v7.1beta4 [development] is released!

emils · Thu Feb 04, 2021 10:52 am

RouterOS version 7.1beta4 has been released in public "development" channel!

What's new in 7.1beta4 (2021-Feb-03 09:39):

*) api - added support for REST API;
*) crs3xx - fixed Layer3 hardware offloading;
*) route - routing rules improvements;
*) winbox - added support for wifiwave2;
*) winbox - updated User Manager, OSPF and BGP menus;
*) wifiwave2 - authentication and functionality improvements;
*) other fixes and improvements;

All released RouterOS v7 changelogs are available here:
https://mikrotik.com/download/changelog ... lease-tree

How to report RouterOS v7 bugs:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=152006

tpedko · Thu Feb 04, 2021 11:41 am

simple queues fixed on the router RB4011iGS+5HacQ2HnD-IN?

ErfanDL · Thu Feb 04, 2021 11:58 am

RouterOS version 7.1beta4 has been released in public "development" channel!

*) api - added support for REST API;

that's mean HTTP REST API with GET PUT ?

Thu Feb 04, 2021 11:59 am

Documentation of the REST API https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/REST+API

eworm · Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:01 pm

Looks like export still hangs...

ErfanDL · Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:04 pm

Documentation of the REST API https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/REST+API

One of the best features I've ever expected. Thanks to Mikrotik

buvarbeno · Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:08 pm

I use an RB951g-2hnd for testing. With minimal firewall, NAT and fasttrack. The WAN side of the router is connected to a LAN (DHCP client), and behind the router I can reach an RDS server from original LAN. With 6 series ROS (many versions and latest beta from yesterday too) it is working, but with ROS7 beta3 and beta 4 too, the RDP link is unstable, it disconnects in every minutes.

SLNetworks · Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:14 pm

Is SwOS hidden by chance in this release for the CRS354? 🤞

velk1001 · Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:20 pm

I have just upgrade to v7.1beta4 from v6.48 on an Nray and the bandwidth speed test is not working any more.

Regards
Paul

hecatae · Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:22 pm

I have just upgrade to v7.1beta4 from v6.48 on an Nray and the bandwidth speed test is not working any more.

Regards
Paul

Please follow this thread for bug reporting: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=152006

kamillo · Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:26 pm

@normis, can the https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... col+Status be updated to reflect any changes in beta4?

Manfred · Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:52 pm

Updated a RB2011 and a Chateau LTE12 from Beta3 to Beta4.
A small Bug is introduced in Beta4::
If anything in "ip/routes" is changed ( modify, add, ... ), only a "by admin" appears in the Log - Window in the Message - Tab.
Missing what has been done !

eworm · Thu Feb 04, 2021 1:04 pm

*) api - added support for REST API;

With this being added... How about a JSON parser within RouterOS? This would allow one device to call another device's REST API.

pe1chl · Thu Feb 04, 2021 1:05 pm

Looks like export still hangs...

Indeed. Downloaded the .ova for CHR, installed on VMware ESXi 6.7u3, start the VM, type /export, instaneous hangup.

pe1chl · Thu Feb 04, 2021 1:06 pm

Updated a RB2011 and a Chateau LTE12 from Beta3 to Beta4.
A small Bug is introduced in Beta4::
If anything in "ip/routes" is changed ( modify, add, ... ), only a "by admin" appears in the Log - Window in the Message - Tab.
Missing what has been done !

That is not introduced in beta4, this bug has been in v7 from the beginning.

GreySer · Thu Feb 04, 2021 2:15 pm

Updated RB3011 from ROS7 beta3 to beta 4. Circle reboot...

loading kernel... OK
setting up elf image... OK
jumping to kernel code
opendir: No such file or directory
ERROR: no system package found!
Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! exitcode=0x000000CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: init Not tainted 5.6.3 #35
Hardware name: RB3011
{bf05ff2c} _stext+0x97a4/0x432b28
{bf05ff34} _stext+0x41f2a0/0x432b28
{bf05ff44} _stext+0x19a98/0x432b28
{bf05ff6c} _stext+0x1b8c8/0x432b28
{bf05ff84} _stext+0x1c9dc/0x432b28
{bf05ff9c} _stext+0x1ca4c/0x432b28
CPU0: stopping
CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.6.3 #35
Hardware name: RB3011
{80901f04} _stext+0x97a4/0x432b28
{80901f0c} _stext+0x41f2a0/0x432b28
{80901f1c} _stext+0xbef0/0x432b28
{80901f34} _stext+0x1b2af4/0x432b28
{80901f4c} _stext+0x1acc/0x432b28
Exception stack(0x80901f50 to 0x80901f98)
1f40:                                     000cea30 00000000 000cea30 801142a0
1f60: 80900000 00000001 80903e24 80903e60 80824a38 512f04d0 10c5387d 00000000
1f80: 00000000 80901fa0 80106f60 80106f50 60000013 ffffffff
{80901f9c} _stext+0x6f50/0x432b28
{80901fa4} _stext+0x3a038/0x432b28
{80901fbc} _stext+0x3a2c8/0x432b28
{80901fc4} _sinittext+0x934/0x20d2c
Rebooting in 5 seconds..

bruins0437 · Thu Feb 04, 2021 3:01 pm

RB4011iGS+ updated from 7.1beta3 to 7.1beta4 with no problems.

tpedko · Thu Feb 04, 2021 3:24 pm

RB4011iGS+ updated from 7.1beta3 to 7.1beta4 with no problems.

are simple queues set up?

StubArea51 · Thu Feb 04, 2021 3:46 pm

Really excited to see a REST API in this release. Thanks MT!

bruins0437 · Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:12 pm

RB4011iGS+ updated from 7.1beta3 to 7.1beta4 with no problems.
are simple queues set up?

I don't have simple queues setup, but I can try it.

ectoplasmosis · Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:33 pm

Anyone upgraded their CRS317 yet?

Mine is working happily on 7.1beta2 with L3 hardware offloading enabled... Afraid to break things with this new beta!

mafiosa · Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:43 pm

So we can now finally use winbox to configure BGP and OSPF?

Paternot · Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:50 pm

Finally a beta4! :D
No time to test it now: how is wireguard and BGP going?

WeWiNet · Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:53 pm

Tried an upgrade on Chateau LTE12 (from 7beta3).
Device in boot loop and not possible to reset the device.
Will need to do a netinstall...

mafiosa · Thu Feb 04, 2021 7:58 pm

Creating filters via winbox not working. Certain options in bgp crashes winbox. The AFI option in bgp templates in particular.

gtj0 · Thu Feb 04, 2021 8:04 pm

NetMetal 5 922UAGS-5HPacT with an add-on R11e-2Hnd .. The 2.4 GHz radio isn't detected at all. This was an earlier issue that was fixed in Beta3 but now seems to be broken again. Supout sent.

doneware · Thu Feb 04, 2021 8:41 pm

with REST API finally here a lot of possibilities are open at once. thank you!
(let me try one more thing)

doneware · Thu Feb 04, 2021 8:46 pm

Documentation of the REST API https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/REST+API

Normis, will it pe possible somehow to decouple REST from www-ssl in the future?
i definitely don't want to expose the web ui to everyone. and maybe a way to change the base URI for the REST API.

lcohen999 · Thu Feb 04, 2021 10:38 pm

Has anyone with an Audience tried this yet.

Beta3 always gave me a bootloop with a simple wireless access point only config (and the new wifiwave2)?

edit: Decided to jump in.

Upgrade went fine
added wave2, bootloop.
Factory reset by reset button to recover

Setup a bridge for all NIC/Wifi, thats it (audience is just my AC, I have a Hap AC in the basement)

So, compared to 6 brach, my 2x2 Surface 7+...

6.48, fast.com = 200mbps
7.1beta4..... 400mbps !

speedtest.net is about the same.

So I would say, great job on the wifi team. That is a MASSIVE improvement.

Lets see if the unit bootloops like beta3 did. If not....this Audience will stay happily on 7.1b4

Anyone also notice the size of the wave module is 1/2 the size?

edit: options for 5G AX are showing up too. I tried to select it but says no supported channels

memelchenkov · Thu Feb 04, 2021 11:22 pm

Tried an upgrade on Chateau LTE12 (from 7beta3).
Device in boot loop and not possible to reset the device.
Will need to do a netinstall...

Upgraded just fine from 7.1 pre-beta4. Did not tried to upgrade from beta3.

thadrumr · Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:43 am

I tried an upgrade to my CHR version 7.1 beta 3 running on Hyper-V 2016 and it completely failed. I had to download a new CHR vhdx and boot from it. Luckily I was able to mount my old CHR VHDX as a secondary drive and I had an old backup file in there. Stupid me didn't forgot to take a snapshot. After the upgrade it said missing system upon boot.

krzysztof · Fri Feb 05, 2021 2:37 am

In X86 v7.1 beta 3 the system doesn't boot,
In X86 v7.1 beta 4 the system doesn't boot,

In X86 v7.1beta2 system boot very well,

lcohen999 · Fri Feb 05, 2021 3:25 am

Kernel Panic on Audience

error while running customized default configuration script: expected end of command (line 1320 column 53)

Lets see how we do, seemed to recover this time...

thadrumr · Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:25 am

Looks like CAKE is still causing a random reboot. The device remains stable when I disable CAKE. I setup a simple queue using cake and a target of my lan subnets like below.

/queue simple/pri
Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid; D - dynamic
0 X name="queue1" target=10.22.87.0/24,192.168.2.0/24 parent=none
packet-marks="" priority=1/1 queue=cake/cake limit-at=0/0
max-limit=12M/225M burst-limit=0/0 burst-threshold=0/0 burst-time=0s/0s
bucket-size=0.1/0.005 total-queue=hotspot-default

Here is how my Cake queue type is setup.

name="cake" kind=cake cake-bandwidth=0bps cake-overhead=0
cake-overhead-scheme="" cake-rtt=100ms cake-diffserv=diffserv4
cake-flowmode=triple-isolate cake-nat=no cake-wash=no cake-ack-filter=none

SrConfluente · Fri Feb 05, 2021 5:05 am

Looks like CAKE is still causing a random reboot. The device remains stable when I disable CAKE. I setup a simple queue using cake and a target of my lan subnets like below.

/queue simple/pri
Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid; D - dynamic
0 X name="queue1" target=10.22.87.0/24,192.168.2.0/24 parent=none
packet-marks="" priority=1/1 queue=cake/cake limit-at=0/0
max-limit=12M/225M burst-limit=0/0 burst-threshold=0/0 burst-time=0s/0s
bucket-size=0.1/0.005 total-queue=hotspot-default

Here is how my Cake queue type is setup.

name="cake" kind=cake cake-bandwidth=0bps cake-overhead=0
cake-overhead-scheme="" cake-rtt=100ms cake-diffserv=diffserv4
cake-flowmode=triple-isolate cake-nat=no cake-wash=no cake-ack-filter=none

Can confirm. Had two kernel panics in HAP AC2, cake was the reason I updated but since sfq works I reverted to stable.

chubbs596 · Fri Feb 05, 2021 8:03 am

Creating filters via winbox not working. Certain options in bgp crashes winbox. The AFI option in bgp templates in particular.

I have seen the same issue with winbox crashing on some BGP menus

Fri Feb 05, 2021 8:20 am

edit: options for 5G AX are showing up too. I tried to select it but says no supported channels

Wireless standard support is limited by the capabilities of the hardware. You can find out, which bands an interface supports, by checking the 'Radios' section in WinBox, or running '/interface/wifiwave2/radio/print detail' in the CLI.

haedertowfeq · Fri Feb 05, 2021 9:09 am

Looks like CAKE is still causing a random reboot. The device remains stable when I disable CAKE. I setup a simple queue using cake and a target of my lan subnets like below.

/queue simple/pri
Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid; D - dynamic
0 X name="queue1" target=10.22.87.0/24,192.168.2.0/24 parent=none
packet-marks="" priority=1/1 queue=cake/cake limit-at=0/0
max-limit=12M/225M burst-limit=0/0 burst-threshold=0/0 burst-time=0s/0s
bucket-size=0.1/0.005 total-queue=hotspot-default

Here is how my Cake queue type is setup.

name="cake" kind=cake cake-bandwidth=0bps cake-overhead=0
cake-overhead-scheme="" cake-rtt=100ms cake-diffserv=diffserv4
cake-flowmode=triple-isolate cake-nat=no cake-wash=no cake-ack-filter=none

My Hex S: CAKE random reboot
I setup queue tree with FQ_CoDel

تم الإرسال من Redmi Note 8 Pro باستخدام Tapatalk

Jotne · Fri Feb 05, 2021 10:52 am

Looks like export still hangs...

Can confirm, tested on hAP ac^2 with clean and minimal configuration (around 20 lines)

# feb/05/2021 09:48:31 by RouterOS 7.1beta4
# software id = C38F-6NNH
#
# model = RBD52G-5HacD2HnD
# serial number = BEED0Bxxxxxx
/interface bridge
add name=bridge1 vlan-filtering=yes
/interface wireless
set [ find default-name=wlan1 ] ssid=MikroTik
set [ find default-name=wlan2 ] ssid=MikroTik
/interface list
add name=WAN
/interface wireless security-profiles
set [ find default=yes ] supplicant-identity=MikroTik
/interface bridge port
add bridge=bridge1 interface=ether2
add bridge=bridge1 interface=ether3
add bridge=bridge1 interface=ether4
add bridge=bridge1 interface=ether5
/interface list member
add interface=ether1 list=WAN
/ip address
add address=172.16.0.1 interface=bridge1 network=255.255.255.0
/ip dhcp-client
add disabled=no interface=ether1
<--HANGS here-->

skylark · Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:08 am

Please issues with unit reboot while using cake/codel/fq_codel queue types report to support@mikrotik.com with attaching supout.rif file right after the reboot.

dreamind · Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:32 am

I still can't get routing filters to work, so that OSPF would pick up the default route. I tried the same under beta3, but there OSPF didn't seem to consider the filters at all.

Now with beta4, there is only:

/routing/filter/rule add chain=ospf_out rule=

.
There is no match-prfx-value or similar, as mentioned in the preliminary documentation: https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... g+Examples

mafiosa · Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:54 am

I still can't get routing filters to work, so that OSPF would pick up the default route. I tried the same under beta3, but there OSPF didn't seem to consider the filters at all.

Now with beta4, there is only:
Code: Select all
/routing/filter/rule add chain=ospf_out rule=
.
There is no match-prfx-value or similar, as mentioned in the preliminary documentation: https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... g+Examples

Yes exactly the reason why I stopped testing it yesterday.

memelchenkov · Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:17 pm

Chateau LTE12, /export works just fine. Please report to support everyone who has issues, that means the bug depends on your specific configuration, so Mikrotik should detect which config lines/firmware problems causes export failing.

WeWiNet · Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:25 pm

Chateau LTE12, /export works just fine. Please report to support everyone who has issues, that means the bug depends on your specific configuration, so Mikrotik should detect which config lines/firmware problems causes export failing.

Chateau LTE12 : I had to do netinstall. Then again a rests to default to get "default". Then after did export, and stuck at the end of firewall export!!!
So not working on my box with default profile!!!

mafiosa · Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:49 pm

Yes exactly the reason why I stopped testing it yesterday.

Just received reply from support that filters are being reworked and do not work as of now. Will never test betas again unless they don't mention what's know to be not working.

haedertowfeq · Fri Feb 05, 2021 1:44 pm

Please issues with unit reboot while using cake/codel/fq_codel queue types report to support@mikrotik.com with attaching supout.rif file right after the reboot.

OK [emoji108]

تم الإرسال من Redmi Note 8 Pro باستخدام Tapatalk

mkx · Fri Feb 05, 2021 2:54 pm

Will never test betas again ...

If you can't accept random things broken, then beta testing is not for you. No need to publicly announce that, we'll accept your decision regardless.

WeWiNet · Fri Feb 05, 2021 2:59 pm

Mikrotik support: Now that Wifiwave2 package is usable within winbox, its adaptation will raise quickly and questions as well as feedback on the forum as well!

I heavily recommend you split out wifiwave2 package as a new forum topic so the feedback is not diluted in ROS7 generic thread.
Also ROS 7 users not using Wifiwave 2 have no benefit of wifiwav2 package discussion and bug reports!

Please do it, now.... I said now ;-). Please!

lcohen999 · Fri Feb 05, 2021 3:25 pm

edit: options for 5G AX are showing up too. I tried to select it but says no supported channels
Wireless standard support is limited by the capabilities of the hardware. You can find out, which bands an interface supports, by checking the 'Radios' section in WinBox, or running '/interface/wifiwave2/radio/print detail' in the CLI.

I know...I was somehow hoping the Audience supported it unmarket'ed

Thay said winbox shows it supports 80/160 and 80/+80 but selecting those game me the same error

Also, it says I am locked on United States 3...I have my country setup as Canada

thadrumr · Fri Feb 05, 2021 3:38 pm

I sent support an e-mail with my attached rif just after a crash which seems to be relate to CAKE. Hopefully support can decode the rif file and see what happened.

MarcSN · Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:57 pm

Anyone also notice the size of the wave module is 1/2 the size?

Sadly still too big.. I have 2 WAP R acs, they report having 256MB of RAM and an IPQ4019 WIFI interface ( which doesn't conform to the specifications from the mikrotik website?! ) but only 16 MB of storage :(
The Package includes 6 diffrent firmwares and the IPQ4019 firmware is only 1,3 MB. The others amount to 15,4 MB, so a packege specific to the IPQ4019 without the other stuff would probably fit.

gtj0 · Fri Feb 05, 2021 5:08 pm

Chateau LTE12, /export works just fine. Please report to support everyone who has issues, that means the bug depends on your specific configuration, so Mikrotik should detect which config lines/firmware problems causes export failing.
Chateau LTE12 : I had to do netinstall. Then again a rests to default to get "default". Then after did export, and stuck at the end of firewall export!!!
So not working on my box with default profile!!!

Indeed. It now hangs at "/routing table" which would come just after ipv6

[admin@sw04] > /routing export        
# feb/05/2021 08:03:23 by RouterOS 7.1beta4
# software id = NSGG-UDD1
#
# model = RouterBOARD 750G r2
# serial number = 64FC05EEE051
/routing table
add fib name=""
#interrupted
[admin@sw04] >

Supout sent

pe1chl · Fri Feb 05, 2021 5:45 pm

Chateau LTE12, /export works just fine. Please report to support everyone who has issues, that means the bug depends on your specific configuration, so Mikrotik should detect which config lines/firmware problems causes export failing.

That is why I mentioned: I loaded it on a CHR, starting with default configuration (which is almost nothing on a CHR!) and then it already hangs.
Just like Jotne showed with a much larger configuration: after the IP dhcp-client line.
Without working /export there is little incentive for me to test further, as I cannot backup configuration to the repository I use for that, so I cannot track my changes.
(which would help when finding problems during testing)

lcohen999 · Fri Feb 05, 2021 5:59 pm

...and 24 hours from install, (2 random reboots later) 5GHz antenna just stopped working.

Disabling and re-enabling didn't fix it. Nothing noted in the log. Had to reboot

nemoforum · Fri Feb 05, 2021 9:34 pm

Got bootloop after upgrade 7.1b3 ->7.1b4 on my hAP ac2.
Had to netinstall 7.1b4 with configuration reset, then applied the backup (from 7.1b3).

osc86 · Fri Feb 05, 2021 10:13 pm

I can't get more than one peer per wireguard instance working at the time.
After a reboot the first client connecting "wins", all other don't receive traffic.
Multiple instances with just one peer each seem to work simultaneously.

mducharme · Fri Feb 05, 2021 10:50 pm

EoIP is still not working with keepalive enabled.

rooted · Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:35 am

so a packege specific to the IPQ4019 without the other stuff would probably fit.

I'm hoping to see this as well, it makes sense.

nevolex · Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:46 am

winbox - added support for wifiwave2;

do we still need an external driver for that, or is it now integrated into the ros?

nannou9 · Sat Feb 06, 2021 9:33 am

Audience ros 7.1b4 wifiwave2, factory reset after upgrade to b4 from b3.
Tested Wifi3- QCA9984

Wifi reconnection problem is fixed in b4- thanks!
However now after less than 1h all my devices disconnect and can’t connect anymore and reboot is needed.
There is absolutely nothing in logs which would indicate any problem. Even no unsuccessful authentication or anything. WiFi however is still advertised by the ap, just can’t join.
This seems to be happening regardless of amount of devices connected to WiFi (tested 2-15).
Using mostly apple devices.


/interface bridge
add name=bridge-vlan1000 vlan-filtering=yes
/interface wifiwave2
add disabled=yes mac-address=74:4D:28:F4:F1:B3 name=wifi1
add disabled=yes mac-address=74:4D:28:F4:F1:B4 name=wifi2
add band=5ghz-ac channel-width=20/40/80mhz disabled=no mac-address=\
    74:4D:28:F4:F1:B5 mode=ap name=wifi3 security.authentication-types=wpa3-psk \
    ssid="Mikro"
/interface vlan
add interface=bridge-vlan1000 name=vlan1000 vlan-id=1000
/interface bridge port
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 frame-types=admit-only-vlan-tagged interface=ether1
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 interface=ether2 pvid=1000
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 interface=wifi3 pvid=1000
/interface bridge vlan
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 tagged=bridge-vlan1000,ether1 untagged=ether2,wifi3 \
    vlan-ids=1000
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 tagged=ether2,ether1 vlan-ids=1003
/ip dhcp-client
add disabled=no interface=vlan1000

Edit
When My clients can’t connect I have notice that winbox is showing the wifivave interface status (in status tab, not on the interface list) as state disabled and channel empty.
However the interface itself is showing as enabled.
Also disabling and reenabling makes no difference. Only restart works.

notToNew · Sat Feb 06, 2021 10:12 am

hm, my Wireguard config stopped working after Update from beta3 to beta4.
didn't find a reason, the Log is empty.

nannou9 · Sat Feb 06, 2021 11:27 am

Has anybody managed to actually ever save any config change for wifivawe in web ui ? I am getting error saying that exactly one must be set: Mac or master. But I have mac only set through cli, but UI tries to set master each time as there is no disabled/blank option.

infabo · Sat Feb 06, 2021 2:53 pm

update works so good

Quasar · Sat Feb 06, 2021 3:20 pm

*) api - added support for REST API;

Nice! For anyone giving it a spin: do note that it's on the www-ssl service - I spent some time wondering why api-ssl wasn't responding to my HTTP requests..

lcohen999 · Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:39 pm

Audience ros 7.1b4 wifiwave2, factory reset after upgrade to b4 from b3.
Tested Wifi3- QCA9984

Wifi reconnection problem is fixed in b4- thanks!
However now after less than 1h all my devices disconnect and can’t connect anymore and reboot is needed.
There is absolutely nothing in logs which would indicate any problem. Even no unsuccessful authentication or anything. WiFi hover is still advertised by the ap, just can’t join.
This seems to be happening regardless of amount of devices connected to WiFi (tested 2-15).
Using mostly apple devices.
Code: Select all
/interface bridge
add name=bridge-vlan1000 vlan-filtering=yes
/interface wifiwave2
add disabled=yes mac-address=74:4D:28:F4:F1:B3 name=wifi1
add disabled=yes mac-address=74:4D:28:F4:F1:B4 name=wifi2
add band=5ghz-ac channel-width=20/40/80mhz disabled=no mac-address=\
    74:4D:28:F4:F1:B5 mode=ap name=wifi3 security.authentication-types=wpa3-psk \
    ssid="Mikro"
/interface vlan
add interface=bridge-vlan1000 name=vlan1000 vlan-id=1000
/interface bridge port
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 frame-types=admit-only-vlan-tagged interface=ether1
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 interface=ether2 pvid=1000
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 interface=wifi3 pvid=1000
/interface bridge vlan
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 tagged=bridge-vlan1000,ether1 untagged=ether2,wifi3 \
    vlan-ids=1000
add bridge=bridge-vlan1000 tagged=ether2,ether1 vlan-ids=1003
/ip dhcp-client
add disabled=no interface=vlan1000

Try using the mesh 5g antenna. It seems to stable for me and not have the regular one just die (I had the same thing happen)

infabo · Sat Feb 06, 2021 8:49 pm

seems like cake does not work as good as in beta3.

mducharme · Sat Feb 06, 2021 10:15 pm

Does wifiwave2 have bridging support yet? I tried it on my audience in beta3 a few months ago and it seemed to work, but the issue was that I need to use the 5GHz uplink radio on the audience to get back to my main router and this bridging did not work (no equivalent of station bridge or wds).

Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:49 am

Does wifiwave2 have bridging support yet? I tried it on my audience in beta3 a few months ago and it seemed to work, but the issue was that I need to use the 5GHz uplink radio on the audience to get back to my main router and this bridging did not work (no equivalent of station bridge or wds).

4-address operation mode required for station bridging is not currently supported with wifiwave2.

Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:23 am

Has anybody managed to actually ever save any config change for wifivawe in web ui ? I am getting error saying that exactly one must be set: Mac or master. But I have mac only set through cli, but UI tries to set master each time as there is no disabled/blank option.

The WebFig interface for wifiwave2 is not yet usable. Hence why it was omitted from the changelog. It is only accessible because WebFig and WinBox share the same back end.

genesispro · Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:26 am

any plan for dude v7?

nemoforum · Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:33 pm

Will wave2 driver support features like no_country_set, superchannel and so on? Or the new wave2 driver is provided by the vendor and there are no customisation options?

WeWiNet · Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:59 pm

WifiWave2 on RB4011:
What is the performance one should see/expect with it?
test set up with no other 5Ghz AP (running iperf3 on 1G ethernet connected computer), distance 2-3 meter between AP and Client:
(using 160Mhz as well as 80Mhz)

- Macbook Pro, 3x3 11ac 80Mhz: ~480mbps
- laptop Intel 11ac 6200 160Mhz: ~480mbps (showing 160Mhz usage and phy rate of 1700mbps!!! in UL/DL)
- Samsung S20 2x2 11ac: ~480mbps

This is almost less than what I get with the normal wifi package. And 80Mhz client sees same speed as 160Mhz client.
Fully cabled iperf3 test peaks at 970mbps as expected so not a setup problem.

Is this throughput what you should expect with this package?
Please those using wifiwave2, can you share data?

Positive: WPA3 is well working!

McShadow · Mon Feb 08, 2021 3:25 pm

Looks like export still hangs...

It sadly does.
I tried it with Chateau LTE12 7.1beta4 (ARM).

Export now stops on /routing/pimsm.

- McShadow

nemoforum · Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:39 pm

Regarding /routing/export :

2021-02-08_22-38.png

TimurA · Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:50 pm

Positive: WPA3 is well working!

no him there :), but the problem is in ipv6, the connection state does not work, it will need to remove the check for the established and relayed to the forward.

EnverS · Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:24 am

Looks like export still hangs...

Yep, can not see the full config still..

EnverS · Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:31 am

RouterOS version 7.1beta4 has been released in public "development" channel!

What's new in 7.1beta4 (2021-Feb-03 09:39):

*) api - added support for REST API;
*) crs3xx - fixed Layer3 hardware offloading;
*) route - routing rules improvements;
*) winbox - added support for wifiwave2;
*) winbox - updated User Manager, OSPF and BGP menus;
*) wifiwave2 - authentication and functionality improvements;
*) other fixes and improvements;

All released RouterOS v7 changelogs are available here:
https://mikrotik.com/download/changelog ... lease-tree

How to report RouterOS v7 bugs:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=152006

Hello,
are there any plans to add some examples of EAP authentication for wireless with certificates TLS/TTLS and 802.1X port based authentication with new user-manager?
Winbox already shows new user-manager.
Can we get wiki update on these features with some initial examples of usage?
We want to see and use new MT radius server in action.

Regards.
Enver.

genesispro · Tue Feb 09, 2021 10:57 am

I get
L2TP connection rejected no IPsec encryption while it was required
towards 1/5 vpn servers that I need to connect.
It is connecting to the other 4/5 servers also l2tp/ipsec based.
It has been working before.
I also tried to update the vpn server that doesn't accept it to latest beta (6.49beta11) but still it will throw this error.
If I change ipsec from required to yes it connects immediately.
Other clients (v6) connect to this server fine.
If I enter a wrong ipsec password to the client it throws wrong password error. The moment the password is correct it fails with
L2TP connection rejected no IPsec encryption while it was required

Did anyone else had it/resolved it?

pe1chl · Tue Feb 09, 2021 11:22 am

L2TP/IPsec often has a timing problem because when the IPsec association has not yet been established, an unencrypted L2TP packet may leak out and establish the connection, which is then rejected.
You can avoid such problems using a firewall rule, e.g. on the server:

/ip firewall filter
add action=accept chain=input comment=Established/Related connection-state=\
    established,related
add action=accept chain=input comment=L2TP/IPsec dst-port=1701 \
    ipsec-policy=in,ipsec protocol=udp
add action=reject chain=input comment="L2TP no IPsec" dst-port=1701 log=\
    yes log-prefix=l2tp protocol=udp reject-with=icmp-port-unreachable

(of course you will have more rules than that)

notToNew · Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:51 pm

after Upgrade, vrrp between 6.48.1 and 7.1b4 does not work. Both Devices are always Master. downgrading solved it.

tpedko · Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:02 pm

Audiense+LTE show in interface new FW version.

fw_version.png

but install latest version

fw_version2.png

And log show error

reset_conf.png

infabo · Tue Feb 09, 2021 3:55 pm

/export hangs.

Copyright needs 2021 update too

Nevon · Tue Feb 09, 2021 10:19 pm

Hi wonder if someone can help me.
Trying to setup a iBGP IPV6 between a ROS6.46.8 to ROS7b4 router. ROS6 router has full table but I dont get it to share the routes. I have already IPv4 workin..

miguelangelfelix · Wed Feb 10, 2021 10:43 am

So... Where can i set rpki filter ROAs validation??? I can't find "match-rpki" filter option i could use on v7.1beta3 RouterOS Version

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/

.. -- go up to filter
add -- Create a new item
disable -- Disable items
edit --
enable -- Enable items
export -- Print or save an export script that can be used to restore configuration
find -- Find items by value
get -- Gets value of item's property
move -- Change order of items
print -- Print values of item properties
remove -- Remove item
reset --
set -- Change item properties

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add
Creates new item with specified property values.

chain --
copy-from -- Item number
disabled -- Defines whether item is ignored or used
place-before -- Item number
rule --

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add rule=

Rule -- string value

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add rule=

rpingar · Wed Feb 10, 2021 11:04 am

So... Where can i set rpki filter ROAs validation??? I can't find "match-rpki" filter option i could use on v7.1beta3 RouterOS Version

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/

.. -- go up to filter
add -- Create a new item
disable -- Disable items
edit --
enable -- Enable items
export -- Print or save an export script that can be used to restore configuration
find -- Find items by value
get -- Gets value of item's property
move -- Change order of items
print -- Print values of item properties
remove -- Remove item
reset --
set -- Change item properties

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add
Creates new item with specified property values.

chain --
copy-from -- Item number
disabled -- Defines whether item is ignored or used
place-before -- Item number
rule --

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add rule=

Rule -- string value

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add rule=

+1

mafiosa · Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:44 pm

So... Where can i set rpki filter ROAs validation??? I can't find "match-rpki" filter option i could use on v7.1beta3 RouterOS Version

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/

.. -- go up to filter
add -- Create a new item
disable -- Disable items
edit --
enable -- Enable items
export -- Print or save an export script that can be used to restore configuration
find -- Find items by value
get -- Gets value of item's property
move -- Change order of items
print -- Print values of item properties
remove -- Remove item
reset --
set -- Change item properties

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add
Creates new item with specified property values.

chain --
copy-from -- Item number
disabled -- Defines whether item is ignored or used
place-before -- Item number
rule --

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add rule=

Rule -- string value

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add rule=

Bgp filters don't work as per support email reply.

OlofL · Wed Feb 10, 2021 8:40 pm

BUG Report:

When reporting an issue, please follow this template:
Version number (if the issue is upgrade related, specify which version was installed before as well);
Has the /system routerboard command changed name or been removed btw?

[admin@MikroTik] > /system/package/update/print
            channel: stable
  installed-version: 7.1beta4

Router's model;
"Cloud hosted router" using the .IMG file, in GNS3 with default settings.

Steps to reproduce the issue;
Boot router, login, and then type

/export
....

[admin@MikroTik] > /export
# feb/10/2021 18:36:27 by RouterOS 7.1beta4
# software id =
#
/interface ethernet
set [ find default-name=ether1 ] disable-running-check=no
set [ find default-name=ether2 ] disable-running-check=no
/interface wireless security-profiles
set [ find default=yes ] supplicant-identity=MikroTik
/ip dhcp-client
add disabled=no interface=ether1
#interrupted <----- (ctrl+c was pressed here)

in console, and it will hang until ctrl+c

OlofL · Wed Feb 10, 2021 8:45 pm

BUG report:

v7.1beta4, using GNS3 with CHR IMG file. Same setup as post above. These bugs are probably related.

The export command does not exist under.
/routing ospf
or
/routing bgp
They where available in RouterOS v6.

However, /routing export exists, but it hangs.

[admin@MikroTik] /routing/ospf> export
bad command name export (line 1 column 1)
[admin@MikroTik] /routing/ospf>
area  instance  interface  interface-template  lsa  neighbor  static-neighbor
[admin@MikroTik] /routing/ospf> ..export
# feb/10/2021 18:43:11 by RouterOS 7.1beta4
# software id =
#
#interrupted <--- press ctrl+c because it hangs.

rpress · Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:17 pm

Upgraded from CHR v7.1beta2 to beta4. Pings to the router are taking 500-1500ms, lots of packet loss. If I try to disable an interface the router reboots.

Still has the same problem I had before: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=165022

Fri Feb 12, 2021 11:08 am

However now after less than 1h all my devices disconnect and can’t connect anymore and reboot is needed.
There is absolutely nothing in logs which would indicate any problem. Even no unsuccessful authentication or anything. WiFi however is still advertised by the ap, just can’t join.
This seems to be happening regardless of amount of devices connected to WiFi (tested 2-15).

Thank you for this report. The cause of this issue has been identified and will be fixed in the next release.
In the meantime, a workaround for it would be connecting no more than 1 WPA3 authenticated client device per interface (you can create additional virtual APs to connect more than 1 WPA3 client to the same radio).

nannou9 · Fri Feb 12, 2021 4:13 pm

However now after less than 1h all my devices disconnect and can’t connect anymore and reboot is needed.
There is absolutely nothing in logs which would indicate any problem. Even no unsuccessful authentication or anything. WiFi however is still advertised by the ap, just can’t join.
This seems to be happening regardless of amount of devices connected to WiFi (tested 2-15).

Thank you for this report. The cause of this issue has been identified and will be fixed in the next release.
In the meantime, a workaround for it would be connecting no more than 1 WPA3 authenticated client device per interface (you can create additional virtual APs to connect more than 1 WPA3 client to the same radio).

Great! Thanks for the workaround. This is exactly what I was hoping for. I am running multiple clients with wpa2 only and no problems for 2 hours now.

nannou9 · Fri Feb 12, 2021 10:07 pm

Wifiwave2 frequencies for UK are incomplete.
According to Ofcom (UK regulator), frequencies between 5725-5850 MHz do not require DFS and are available for indoor WiFi.
Currently they are not available for UK in MikroTik devices.
More details: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/consultations- ... -for-wi-fi

bozko · Fri Feb 12, 2021 10:47 pm

export hanging is a huge problem to evaluate 7.xy beta

IMHO first priority should be fixing export issue

infabo · Fri Feb 12, 2021 11:46 pm

The chicken egg problem: they request a /export for reporting bugs - but /export hangs....

eworm · Sat Feb 13, 2021 1:09 am

export hanging is a huge problem to evaluate 7.xy beta

IMHO first priority should be fixing export issue

Full ACK! I do not even consider testing before this is fixed.

nannou9 · Sat Feb 13, 2021 1:30 am

In previous betas it was actually completing but after very long time, like 20m. Assuming it is simply still the case.
I have been doing exports myself too and I do not consider this a blocker as others are suggesting.

pe1chl · Sat Feb 13, 2021 12:37 pm

How do you want to run a test scenario, document the configuration used during testing, and report problems to MikroTik when you cannot do a /export ???
I have started a /export command now to see if it will ever complete.

Chupaka · Sat Feb 13, 2021 2:13 pm

I have started a /export command now to see if it will ever complete.

Is it still exporting?..

pe1chl · Sat Feb 13, 2021 2:46 pm

No, indeed it terminated after some time and completed the export, and also generated an autosuport.old.rif and autosupout.rif (spaced 10 minutes in time)
I guess indeed it first did some part of the export, then hang for ~10 minutes, dumped an autosupout.rif and continued, hang again for ~10 minutes, dumped another autosupout.rif (renaming the first to autosupout.old.rif) and then completed.
The resulting export looks OK.

But it is a bit of a tedious way to do exports...

wiresnarg · Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:56 am

No, indeed it terminated after some time and completed the export,
I guess indeed it first did some part of the export, then hang for ~10 minutes,
The resulting export looks OK.

This matches my exact experience on 2011UiAS-2HnD.

routerboard: yes
model: 2011UiAS-2HnD
serial-number:
firmware-type: ar9344
factory-firmware: 3.24
current-firmware: 7.1beta4
upgrade-firmware: 7.1beta4

That said, thank you for working on RouterOS 7 !

wiresnarg · Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:09 pm

No, indeed it terminated after some time and completed the export,
I guess indeed it first did some part of the export, then hang for ~10 minutes,
The resulting export looks OK.
This matches my exact experience on 2011UiAS-2HnD.

routerboard: yes
model: 2011UiAS-2HnD
serial-number:
firmware-type: ar9344
factory-firmware: 3.24
current-firmware: 7.1beta4
upgrade-firmware: 7.1beta4

That said, thank you for working on RouterOS 7 !

Follow up:
I noticed that verbose exports are considerably faster. Can someone else confirm that?

pe1chl · Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:48 pm

Follow up:
I noticed that verbose exports are considerably faster. Can someone else confirm that?

You are right! /export verbose works correctly, only when verbose is omitted it is slow and generates crashdumps.

mkx · Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:57 pm

I wish MT acknowledged the problem so that not everybody (and their dog) reports it as some great discovery.
It would be even better if the problem was fixed ASAP even though this problem probably doesn't affect normal device operation.

pe1chl · Sun Feb 14, 2021 2:40 pm

I wish MT acknowledged the problem so that not everybody (and their dog) reports it as some great discovery.

Did you know that /export verbose works when /export doesn't? For me that was a great discovery!

CTassisF · Sun Feb 14, 2021 4:39 pm

If you disable watchdog automatic-supout will /export work faster? I guess that might work because the autosupout.rif file won't be generated, but I'm not on v7 right now to be able to test it myself.

mkx · Sun Feb 14, 2021 5:41 pm

Did you know that /export verbose works when /export doesn't? For me that was a great discovery!

No, I did not and I agree it's worth mentioning. However, issue with running export (without any options) had been reported many times so far it's really stale by now and because it did not get fixed it's still reported over and over again. Surely it's not the only issue with current beta release but reports of other issues seem to be almost non-existent right now compared to the amount of complaints about export bug ...

BTW, I'm not running beta ... when I tried a year ago I found out 7.0beta did not work with VLANs configured directly on AR8327 switch chip (configuration went without any error message), I reported the issue on this forum which apparently received zero attention (both by devs and forum members). I'm following betas, however release notes so far did not mention anything about the issue I had (and unlike some others I'm not constantly bitching about it). Some time I'll install then-current beta to see myself if something changed with respect to my issue but I don't know when that'll be. I can see there are bigger and more important issues open in v7 beta, but for me "my" issue is a show stopper.

krzysztof · Sun Feb 14, 2021 6:31 pm

In X86 v7.1 beta 4 doesn't boot. I tried many times on different platforms and always the same. The system freezes while booting.
In X86 v7.1 beta 3 also does not start.
Starts Well In X86 v7.1 beta 2

When will you correct this mistake?
I am waiting impatiently when it boots to x86.

Chupaka · Sun Feb 14, 2021 7:15 pm

I run CHR v7.1 beta 4 in Oracle Cloud. It's x86 and it does work.

pe1chl · Sun Feb 14, 2021 9:15 pm

No, I did not and I agree it's worth mentioning. However, issue with running export (without any options) had been reported many times so far it's really stale by now and because it did not get fixed it's still reported over and over again.

Yes it is a blocking issue for many. However I agree that people should read the release topic before adding their comment. It helps avoiding such duplicate reports.

BTW, I'm not running beta ...

I am not running it on router hardware but only in a CHR to experiment and see which new features appear that could be useful.
By testing early I hope the most obvious bugs will be resolved and missing features are added before I test it on a real router.

ib254254 · Sun Feb 14, 2021 9:31 pm

1350 Mbps Wireless Performance. very stable. It is the highest Wireless Test results Best with MikroTik.

RouterOS v7.1beta4 and wifiwave2 performance test result;

bozko · Sun Feb 14, 2021 11:02 pm

/export verbose

just works!

Why don't you (mods/admins) add this very valuable info in first post?

nehmefadi · Mon Feb 15, 2021 2:39 am

I have just upgrade to v7.1beta4
my rb 1009 reboot every 8 min when i put 100 pppoe users
i have tried the setup on different hardware same issue
thank you

cxcool · Mon Feb 15, 2021 7:51 am

gre tunnel are borken ...down grade to 6.xx works immediately

rpingar · Mon Feb 15, 2021 9:13 am

In X86 v7.1 beta 4 doesn't boot. I tried many times on different platforms and always the same. The system freezes while booting.
In X86 v7.1 beta 3 also does not start.
Starts Well In X86 v7.1 beta 2

When will you correct this mistake?
I am waiting impatiently when it boots to x86.

use cd-iso 7.0beta5 (the last one that works) choosing legacy bios (and setup legacy boot in bios).
Then upgrade using the packages to 7.1beta4.
It was the only way it worked for me.
regards
Ros

karlisi · Mon Feb 15, 2021 11:07 am

In previous betas it was actually completing but after very long time, like 20m.

Actually without 'verbose' it takes exactly 20min. Very interesting.

pe1chl · Mon Feb 15, 2021 11:36 am

gre tunnel are borken ...down grade to 6.xx works immediately

This is known. Disable keepalive at both ends.

pe1chl · Mon Feb 15, 2021 11:38 am

In previous betas it was actually completing but after very long time, like 20m.
Actually without 'verbose' it takes exactly 20min. Very interesting.

This was already explained. It hangs twice, and apparently there is some form of software watchdog that fires after 10 minutes, generates a crashdump, and then the execution of the export continues at the next statement. So after 20 minutes you have your export (probably missing two items, but you won't notice that when they are at default settings) and two crashdumps.

mikegleasonjr · Mon Feb 15, 2021 7:50 pm

Will never test betas again ...

If you can't accept random things broken, then beta testing is not for you. No need to publicly announce that, we'll accept your decision regardless.

From a high level perspective, I think betas are more like alphas. He's kind of right that, while you would expect some things to break in betas, you should still be able to go far and have a relatively stable beta to be able to properly test it. When a big proportion of users can't even run the devices to test them and give constructive feedback, it wastes everyone's time.

I too will never install a beta again for this reason.

Again, it is a matter of opinions. But as a software engineer, I think the betas are too unstable top be properly tested.

mkx · Mon Feb 15, 2021 8:23 pm

I can uderstand everybody who decide not to install beta version, it's their gear, their time, their life. But why bitching about quality of betas (or lack of it)? Either accept the lack of quality of betas and proceed to test (reporting issues etc.) or stop testing and shut up about it.

r00t · Mon Feb 15, 2021 10:02 pm

I think main problem is branch naming Mikrotik is using. Anyone who doesn't know how things go with Mikrotik expect beta to be something that's like 90% stable and in most cases can be used to get cool new features without risking much. That's how it usually is when it comes to testing beta releases of software. So they install it on their router and then get burned by finding half of the things doesn't even work, router crashes, there are inconsistencies with winbox vs. console and all other stuff "we" already know about.

Long time ago I proposed changing naming to something like this:
Beta branch should be called Unstable
Stable should be called Stable candidate
Actual Stable release where stable candidate version would get promoted after a week. Or not... depending on stable candidate version feedback. If problematic, new candidate version would be released and stable would skip the problematic release.

Most admins already use this "wait a week" strategy when it comes to "Stable" versions, but again new Mikrotik users often get burned.

pe1chl · Mon Feb 15, 2021 10:40 pm

I think "stable" should not be used in any release name, because of the confusion between "stability of the system" and "stability of the version".
Stable version can mean "it does not change often" or "it does not crash a lot".
(just like "free" can mean "it does not cost money" or "there is freedom to use it in your own developments")

mikegleasonjr · Mon Feb 15, 2021 10:57 pm

I can uderstand everybody who decide not to install beta version, it's their gear, their time, their life. But why bitching about quality of betas (or lack of it)? Either accept the lack of quality of betas and proceed to test (reporting issues etc.) or stop testing and shut up about it.

I was respectful and verbose in explaining why some users like me feel that way. I will continue in that vein. The reason we're vocal about it is that we want to test the device and help Mikrotik find bugs earlier while enjoying new functionalities.

But you get bit once since you loose a lot of time since it is barely usable. Not even for home use, or lab use. As I said, it is helping no one, and first and foremost it is not helping Mikrotik.

They advertise their beta as a beta, since it has "beta" in the name. A beta is...

Beta software refers to computer software that is undergoing testing and has not yet been officially released. The beta phase follows the alpha phase, but precedes the final version. Some beta software is only made available to a select number of users, while other beta programs are released to the general public.

- https://techterms.com/definition/beta_s ... l%20public.

But in its state, it is more like pre-alpha: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_ ... life_cycle

So I am not mad Mikrotik made this early preview code available to us, I feel cheated when there's a beta out for more than a year with dozens of new versions that is not functioning at its minimum. I lost time. I wouldn't have installed a pre-alpha version. I felt mislead.

Thank you for reading my point of view

r00t · Tue Feb 16, 2021 3:49 am

I think "stable" should not be used in any release name, because of the confusion between "stability of the system" and "stability of the version".

This is a good point. Maybe "Testing/Preview" (currently beta) -> "Release candidate" (for a week) -> "Current/Latest" (stable) would be better naming...

gdanov · Tue Feb 16, 2021 2:29 pm

I can uderstand everybody who decide not to install beta version, it's their gear, their time, their life. But why bitching about quality of betas (or lack of it)? Either accept the lack of quality of betas and proceed to test (reporting issues etc.) or stop testing and shut up about it.

Because MT's betas are not betas, but alphas. In the software world there's long practice of naming releases that is not exactly formal, but the definitions are understood & used pretty uniformly by the industry.

Additionally there is pretty well accepted release process that MT don't seem to be following. For example there are no branch-level release candidates. For this reason even on the stable channel we have to wait for a week to see if the more enthusiastic members got burned and then install based on the feedback.

While I have adapted without "bitchin'" about it, it's fact that MT's release process is ... inaccurate and incomplete to put it politely.

Paternot · Tue Feb 16, 2021 2:50 pm

Although I agree that the Mikrotik's betas are alphas, they are labelled "development". Both at the web page and at the system upgrade on the routers. It isn't even marked "testing".

So, we could argue that the v7 should be 7.1alpha4, instead of 7.1beta4 - and it would be a reasonable argument. But complaining that something put into the "development" branch is broken? That's a little too much.

gtj0 · Tue Feb 16, 2021 6:46 pm

I'm going to wait for RouterOS 7.8675309Beta42 before trying another one. Maybe it'll be out before the universe collapses but I'm not holding out hope.

onnoossendrijver · Tue Feb 16, 2021 7:34 pm

But complaining that something put into the "development" branch is broken? That's a little too much.

I totally agree!
I have devices where 7 is working great, and other devices where I can't even get 7 to boot. I accept that for its a development release.

infabo · Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:58 pm

v7.42 will be the most stable release ever.

infabo · Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:20 pm

Although I agree that the Mikrotik's betas are alphas, they are labelled "development". Both at the web page and at the system upgrade on the routers. It isn't even marked "testing".

So, we could argue that the v7 should be 7.1alpha4, instead of 7.1beta4 - and it would be a reasonable argument. But complaining that something put into the "development" branch is broken? That's a little too much.

What if someone sells devices running development software. Mind blown.

Paternot · Wed Feb 17, 2021 2:46 am

Although I agree that the Mikrotik's betas are alphas, they are labelled "development". Both at the web page and at the system upgrade on the routers. It isn't even marked "testing".

So, we could argue that the v7 should be 7.1alpha4, instead of 7.1beta4 - and it would be a reasonable argument. But complaining that something put into the "development" branch is broken? That's a little too much.
What if someone sells devices running development software. Mind blown.

Ah, yes. THAT was a very good question. They shouldn't have done it, period.

onnoossendrijver · Wed Feb 17, 2021 9:47 am

What if someone sells devices running development software. Mind blown.

That is not winning prizes... But the big boys do the same. They even don't call it beta or development..
First Cisco Nexus switches: Total crap. First Juniper SRX: the same. Checkpoint modular firewalls: after all these years still major bugs.

gdanov · Wed Feb 17, 2021 11:34 am

Although I agree that the Mikrotik's betas are alphas, they are labelled "development". Both at the web page and at the system upgrade on the routers. It isn't even marked "testing".

So, we could argue that the v7 should be 7.1alpha4, instead of 7.1beta4 - and it would be a reasonable argument. But complaining that something put into the "development" branch is broken? That's a little too much.

I'd speculate they shared the "beta" out of desperation — to demonstrate progress and to get some testing out in the wild for free. Just outsourcing the testing to their users is worth enough for them to tolerate much more bitchin' than you see in this thread.

Apart from the typical entitled whining there's also build-up of frustration in the long-term users. You see it often. I think MT is doing very poor job socializing their users with the new release. There's one moderator trying to cover all bases (respect to him) but this can't solve all problems.

Judging from my experience in the SW industry and the clues around this "beta" MT are in trouble w.r.t. software delivery and playing catch-up. While complaining about one's pet feature won't solve this and are annoying, complaints about overall software quality and delivery process should be encouraged.

gdanov · Wed Feb 17, 2021 11:36 am

What if someone sells devices running development software. Mind blown.
That is not winning prizes... But the big boys do the same. They even don't call it beta or development..
First Cisco Nexus switches: Total crap. First Juniper SRX: the same. Checkpoint modular firewalls: after all these years still major bugs.

MT is not big boy and this is why I love it. The business model of the big players puts a cushion of consultants or IT support that have to eat their s**t.

Jotne · Wed Feb 17, 2021 12:57 pm

Maybe this discussion should be in another thread?

pe1chl · Wed Feb 17, 2021 12:58 pm

I'd speculate they shared the "beta" out of desperation — to demonstrate progress and to get some testing out in the wild for free.

Well, we have been promised the version 7 that would solve all our problems for many years.
Many feature additions and bugfixes were made to version 6 in the meantime, but version 7 would bring the holy grail of an entire new routing engine and better implementation of BGP (mainly interesting for those that do BGP to internet, for me on a closed network BGP works OK).

Version 6 has made a lot of patches in the Linux kernel and that made them effectively locked to the same kernel version over time.
At some point, the new version 7 became tied to the use of a new version of the Linux kernel. There could be no kernel update within version 6.

That, at some point, made it necessary to force version 7 into the user community because the hardware department had designed new hardware that really required a new kernel.
As this meant the new version had to be shared anyway, it also was the start of the "beta" testing of version 7's other features.

But it looks like the porting of the previous Linux kernel patches is not complete yet. Likely a lot of work.
(e.g. MPLS is not yet present in v7, and some things that required kernel patches, like GRE tunnel keepalives, no longer work)

The rate at which v7 betas now appear (and their release notes) does not really seem to indicate that e.g. a team of 2-3 developers is now working fulltime on this.
Maybe they try to, but are constantly distracted by important bugfixes for the users of the new hardware, or in the old version 6.

memelchenkov · Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:06 pm

As an experienced software developer, I confirm that there is definitely lack of developers who are working on it! QA team is also understaffed. Hardly the owners read this forum, so it's just a cry in the blank.

Paternot · Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:46 pm

As an experienced software developer, I confirm that there is definitely lack of developers who are working on it! QA team is also understaffed. Hardly the owners read this forum, so it's just a cry in the blank.

The idea is to present the community feelings and suggestions. With a little bit of luck, the developers want to solve this internally, but lack the clout to make it happen. As time passes, and as complaints get pile up on this forum, it may come a time when this body of messages could be presented as evidence of "customers are complaining".

Yes, yes, I know: fat chance. One can always dream. :D

memelchenkov · Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:55 pm

Unfortunately, developers in medium/large companies do not decide anything. Even Project Manager can't do much. Only Product Owner / Sales Managers / General Managers decide. They already decided to sell product with alpha-quality firmware, telling everyone it's a release. What do you expect from them? It's not 70's - 80's, when developers were kings. Now developers are "human resources".

infabo · Wed Feb 17, 2021 3:00 pm

Juding by the changelog length I would say that they put by far more effort into the 6.x than into 7.x. That's okay as 7.x is just in development and nobody should use it for production purposes anyway. People with devices like Chateau12 are just trapped. At least they made Chateau12 useable for simple home-usage again with 7.1 beta3. But the uncertain feeling remains: what will be broken in the next beta? :D

fflo · Thu Feb 18, 2021 6:23 am

Looks like export still hangs...

Is there a reason why this bug has not been fixed?
Working with the Terminal regularly this keeps me from testing the latest v7.1 betas. Does there exist a workaround?

infabo · Thu Feb 18, 2021 9:17 am

Looks like export still hangs...
Is there a reason why this bug has not been fixed?
Working with the Terminal regularly this keeps me from testing the latest v7.1 betas. Does there exist a workaround?

Yes, there is. As mentioned before in this thread, "/export verbose" works. Without verbose argument it hangs and you can see a suppout.rif appearing in the files list.

andyc829 · Sat Feb 20, 2021 11:14 am

I am trying to get wireguard set up but the router does not even attempt to handshake with the server. I've not had any experience of anything in the development channel prior to Beta 4.

angboontiong · Sun Feb 21, 2021 7:01 pm

This version gmail got issue when i use it to send my backup file.

lcohen999 · Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:25 pm

However now after less than 1h all my devices disconnect and can’t connect anymore and reboot is needed.
There is absolutely nothing in logs which would indicate any problem. Even no unsuccessful authentication or anything. WiFi however is still advertised by the ap, just can’t join.
This seems to be happening regardless of amount of devices connected to WiFi (tested 2-15).

Thank you for this report. The cause of this issue has been identified and will be fixed in the next release.
In the meantime, a workaround for it would be connecting no more than 1 WPA3 authenticated client device per interface (you can create additional virtual APs to connect more than 1 WPA3 client to the same radio).

I seem to have worked around this on my Audience by using the back-haul wifi as the 5GHz. Given most of my stuff is 5GHz anyway, this seems to have worked around the issue (plus a nightly reboot for good measure).

updog · Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:49 pm

I'm running the beta on my RB493G and the queue tree stats are not logging total packets, only total bytes and packets dropped. I've tried with queue types cake, fq_codel, and pfifo.

 6   name="HOME_UPLOAD" parent=STANDARD_UPLOAD packet-mark=HOME_UPLOAD_MARK rate=0 packet-rate=0 queued-bytes=0 
     queued-packets=0 bytes=2475679 packets=0 dropped=0 

 7   name="HOME_DOWNLOAD" parent=STANDARD_DOWNLOAD packet-mark=HOME_DOWNLOAD_MARK rate=320 packet-rate=0 
     queued-bytes=0 queued-packets=0 bytes=71284787 packets=0 dropped=0

infabo · Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:28 am

is it possible to get logs before the kernel panic reboot?

mkx · Wed Feb 24, 2021 11:05 am

Only if logs are sent elsewhere (not to memory), such as disk or network syslog server.

pe1chl · Wed Feb 24, 2021 11:20 am

It can also help to connect the serial port (if there is any) to another system and run a terminal program there to capture what is sent to serial.

Uqbar · Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:08 pm

Documentation of the REST API https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/REST+API

Will we then have "HTTPS by default" web UI as well?

Chupaka · Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:13 pm

You have to provide a certificate, so looks like it won't be default.

Uqbar · Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:23 pm

You have to provide a certificate, so looks like it won't be default.

Why not using the same for REST-API?
If the customer wants to use her own, then they will install and use it.

pe1chl · Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:32 pm

There is no such thing as a "default certificate" that will be usable with modern browsers.
You need to provide a certificate or it will be marked as unsafe. Nothing you can do about that.

Uqbar · Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:49 pm

There is no such thing as a "default certificate" that will be usable with modern browsers.
You need to provide a certificate or it will be marked as unsafe. Nothing you can do about that.

So rest api are HTTP by default?
I understood from previous posts that is was HTTPS...

Chupaka · Wed Feb 24, 2021 11:33 pm

REST API works only over https. You need to install a certificate to use https (and REST API).

mducharme · Thu Feb 25, 2021 9:18 am

Some of the new features from 6.48.x are not yet present in 7.1beta4 (ex. LLDP-MED Voice VLAN) - any idea when those will be available?

Uqbar · Thu Feb 25, 2021 9:32 am

Some of the new features from 6.48.x are not yet present in 6.47beta4 (ex. LLDP-MED Voice VLAN) - any idea when those will be available?

This thread is for v7betas, not v6!

mducharme · Fri Feb 26, 2021 9:24 am

This thread is for v7betas, not v6!

Yes, sorry, I meant the following:

Some of the new features from 6.48.x are not yet present in 7.1beta4 (ex. LLDP-MED Voice VLAN) - any idea when those will be available?

mkx · Fri Feb 26, 2021 8:32 pm

Betas in v7 line come out quite infrequently. I expect most of new functionality in v6 to land in v7 betas soon. However in v7 quite a few old functions from v6 are missing and I guess development in v6 and in v7 is not parallel at the moment.

G00dm4n · Sun Feb 28, 2021 3:31 am

Hi Guys,

I do not know if I do something wrong but I cant get to graphs & webfig (even this) on my CCR1009 after upgraded to 7.1b4.
Does any one have similar issues?

anuser · Mon Mar 01, 2021 10:36 pm

I would like to request a separate wifiwave2 package for IPQ4018/IPQ4019 devices with 16MB of ROM. With such a package a lot of more users could test this it, send feedbacks and bug reports which will result in an earlier available bugfree stable release.

doneware · Wed Mar 03, 2021 12:14 am

tested iperf3 throughput wifiwave2 on an audience configured as a simple AP, from blank config - using the 4x4 radio.
the other end was an iMac with 3x3 BCM94331CD.
max speed topped around 580ish Mbps.
this seemed to be strange, so i checked stats. found out that core2 is getting all the fun as shown on the output below.

nannou9 · Wed Mar 03, 2021 12:38 am

tested iperf3 throughput wifiwave2 on an audience configured as a simple AP, from blank config - using the 4x4 radio.
the other end was an iMac with 3x3 BCM94331CD.
max speed topped around 580ish Mbps.
this seemed to be strange, so i checked stats. found out that core2 is getting all the fun as shown on the output below.

Exactly same experience here mate with audience, except with 80+80mhz channels I was getting up to ~630mbit in iperf3 while still engaging only two cores. I was hoping maybe this is because I was using two chains devices, but after testing two devices each with 2 chains, it was still maxing only two cores.
There are also others testing on rb4011 also with QCA9984 and likewise getting similar results while rb4011 has twice as much cpu power per core as audience.
So hopefully software issue.
I have reported this problem already with 7.1b3. But no improvement so far in b4.
Let’s hope next beta in April.

doneware · Wed Mar 03, 2021 12:45 am

max speed topped around 580ish Mbps.

switched over to the 2x2 radio to see whether it will be better. as previously, bridge is in fast-path mode. config is dumb as it can be.
still performing around 560Mbps. the client was the same, an iMac with 3x3 ac broadcom wifi.
don't get me wrong, it is nice, but i'd expected some sort of difference between the 4x4 and the 2x2 result, if it is a wireless related bottleneck.
but as before, i see one core running on full speed, while the others don't do much.

[admin@MikroTik] /interface/wifiwave2> /system/resource/monitor 
          cpu-used: 27%
  cpu-used-per-cpu: 10%,0%,0%,98%
       free-memory: 144936KiB
-- [Q quit|D dump|C-z pause]

now it's core3

[admin@MikroTik] /interface/wifiwave2> /tool/profile cpu=all 
Columns: NAME, CPU, USAGE
  NAME          C  USAGE
  ethernet      0  2%   
  networking    0  7.5% 
  management    0  0%   
  profiling     0  0%   
  bridging      0  1%   
  unclassified  0  1%   
  cpu0             11.5%
  ethernet      1  0%   
  networking    1  1.5% 
  logging       1  0%   
  management    1  0%   
  profiling     1  0%   
  bridging      1  0%   
  unclassified  1  1.5% 
  cpu1             3%   
  ethernet      2  0.5% 
  console       2  0.5% 
  ssh           2  0%   
  networking    2  3.5% 
  logging       2  0%   
  management    2  0.5% 
  profiling     2  0%   
  bridging      2  0%   
  unclassified  2  1%   
  cpu2             6%   
  ethernet      3  4%   
  console       3  0%   
  networking    3  67.5%
  management    3  0%   
  profiling     3  0.5% 
  bridging      3  10%  
  unclassified  3  8%   
  cpu3             90%

mkx · Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:42 am

I'd say it's the issue with linux kernel and drivers and as such not very likely to go away in ROS. I checked on my ubuntu desktop, running linux kernel 5.4 on CPU with 4 cores (and HT). Most peripherials (e.g. built-in USB hub, ethernet NIC, sound card, ...) see their interrupts served by same logical CPU (core/thread) every single time, only some have part of work done by second logical CPU (AHCI - SATA driver and ATI GPU), none have work evenly spread over all available logical CPUs (not even over physical cores). And that includes ethernet NIC.
Indeed in a multi-purpose PC with high-performance CPU this is not a huge problem, but in devices with relatively weak CPUs (and ARM CPUs are not as fast as intel/AMD parts with similar clock speed) and fast pheripherials (multi-gig ethernet NIC or 802.11ac wireless) this is and will be a problem.

So I guess CPU will quite likely remain bottleneck for wireless on mikrotik devices unless somebody modifies drivers to spread the load between all CPU cores (which is likely a hard thing due to timing issues or else all drivers would be doing it already).
Yes, remain, some devices with even with only 802.11n radio (e.g. RB951G) are hitting CPU wall when pushed to the upper limits of WiFi and that can be seen as better throughput in uplink (device -> AP) than in downlink (Tx is slightly harder on device because encryption and calculation of FEC is heavier on CPU than decryption and verification of FEC).

infabo · Wed Mar 03, 2021 3:14 pm

I currently run 7.1beta5 and have the following issue:

I can't get over 24h uptime anymore, the Chateau LTE12 will most probably die before it reaches 12h of uptime.

wifi disappears and no connection via LAN. No DHCP response and even with manual IP I am not able to for example connect via SSH to the router anymore. The leds are still blinking but this device is actuall dead like bread.

Unplug, plug back and another few hours working until - repeat repeat repeat.

The last device that was so unstable and crashed a few times each day was my PC back then running Windows 95 or 98SE....

When a device crashes so hard, it is not even possible to create a supout.rif or something useful. I even store the logs on a USB-device - but they don't contain anything of interest about the crash.

And the funny part:

Running 7.2beta4 my chateau12 rebooted quite 1 or 2 times a day with "kernel panic" and a generated autosuport.rif. I provided every autosupout.rif to Mikrotik support. Answer: "can you try this beta5 - it may solve the issue".

Yeah thanks, the kernel panic reboot issue is gone. Now the device locks up and needs a re-plug to get it online again. Quite an "improvement".

Jotne · Wed Mar 03, 2021 3:47 pm

I currently run 7.1beta5 and have the following issue:

Do you have a not yet released version from MT?

doneware · Wed Mar 03, 2021 3:57 pm

So I guess CPU will quite likely remain bottleneck for wireless on mikrotik devices unless somebody modifies drivers to spread the load between all CPU cores (which is likely a hard thing due to timing issues or else all drivers would be doing it already).

well, ok. but i still can't see how some were able to reach near gigabit speeds with the same sw/hw when it is a per core scalability issue.
i know, i did not use 160MHz channels (because none of my clients support this) but it's clearly not something that actually limits stuff here.
i don't want to argue about whether it's necessary to have that much throughput, or is it something that the general public could potentially use for anything else than speedtest.

Cablenut9 · Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:09 pm

i don't want to argue about whether it's necessary to have that much throughput, or is it something that the general public could potentially use for anything else than speedtest.

I often do stuff that requires a gigabit internet connection, and getting even close to that with wireless would be great.

pe1chl · Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:46 pm

I often do stuff that requires a gigabit internet connection, and getting even close to that with wireless would be great.

When you want that kind of throughput, MikroTik wireless is not the best choice for you (except maybe the 60 GHz products).
Other manufacturers are far ahead in this regard.

ib254254 · Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:02 pm

2. generation Wireless Driver 80MHz TCP and udp traffic test;

PackElend · Thu Mar 04, 2021 12:01 pm

reading through all the V7.x beta topic, what have been ongoing for months, is there any realistic chance that stable is reachable in the not too far feature?

Jotne · Thu Mar 04, 2021 12:11 pm

You will not get any answer on this, but since they have sold product that can not use version 6.x, only 7.x, it should not be to may years to wait.

PackElend · Thu Mar 04, 2021 12:49 pm

it should not be to may years to wait.

at least we are below decades :)

infabo · Thu Mar 04, 2021 1:53 pm

reading through all the V7.x beta topic, what have been ongoing for months, is there any realistic chance that stable is reachable in the not too far feature?

IMHO at least not in 2021. See https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... col+Status

Cablenut9 · Thu Mar 04, 2021 5:25 pm

See https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... col+Status

A lot of the things there are now available on beta4, so there's hope. If the next version comes out every 2 months, then we might have a chance of seeing a "stable" version by the end of this year.

usern · Thu Mar 04, 2021 7:12 pm

You will not get any answer on this, but since they have sold product that can not use version 6.x, only 7.x, it should not be to may years to wait.

Which product?

memelchenkov · Thu Mar 04, 2021 7:38 pm

Which product?

https://mikrotik.com/product/chateau_lte12
Still not mentioned that it has alpha/beta quality firmware.

infabo · Thu Mar 04, 2021 7:48 pm

Which product?
https://mikrotik.com/product/chateau_lte12
Still not mentioned that it has alpha/beta quality firmware.

c'mon! Everybody knows that you need to check Mikrotik forums and download-pages before you buy a Mikrotik product! Always these naive people that buy hardware and assume there is a stable software available....

memelchenkov · Thu Mar 04, 2021 8:25 pm

c'mon! Everybody knows that you need to check Mikrotik forums and download-pages before you buy a Mikrotik product! Always these naive people that buy hardware and assume there is a stable software available....

Not everybody, but only those who work with MikroTik long and a lot—network administrators with broad experience with MikroTik products. Chateau is a consumer-grade product, and you calling consumers naive people. Reminds me Russian prison concept "loh", when every customer is a "loh" by default if not know something specific and hidden/not spend thousands of hours before buying. It's called "latent defect" and of course serves as a reason for returning the goods.

Jotne · Thu Mar 04, 2021 9:30 pm

Still not mentioned that it has alpha/beta quality firmware.

Nearly all electronic product I do buy, I need to upgrade before use, but this product does not have any released firmware and that is not very good.

infabo · Thu Mar 04, 2021 11:22 pm

sorry for beeing sarcastic. I am in the Chateau12 camp too. Struggling since 11/2020 with this device. But I dont give up hope.

memelchenkov · Thu Mar 04, 2021 11:40 pm

sorry for beeing sarcastic. I am in the Chateau12 camp too. Struggling since 11/2020 with this device. But I dont give up hope.

Oh yeah! The same. Recently I found the root of my problems of wrong traffic routing and IPsec issues, which I experienced for 2 months with no resolution from support's side. Totally broken bridge's "Use IP Firewall" mode. The support already informed, but fixes are not there yet.

mducharme · Fri Mar 05, 2021 2:01 am

Oh yeah! The same. Recently I found the root of my problems of wrong traffic routing and IPsec issues, which I experienced for 2 months with no resolution from support's side. Totally broken bridge's "Use IP Firewall" mode. The support already informed, but fixes are not there yet.

Depending on how complicated the things you are doing are, you might be able to use bridge filter rules instead of the "Use IP Firewall".

memelchenkov · Fri Mar 05, 2021 9:00 am

Depending on how complicated the things you are doing are, you might be able to use bridge filter rules instead of the "Use IP Firewall".

Wi-Fi interfaces are on the same bridge with outbound interfaces and IPsec tunnel, and I packet-mark traffic from Wi-Fi for NATing. I already tried Bridge Filters—there are funny bugs too, but most important I can’t use packet marks, it just not works (despite of “Use IP Firewall” setting).

miguelangelfelix · Fri Mar 05, 2021 12:54 pm

So... Where can i set rpki filter ROAs validation??? I can't find "match-rpki" filter option i could use on v7.1beta3 RouterOS Version

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/

.. -- go up to filter
add -- Create a new item
disable -- Disable items
edit --
enable -- Enable items
export -- Print or save an export script that can be used to restore configuration
find -- Find items by value
get -- Gets value of item's property
move -- Change order of items
print -- Print values of item properties
remove -- Remove item
reset --
set -- Change item properties

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add
Creates new item with specified property values.

chain --
copy-from -- Item number
disabled -- Defines whether item is ignored or used
place-before -- Item number
rule --

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add rule=

Rule -- string value

[admin@MikroTik] > routing/filter/rule/add rule=
Bgp filters don't work as per support email reply.

Thanks, im really sure about what you say too, I could confirm thar by myself, just I cant understand how possible is that this function does not work on a newer version it was good on last one.

else there is a note for this new beta version changelog about "routing rules improvements" and ... with all my respect I really would like to know what are them??...

I was really excited waiting for new version to test this function and results are not as good as i was waiting for... :(

schemadyn · Sat Mar 06, 2021 1:10 pm

Upgraded our CCR1009-7G-1C-1S+ to v7.1beta4 only to be able to use fq_codel

We apparently have 70/70 dedicated fiber connection from our ISP. but before using fq_codel we had untolerable bufferbloat.

After implementing the following simple queue we are getting A/A+ in bufferbloat http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/67588737 (in cable) but we are getting C/D http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/67588757 (in WiFi)

Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid; D - dynamic
name="queue2" target=ether1 - BDCOM Fiber parent=none packet-marks="" priority=8/8
queue=fq_codel-default/fq_codel-default limit-at=0/20M max-limit=65M/20M burst-limit=0/0
burst-threshold=0/0 burst-time=0s/0s bucket-size=0.1/0.1 total-queue=fq_codel-default

Now, the question to the respected Mikrotik community here is that, how can we stabilize both LAN and WiFi connections. Our WiFi router avg. dBm is -44~-46 using channel 6 in 20 MHz and only 2.4 GHz mode. Please feel free to let me know if further information is needed.

Thanks in advance.

workino · Mon Mar 08, 2021 12:21 pm

In this new version, POE is not correctly recognizing the load attached to the port letting it down.
The easy resolution is to force to on in the configuration.

Routerboard: hEX S
Load: Unifi-ac-lite

Regards

doneware · Tue Mar 09, 2021 11:53 pm

When you want that kind of throughput, MikroTik wireless is not the best choice for you (except maybe the 60 GHz products).
Other manufacturers are far ahead in this regard.

wigig on MCS8 delivers a solid 1.9Gbps performance with the wAP60G. 950Mbps up/down simultaneously, routed from ethernet to the radio.
even with the built in traffic generator i was able to get the throughput over 1.1Gbps over the 60Gig link between 2 radios.

btw, sorry i had to do it. i unpacked the new wifiwave2 package, and i found some 'new friends' there:

IPQ4019 - hap ac3, audience
QCA9984 - rb4011, audience
QCA9888 - ?? dual band 2x2 ac on 5GHz
IPQ6018 - quad core A53 @ 1.0 GHz, 2x2 ax 2.4GHz, 2x2 ax 5GHz
IPQ8074/IPQ8074v2 - quad core A53 @ 2.2 Ghz, 4x4 + 2x2 ax 5Ghz, 2x2 ax 2.4GHz

so i am not particularly concerned about the future throughput.

pe1chl · Wed Mar 10, 2021 12:24 am

IPQ4019 - hap ac3, audience
QCA9984 - rb4011, audience
QCA9888 - ?? dual band 2x2 ac on 5GHz
IPQ6018 - quad core A53 @ 1.0 GHz, 2x2 ax 2.4GHz, 2x2 ax 5GHz
IPQ8074/IPQ8074v2 - quad core A53 @ 2.2 Ghz, 4x4 + 2x2 ax 5Ghz, 2x2 ax 2.4GHz

so i am not particularly concerned about the future throughput.

Yes hopefully in the future it will be better. But it has been like this for a bit too long.
When I had to select a new WiFi system at work (exactly 2 years ago now) the best APs from MikroTik really could not compete with other manufacturers.
Wifi wave2 is only coming now in beta versions, while we now have it running for 2 years already (4x4). By the time MikroTik has it in stable version, others have again moved on 2 more steps.
No idea why this happened. Was it sticking to an old Linux kernel for too long, was it sticking to in-house developed WiFi drivers, was it using too little Flash memory and thus no room for large drivers, ...
Even low-budget APs for the nontechnical family user are way ahead now in WiFi performance.

infabo · Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:11 am

Even low-budget APs for the nontechnical family user are way ahead now in WiFi performance.

AMEN

doneware · Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:19 am

Was it sticking to an old Linux kernel for too long, was it sticking to in-house developed WiFi drivers, was it using too little Flash memory and thus no room for large drivers, ...
Even low-budget APs for the nontechnical family user are way ahead now in WiFi performance.

this is true. but i also cannot unsee how limited the current wifiwave2 knobs and levers are.
compared to the control one could have over wifi, this is overly simplified. i guess the truth is somewhere between the two extremes.

i think with wifi6 standard new features you won't need old, proprietary tweaks anymore, esp not in the home/office. but a working CAPSMAN with wifiwave2 is essential.

how to fix the current wifiwave2 package to run on some boxes with less flash:
the memory thing can be handled somehow, the current driver has "low_mem_system=0", so in theory it could work with less RAM.
flash is an issue, but if i throw away all new hw and only keep the IPQ4019, things might fit on a minimal setup with system, security, wifiwave2, maybe even on a 16MB flash.
but as far i know i can't pack them back together in a way that routerOS accepts them (cannot sign the NPK file)

mkx · Wed Mar 10, 2021 11:15 am

how to fix the current wifiwave2 package to run on some boxes with less flash:
...
flash is an issue, but if i throw away all new hw and only keep the IPQ4019, things might fit on a minimal setup with system, security, wifiwave2, maybe even on a 16MB flash.

I certainly hope that if they manage to squeeze things to 16MB flash, eventually also IPQ4018 (e.g. hAP ac2, cAP ac, wAP ac, etc.) will be supported. If I understand quick specs correctly, then regarding wireless IPQ4018 and IPQ4019 are pretty much the same.

infabo · Wed Mar 10, 2021 11:23 pm

OMG, MikroTik just launched a Chateau 5G Edition!!!!

But...wait...ROS v7? Gonna grab some popcorn so I am ready for the first couple of people rushing into here and complaining about "that unstable 500€ 5g router they just bought" 🤣🤣🤣🤣

rooted · Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:02 am

Should see it soon.

mikrotikedoff · Thu Mar 11, 2021 7:27 pm

"Chateau is a consumer-grade product"

While it's a device intended for home use Mikrotik is also not an "off the shelf" product line intended to be directly purchased and administered by a typical home user. The software requires a working knowledge of IP to be administered safely and correctly and doesn't come pre-configured with either safe security settings or plug and play operation. Mikrotik devices have always been intended to be purchased and administrated by ISP and issued out or resold to end users. Even the sales material alludes to such

"Chateau can be customized: you can choose a variety of labels, we can print your branding, if necessary. And there is another great feature – you can use TR-069 technology to create a custom remote client management option. You can choose how much control your clients need and which features of the highly versatile RouterOS they get to use. Some operators use this to allow users to configure the router via the same web-page they use to pay bills, others restrict novice users from meddling with the settings to provide better browsing experience in the long run."

I wish the front page read "Mikrotik: Your friendly ISP supply center" I feel bad for end users that wind up in these situations and wish there was more that could be done to help them.

infabo · Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:41 pm

I like this video: https://youtu.be/kdT-tlzRZI4?t=134

> Our experience with the largest mobile carrier in Latvia shows, that a regular Chateau without any attachments is enough to improve the signal in most places.

Wait - what!? The largest mobile carrier in Latvia uses the Chateau in Production already?????? Holy batman! My Chateau reboots once or twice a day because "of kernel panic". I can't imagine a serious ISP shipping this device to a regular end-user with all that issues that existed in for example 7.1beta2 back then.

uldise · Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:18 pm

The largest mobile carrier in Latvia uses the Chateau in Production already?????? Holy batman!

Yes, they do, see here: https://www.lmt.lv/en/internets-majai-en

nithinkumar2000 · Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:52 pm

When can we expect Stable Release of ROS v7?????

infabo · Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:35 pm

The largest mobile carrier in Latvia uses the Chateau in Production already?????? Holy batman!
Yes, they do, see here: https://www.lmt.lv/en/internets-majai-en

Respect!

Oversite · Sat Mar 13, 2021 8:14 pm

I am trying to get wireguard set up but the router does not even attempt to handshake with the server. I've not had any experience of anything in the development channel prior to Beta 4.

I have had trouble setting the port with winbox, i needed to set endpoint-port=13231 for the peer in terminal.