Hi,
I have been searching from fast few days but all the threads are out dated and non of them worked.
Here is what i am trying to achieve.
I have 1 GPON ethernet cable (using media converter) that is connected to Ethernet Port 1 of hEX. This hEX is running default configurations. only fast track routes are disabled so queues can work.
and Ethernet Ports 2,3,4,5 are bridged.
pppoe-ou1 (PPPoE client) is configured on ether1 and is set to add default route and use peer DNS.
everthing is working but once i add another PPPoE client on same interface the first PPPoE reconnects and once that reconnects the second one reconnects and the loop of reconnection goes on.
I tried to bridge the ether1 and then placed both PPPoE clients on bridge the result was same. I tried to create VLAN on ether1 and then on bridge but i FAILED it wouldnt connect.
The ether4 is connected to another hEX. The hEX then bridged all ports to work as network switch.
and ether5 is connected to RB750-GL3. The RB750-GL3 is then bridged all ports to work as network switch.

So what i want is to be able to connect multiple PPPoE over single interface. Or if any of the client over port 2,3,4,5 dials PPPoE it should relay that to ether1.
I have tested GPON and ISP supports multiple logins using same cable. I tested it by putting network switch and dialing multiple usernames and passwords everyone logged in and had access and separate internet IP.
The purpose of this configuration is that we use RDPs and SMTP and for these 2 we have high speed internet with data limit. And when ever someone want to use that high speed internet, that client can dial-in and have high speed access where as others can use normally without interruption.
If you need any more info please let me know i will provide it.
All the help is appreciated.
Thanks.
Regards.

Multiple PPPoE in one interface?
Never seen that!!!

Even if you could do that, how would the traffic balance between all your PPPoE connections? It would'nt..!

Use PPPoE client one per interface and then you should use mangles to load balance the traffic...

I haven't tested this, but I suspect your problem is likely that all of your PPPoE connections are coming from the same MAC address. When that is the case, the server won't know how to address the individual clients (that all share same MAC, since it is transmitting to that one MAC for both of the connections), and the two clients won't know which one was intended to receive each frame.

It has been many years since I played with this, but as I recall, there is a way to distinguish between multiple PPPoE sessions with the same MAC: it requires optional Host-Uniq tag to be included by the client, which then the server will include in its responses. See RFC 2516.

I do not know that RouterOS supports the use of Host-Uniq. So you may have to come up with some way of causing each PPPoE client connection to bear a different MAC address. Perhaps using Bridge Filter or Bridge NAT rules.

-- Nathan

i run 2 pppoe connections at same ethernet (ether1) from 2 different internet providers (2 vdsl modems) without problems. even load balance or failover is working properly.
but your situation may be different as previous post said.

I haven't tested this, but I suspect your problem is likely that all of your PPPoE connections are coming from the same MAC address. When that is the case, the server won't know how to address the individual clients (that all share same MAC, since it is transmitting to that one MAC for both of the connections), and the two clients won't know which one was intended to receive each frame.

It has been many years since I played with this, but as I recall, there is a way to distinguish between multiple PPPoE sessions with the same MAC: it requires optional Host-Uniq tag to be included by the client, which then the server will include in its responses. See RFC 2516.

I do not know that RouterOS supports the use of Host-Uniq. So you may have to come up with some way of causing each PPPoE client connection to bear a different MAC address. Perhaps using Bridge Filter or Bridge NAT rules.

-- Nathan

I test it. and Yes you were right. I feel dumb, i never thought of that. I connected Ether1 and Ether3 with GPON using network switch and then I cloned MAC address of Ether1 into Ether3 and the problem remained same but after resetting MAC address of Ether3 it stayed connected.
Now if you have any suggestion how can I use different MAC address I am happy to explore.

What if i Bridge ether1 and VLANs and use my second hEX for dialing-in PPPoE over VLANs will it work ?
I am still new to VLANs. I dont know how to properly configure them and how they work.

i run 2 pppoe connections at same ethernet (ether1) from 2 different internet providers (2 vdsl modems) without problems. even load balance or failover is working properly.
but your situation may be different as previous post said.

This is failover... Not traffic ballancing...
Load ballance needs mangle rules...

i run 2 pppoe connections at same ethernet (ether1) from 2 different internet providers (2 vdsl modems) without problems. even load balance or failover is working properly.
but your situation may be different as previous post said.

This is failover... Not traffic ballancing...
Load ballance needs mangle rules...

who said i dont have the mangle pcc rules?

who said i dont have the mangle pcc rules?

You said nothing about mangles on the previous post...

who said i dont have the mangle pcc rules?

You said nothing about mangles on the previous post...

the topic is about pppoe problem not about pcc or mangle or anything else. lets not hijack it.

You can try specify the ac-name or service-name for each PPPoE client..

You can try specify the ac-name or service-name for each PPPoE client..

Just tested both, didnt work as service and account name is provided by ISP.

What if i Bridge ether1 and VLANs and use my second hEX for dialing-in PPPoE over VLANs will it work ?
I am still new to VLANs. I dont know how to properly configure them and how they work.

I don't think using VLANs will change anything crucial in your case. VLAN interfaces assume MAC address of their "master" interface. And you don't need VLANs to make fibre port available to other devices (such as second hEX), a simple unmanaged switch between media converter and all Routers would do. Unless, of course, you suffer from lack of free ethernet cables and you want to place those "second hEXes" some distance away from media converter and "first router" and you're thinking of using VLANs and smart switch to overcome this hurdle ... in this case using VLANs will help.

What if i Bridge ether1 and VLANs and use my second hEX for dialing-in PPPoE over VLANs will it work ?
I am still new to VLANs. I dont know how to properly configure them and how they work.

I don't think using VLANs will change anything crucial in your case. VLAN interfaces assume MAC address of their "master" interface. And you don't need VLANs to make fibre port available to other devices (such as second hEX), a simple unmanaged switch between media converter and all Routers would do. Unless, of course, you suffer from lack of free ethernet cables and you want to place those "second hEXes" some distance away from media converter and "first router" and you're thinking of using VLANs and smart switch to overcome this hurdle ... in this case using VLANs will help.

Hope this will explain my network and my scenario.



link to img https://ibb.co/GF9bJgj

From 2013 to 2017 I have used 4 x 8 Mbps Lines with Mikrotik PCC load Balancing. I know how PCC works and I have used some kind of advanced routing to sense link up and down status and change routing accordingly incase if 1 of the 4 links goes down. So, I have previous experience with static IPs and PPPoE over 4 different Ports but thats not what i am look for. I am trying to figure out if its possible without physical ports / ethernet ports.
Or if its possible to make tunnel or VLANs for all the users so that when ever they want to use separate link / IP they can dial-in into that GPON and get private link / IP and disconnect from Home Shared Network.
The reasons for this setup is that
1. Sometimes when we are working on RDPs or using SMTP or Playing Games Online we end up with high ping.
2. Shared connection is unlimited bandwidth with low speed as compare to limited bandwidth high speed connections that we want to dial-in in the time of need / urgency.

What I have done for the time being is that I have placed 3 tp-Link routers and configured them as PPPoE dialer and attached them to network as separate Gateway. And Placed 4 batch files on desktop of every user so that they can switch from 1 to another by simply running batch file from their desktop.
Here is gateway setup.
gateway1 = xxx.xxx.xxx.1
gateway2 = xxx.xxx.xxx.2
gateway3 = xxx.xxx.xxx.3
gateway4 = xxx.xxx.xxx.4
User getting static IPs = xxx.xxx.xxx.100 - 200
Mobile users with dynamic IPs served by gateway1 = hEX (2nd floor, the one with PPPoE dialer and queues for bandwidth shaping and priority) DHCP = xxx.xxx.xxx.50 - 99

As I said before, I would guess you can use clever rules under "/interface bridge filter" and "/interface bridge nat" to do what you want, but that would probably get very complicated to maintain. I have not sat down and tried to work out how exactly to do this (maybe create VLANs off the WAN port, add each VLAN to separate bridge, give each bridge a separate MAC address, strip the VLAN tag on egress and apply VLAN tag on ingress, and set each PPPoE client master interface to the separate bridges?), and maybe it isn't even doable.

But this whole subject was giving me deja-vu, so I did some searching in the forums and came across this: viewtopic.php?t=93517#p466594 It's a similar problem, but DHCP instead of PPPoE. The solution presented is brilliantly simple.

I wasn't sure that this would work with PPPoE because I doubted that a VRRP interface could be selected as the master interface for a PPPoE client. After all, you can't bridge a VRRP interface, and typically you can only choose etherlike interfaces to do PPPoE over (same set of interfaces would show in the PPPoE client list as the bridge interface list). But I tried it, and to my amazement, it worked.

The main restriction with this method is that you don't have the freedom to choose the entire MAC; as the ROS manual explains (https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:I ... AC_address), only the last octet of a VRRP MAC can be changed, by setting VRRP ID (which can be 1-255, so 01-FF). The first 5 will always be 00:00:5E:00:01. If your provider ever catches on to what you are doing, they could easily block OUI 00:00:5E on their end from making PPPoE connections.

-- Nathan

As I said before, I would guess you can use clever rules under "/interface bridge filter" and "/interface bridge nat" to do what you want, but that would probably get very complicated to maintain. I have not sat down and tried to work out how exactly to do this (maybe create VLANs off the WAN port, add each VLAN to separate bridge, give each bridge a separate MAC address, strip the VLAN tag on egress and apply VLAN tag on ingress, and set each PPPoE client master interface to the separate bridges?), and maybe it isn't even doable.

But this whole subject was giving me deja-vu, so I did some searching in the forums and came across this: viewtopic.php?t=93517#p466594 It's a similar problem, but DHCP instead of PPPoE. The solution presented is brilliantly simple.

I wasn't sure that this would work with PPPoE because I doubted that a VRRP interface could be selected as the master interface for a PPPoE client. After all, you can't bridge a VRRP interface, and typically you can only choose etherlike interfaces to do PPPoE over (same set of interfaces would show in the PPPoE client list as the bridge interface list). But I tried it, and to my amazement, it worked.

The main restriction with this method is that you don't have the freedom to choose the entire MAC; as the ROS manual explains (https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:I ... AC_address), only the last octet of a VRRP MAC can be changed, by setting VRRP ID (which can be 1-255, so 01-FF). The first 5 will always be 00:00:5E:00:01. If your provider ever catches on to what you are doing, they could easily block OUI 00:00:5E on their end from making PPPoE connections.

-- Nathan

Will try this today and i will ask for help if i got stuck, Actually I was ISP since 2009 to 2017 and then I merged my network with my current ISP he is dear friend and i have my own portal for user management. So no worries about blocking or what so ever. This ISP is using Mikrotik and DMAsoftlab Radius Server as user management.

Awesome it works like a charm
I Guess now i will have to create another post regarding routing. As this one is answered and i dont want to overcrowd this post for those who gona stumble upon it while searching.

Awesome it works like a charm
I Guess now i will have to create another post regarding routing. As this one is answered and i dont want to overcrowd this post for those who gona stumble upon it while searching.

Awesome it works like a charm
I Guess now i will have to create another post regarding routing. As this one is answered and i dont want to overcrowd this post for those who gona stumble upon it while searching.

Hi nabeelryk, is there a way you can share your solution. I have same concept, configuring 2 pppoe client from 1 isp onto a single port for higher bandwidth etc