 or 6.31, but definitely not earlier), which means you could not have been using RCs for more then 3 years. And final versions before that time were just horrible. Introduction of the release channels was a huge improvement in their release management, bugfix channel brought stability that had never been seen before. And RCs... well, their main purpose (as with any beta software) is to break early.Ive been doing RCs for 8+ years. For 7+ years the RCs were as stable as the stable version.
The current stable version is 6.40.8 (the latest one in the BugFix release channel). The version 6.42.2 (and 6.42.1 before that) has been release in the Current release channel, which means it is not yet considered stable enough.The 42.1 "stable" release was abhorrent and bug ridden in ways that were inexplicable.
Honestly, I dont understand what has happened. Something really changed at Mikrotik. Ive been doing RCs for 8+ years. For 7+ years the RCs were as stable as the stable version. ALMOST NO BUGS OR ISSUES. Suddenly in the last like 3-4 months things have really taken a turn in a bad direction. So much so im now buying Ubiquity. The 42.1 "stable" release was abhorrent and bug ridden in ways that were inexplicable. DHCP client did not work in a "stable" release for example. The change log from 42.1 to 42.2 is stunning. They took away a feature that was critical to me and had been in RouterOS for more then 8 years, Netwatch. For me Mikrotik seems to have become untrustworthy as almost anything could break, even in "stable" releases. Features might be taken away with no notice or explanation. Mikrotik is not addressing any of this in the forums. They need to post a apology for causing so much money loss for on site visits to Netinstall "Stable" 42.2 updates. Ive got a reproducable issue now im dealing with support on where disc space is lost during a update. If you upgrade or downgrade this can occur and if you do it twice you can no longer upgrade or downgrade and your only way is to then go on site and netinstall. This occurs on Tile, MIPSBE and PPC so far that I know of and occurs in the "stable" 42.x and when upgrading from RC14 to 17. 10MB is lost in disc space with each upgrade/downgrade. It appears some file or files is not being deleted in a update. OR. Some file is being generated. Ive given Mikrotik remote access to the router to look at it. It should be simple, log in, and with thier special access go look at files and see whats taking up too much space.
Hi Normis.
Mikrotik must implement automated tests ASAP. You must stop breaking things even in rc versions. The only way to make high quality software is doing a lot of test...since unit test, integration test, UI test, E2E test, etc. Launch a new version (even a RC) whitout automated testing is an irresponsability, at least in 2018.
BR,
Diego.
Things are a huge mess.
Ive ALWAYS used and LOVED Mikrotik products. So I keep hoping it will get worked out and we will get back to super stable. Locking out all users updating to RC17 does not look good. It really appears zero testing was done. Did no one at Mikrotik upgrade and login ?
Sorry for my rant. I love Mikrotik, but, we gotta get things back to super stable again. Till then I have all my production routers on 6.41.4 as that was really the last truly STABLE STABLE.
I agree with you. I've been playing with rc versions since they introduced the release channels. I have shot myself in the balls several times with them requiring a netinstall and some voodoo.You are exaggerating "a bit". Mikrotik started releasing public RCs since mid-2015 (since v6.32 or 6.31, but definitely not earlier), which means you could not have been using RCs for more then 3 years. And final versions before that time were just horrible. Introduction of the release channels was a huge improvement in their release management, bugfix channel brought stability that had never been seen before. And RCs... well, their main purpose (as with any beta software) is to break early.Ive been doing RCs for 8+ years. For 7+ years the RCs were as stable as the stable version.
API authentication method have changed, see API manual:I have a feeling that the API calls cannot authenticate now!
Is it to be expected that using this new winbox on older releases (6.42.2) causes problems?In order to access router running this version by Winbox, please download v3.14rc Winbox loader from here:
https://www.mikrotik.com/download/share/winbox.exe
I modified it and it seams to work but....API authentication method have changed, see API manual:I have a feeling that the API calls cannot authenticate now!
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API#Initial_login
Is that why I can't modify the username via API?Basically the last two RouterOS versions have been released for testing purposes for everything besides Winbox. We are working on a new Winbox version and have provided rc version earlier within this topic. When 6.43 and Winbox 3.14 will be released, then both of them will work together just fine. Read-only fields issue will be resolved in next Winbox release.
And will the new Winbox then still support older RouterOS versions?When 6.43 and Winbox 3.14 will be released, then both of them will work together just fine.
How secure is plaintext password over insecure connection?.. Will there be any change in it back to challenge-response auth?API authentication method have changed, see API manual:I have a feeling that the API calls cannot authenticate now!
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API#Initial_login
In general, challenge-response auth protocols require the availability of the unhashed password on the router and that is what is being removed for security reasons.Will there be any change in it back to challenge-response auth?
https://www.mikrotik.com/download/share/winbox.exePlease Help! I upgraded to 6.43rc17, could not enter and reset the settings. Now I can not go in with a new winbox, not with an old winbox. Version of the nethinstall that is needed to update, I could not find on the download page.
download/file.php?id=32109New winbox does not work! Wrong password!
There is an error with this version of winbox::"could not get index missing file".download/file.php?id=32109New winbox does not work! Wrong password!
+ generate your own certificate to exclude MitMFor secure connection use api-ssl
Why can't router send, for example, salt of the password hash + some challenge, and then client uses that salt to generate hashed password and HMAC with challenge to generate response?In general, challenge-response auth protocols require the availability of the unhashed password on the router and that is what is being removed for security reasons.
There are tricks around that but those protocols are often regarded as not very secure either.
implementing SSL in our utilities is a problem (time etc). Since the API is proprietary protocol the login phase could be easily changed to not send plain text password and still allow you in the RouterOS to store only hashed passwords. Just make the 'challenge' hash from the hashed password not from plaintext one. If the password hash is easily usable one (i.e. if we can use it in our scripts to create the hash from password the same way the ROS does) it should work fine.For secure connection use api-ssl
Netinstall 6.43rc19 does not work. I think for routeros 6.43rc17 need netinstall 6.43rc17.That version has been withdrawn. You would not want to install that! Get the 6.43rc19
Wait, the first step in the post-v6.43 login method is to send the password in plain text? Who the hell thought that was a good idea?API authentication method have changed, see API manual:
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API#Initial_login
Winbox 3.14RC work fine.... What's wrong with me?Login by Winbox does not work but SSH and Telnet works
download last winbox 3.14RC and "login great again".I reset my cfg with no default settings how do I get back in? It's over 300ft on a tower. I can mac telnet, but it tells me password is wrong.
I was experiencing very low download speeds. Been tying several rc versions. But now i have one AP and i cant get on it. Is there anything i can do???? Netinstall recognizes my AP but does not install.Why those who cannot login even installed the rc version?
What a mess.
First I connected via serial. Then I reformatted my NAND. So I Netinstalled 6.41.4 as to me that seems like the only stable version. I then updated firmware to the 6.41.4.. I formatted NAND again to be sure once I was sure of my firmware. I netinstalled 6.41.4 again and used a backup from months ago. This resulted in a clean install using a truly stable version of RouterOS. I dont consider 6.42.x or 6.43.x stable.
Once I had that up and going. I repartitioned to 2. I copied my known good clean install into the second partition. Copied the config. i then made it active and rebooted to change to it and verified it was good.
I then switched back and upgraded 6.41.4 to 6.43.19. Of course I lost Winbox access, however, Winbox 2.x works great as it does not use authentication.
So ive been running 6.43.19 for 3 days on a SOHO setup and its working fine. No issues in my simple test setup other then no 3.x Winbox and NO NETWATCH.
I do have a production older PPC based router which is stuck on 6.42.1 and only has 6MB of disc space left and so I cant update it. This sudden irreversible loss of discspace making it impossible to upgrade/downgrade is a unpatched issue that so far is kinda random. But it also occurs with 43RC so watch your system/resources/diskspace. The only way to fix this is NAND format and Netinstall.
Yea at this point these should not be considered Release Candidates, they should be considered engineering daily builds that could brick your device and require physical access with a serial cable to recover. I now consider ANYTHING that comes from Mikrotik in this category. Look at how bad the "stable" release of 42.1 was.
So for me 6.41.4, all services disabled except Winbox and that set to LAN side only with a custom port.
MIKROTIK - PLEASE REVIEW AND CORRECT ALL KNOWN ISSUES BEFORE ADDING ANY NEW FEATURES. FOCUS YOUR STAFF ON GETTING THINGS STABLE AND RESTORING LOST FEATURES LIKE NETWATCH. 43RC19 is close. Fix authentication and add Netwatch.
The forum users here are awesome. So is Mikrotik. Ive been using ONLY mikrotik products for 8 years. Im confident things will get resolved. BUT. Im concerned by all these missteps in a row over the last 2 months.@Xymox,
what have we (forum users) done to you?
Please stop flooding forum with useless texts. if you have to say something ugly to mikrotik staff, please write directly to support, not here.
If you have been following these topics on the forum for some time, you shold know, they are exactly that.Yea at this point these should not be considered Release Candidates, they should be considered engineering daily builds that could brick your device and require physical access with a serial cable to recover. I now consider ANYTHING that comes from Mikrotik in this category. Look at how bad the "stable" release of 42.1 was.
Note that release candidate versions are published strictly for testing purposes and should not be used on production routers.
Unfortunately some people can't read it if they don't visit the forum There's no such warning in WinBox, for example.That warning is perfectly clear. Unfortunately some people don't read.
So rc!=rc that makes no sense!If you have been following these topics on the forum for some time, you shold know, they are exactly that.Yea at this point these should not be considered Release Candidates, they should be considered engineering daily builds that could brick your device and require physical access with a serial cable to recover. I now consider ANYTHING that comes from Mikrotik in this category. Look at how bad the "stable" release of 42.1 was.
Unofficially "rc" = "beta" or "nightly build". "current" = "rc". "bugfix" ="stable"
And why should people have to read these things, just make RC a real RC and not a nightly.Unfortunately some people can't read it if they don't visit the forum There's no such warning in WinBox, for example.That warning is perfectly clear. Unfortunately some people don't read.
... or call it "Recently Compiled" instead of "Release Candidate"...And why should people have to read these things, just make RC a real RC and not a nightly.
Naming of releases should be self explanatory
Or call it "Ridiculous Count"... Once Linus Torvalds stated:... or call it "Recently Compiled" instead of "Release Candidate"...And why should people have to read these things, just make RC a real RC and not a nightly.
Naming of releases should be self explanatory
However, for some reason four numbers just looks visually too obnoxious to me, so as I don't care that much, I'll just use "-rc", and we can all agree that it stands for "Ridiculous Count" rather than "Release Candidate".
As I have said. I love Mikrotik. I literally use nothing else. For 8+ years. I have great respect for Normis here on the forum. I NEVER intended any disrespect to anyone or to Mikrotik. In fact, I have great respect that they have allowed me to post these posts.If you have been following these topics on the forum for some time, you shold know, they are exactly that.Yea at this point these should not be considered Release Candidates, they should be considered engineering daily builds that could brick your device and require physical access with a serial cable to recover. I now consider ANYTHING that comes from Mikrotik in this category. Look at how bad the "stable" release of 42.1 was.
Unofficially "rc" = "beta" or "nightly build". "current" = "rc". "bugfix" ="stable"
Regarding the travel cost to many sites from the same reason... It looks like you are not testing the new versions before productive implementation. Otherwise I cannot explain to myself how you could break many remote sites at once. I always deploy newer versions in vawes starting on the closest sites and continue with the further if nothing bad happens during a week or so. But never at once.
Technically, 6.42 topic is locked, so they continue hereAnd again - this is not 6.43rc version related discussion.
Things, just got interesting!!Version 6.43rc21 has been released.
*) dhcp - added dynamic IPv4/IPv6 "dual-stack" simple queue support, based on client's MAC address;
*) dhcpv4-server - added "allow-dual-stack-queue" implementation (CLI only);
*) dhcpv6-server - added "allow-dual-stack-queue" implementation (CLI only);
!) radius - use MS-CHAPv2 for "login" service authentication;
Could you please explain how to enable this function?*) dhcp - added dynamic IPv4/IPv6 "dual-stack" simple queue support, based on client's MAC address;
*) dhcp - fixed DHCP server stuck in invalid state;
*) dhcpv4-server - added "allow-dual-stack-queue" implementation (CLI only);
*) dhcpv6-server - added "allow-dual-stack-queue" implementation (CLI only);
So... Where's my health?*) winbox - show "System/Health" only on boards that have health monitoring;
I wish Mikrotik would just move to a compressed root image thats decompressed to a Read-Only RAM disk on boot, with a seperate R/W partition for persistent data (configuration files), accross all platforms. RAM is cheap, and a lot of existing platforms already have enough RAM to do this.I lost 10MB of disc space when I upgraded from RC19 to RC21 on a CCR. Ive seen this same thing on PPC and MIPSBE.. MT Support replicated it and is working on it. After a few upgrades or downgrades you can run out of space and then the only thing you can do is Netinstall as your stuck on whatever version your at. This effects 6.42.x thru 6.43RC21. So careful upgrading as you might be loosing space with each time you do it, this is kinda critical on devices with low disc space.. MT support has seen it, so, its getting worked on.
IMHO always use partitions when you upgrade so its easy to go back.
Netwatch problem persistXymox - for example, your Netwatch includes this command "/system script run IPSMTP". So are policies write,read,reboot,test or only some of them, only ones that are enabled on this script? For example, no romon policy, no dude policy, etc. And again - this is not 6.43rc version related discussion.
MT has said this thread is not the place for Netwatch discussion. So I started a separate thread. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=134538Netwatch problem persistXymox - for example, your Netwatch includes this command "/system script run IPSMTP". So are policies write,read,reboot,test or only some of them, only ones that are enabled on this script? For example, no romon policy, no dude policy, etc. And again - this is not 6.43rc version related discussion.
tested on rb750UP with routeros 6.43RC21
No log error, only log the netwatch up or down, script dont run, no error messages
User owner of the script permissions full
Captura.JPG
The wiki has been updated with examples:Could you please explain how to enable this function?*) dhcp - added dynamic IPv4/IPv6 "dual-stack" simple queue support, based on client's MAC address;
*) dhcp - fixed DHCP server stuck in invalid state;
*) dhcpv4-server - added "allow-dual-stack-queue" implementation (CLI only);
*) dhcpv6-server - added "allow-dual-stack-queue" implementation (CLI only);
I've looked at wiki, but there are details only about leases and bindings.
Cheers
Thanks for that, artz!The wiki has been updated with examples:
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:I ... e_limiting
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:I ... e_limiting
I only have suggestions for improvement:Everyone who complained about the Netwatch issue - Please see this topic viewtopic.php?f=2&t=134538
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API#Initial_loginCould anyone give an example of how to connect in the api PHP in the new version of mikrotik v3.43rc21
I modified the php file for now this way and it works... it is not detecting prior version... I hope 6.43 comes out soon to keep it like thathttps://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API#Initial_loginCould anyone give an example of how to connect in the api PHP in the new version of mikrotik v3.43rc21
check version one would need if he has to manage multiple devices prior the change and after like me.You don't have to check version.
* Send /login with username and password in plain text
* if response is with challenge then fall back to old login method
* otherwise check status if login is successful
As an example see how it is done on python example in the wiki
if ($this->socket) {
socket_set_timeout($this->socket, $this->timeout);
// RouterOS >= 6.43
$this->write('/login', false);
$this->write('=name=' . $login, false);
$this->write('=password=' . $password);
$RESPONSE = $this->read(false);
if (isset($RESPONSE[0]) && $RESPONSE[0] == '!done') {
//RouterOs < 6.43
if (isset($RESPONSE[1])) {
$MATCHES = array();
if (preg_match_all('/[^=]+/i', $RESPONSE[1], $MATCHES)) {
if ($MATCHES[0][0] == 'ret' && strlen($MATCHES[0][1]) == 32) {
$this->write('/login', false);
$this->write('=name=' . $login, false);
$this->write('=response=00' . md5(chr(0) . $password . pack('H*', $MATCHES[0][1])));
$RESPONSE = $this->read(false);
if (isset($RESPONSE[0]) && $RESPONSE[0] == '!done') {
$this->connected = true;
break;
}
}
}
}
else
{
$this->connected = true;
break;
}
}
fclose($this->socket);
}
Nothing worked for me either when I upgraded from v5.26 straight to 6.42.3 and I tested it in different platforms with the same exact boot problem. Everything stopped working after the upgrade and you had to use netinstall to recover. However everything worked good when upgrading to bugfix first and then to current. I had no boot problems whatsoever. However I could not get a clean backup when upgrading from bugfix to current. I get always an error so after both upgrades are done you have to do a final step and reset to factory defaults and then copy paste the original rsc file.I did test upgrade from 5.26 to this version. Just for testing. Everything went well. Upgrade failed for you due to configuration or something like thta. In general it works just fine.
Security risk is really not as important as functionality and speed to me in some installations as those old versions are not accessible. I was actually forced to downgrade from current as there is lack of MT support and broken code in later versions of ROS for the dual nstream, besides a few other problems, like the backup error current ROS almost always has. Those old versions have been working rock solid for many years. Sometimes upgrading is not a very wise choice.And, keep "current" a bit more regularly. Running such old versions is a security risk, that is widely known in all of the software world.
So where is new Windows Bandwidth Test app?!) btest - requires at least v6.43 Bandwidth Test client when connecting to v6.43 or later version server except when authentication is not required;
Version 6.43rc21 has been released.
MAJOR CHANGES IN v6.43:
----------------------
!) winbox - improved authentication process excluding man-in-the-middle possibility (Winbox v3.14 required);
----------------------
Thanks. It's working for Winbox, but Dude is still complainingVersion 6.43rc21 has been released.
MAJOR CHANGES IN v6.43:
----------------------
!) winbox - improved authentication process excluding man-in-the-middle possibility (Winbox v3.14 required);
----------------------
You can find Winbox here: https://mikrotik.com/download
As I wrote in the 6.42.3 thread, the check-installation function does not seem to have the claimed new functionality/System check-installation reports everything ok and the old system check-disk is no longer there.
What are those bindstr and bindstr2?*) chr - provide part of network interface GUID at the beginning of "bindstr2" value when running CHR on Hyper-V;
is it for SXT LTE?*) lte - improved modem event processing;
Hello @mrz ,You don't have to check version.
* Send /login with username and password in plain text
* if response is with challenge then fall back to old login method
* otherwise check status if login is successful
As an example see how it is done on python example in the wiki
def login(self, username, pwd):
for repl, attrs in self.talk(["/login"]):
chal = binascii.unhexlify((attrs['=ret']).encode('UTF-8'))
md = hashlib.md5()
md.update(b'\x00')
md.update(pwd.encode('UTF-8'))
md.update(chal)
self.talk(["/login", "=name=" + username,
"=response=00" + binascii.hexlify(md.digest()).decode('UTF-8') ])
seems, not. rc23 even worse for LHG. alot disconnects (~50/hour). after roll back to 6.42.3 - rockstable.Does rc23 fix the w60g issues seen in rc19 and rc21?
It was last edited a year ago. It's not compatible with 6.43 changes.Reading https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API_Python3
Can you please tell me if the function login is compatible with v 6.42 and v 6.43 ?
Hello strods!*) dhcpv6-server - added initial dynamic simple queue support;