From the changelog:

*) added support for interface routes (without nexthop);

Yeeaaha!
Thanks for finally listening

Now I will have to setup a test-bed to check this...

Best regards,
Christian Meis

Woooo hoooo! I will be checking this out later on our test router as well once I upgrade.

Sam

I've loaded 3.0b6 and can't find the option to specify the interface in WinBox. It looks like the CLI will let you add it however. More testing coming shortly.

PS - Does winbox crash/disappear when clicking 'New Terminal' on anyone elses ?

Sam

Did you work out how to configure this?

yes, just set the gateway to an interface name instead of an IP. I dont think yo ucan use winbox for that though.

Sam

Excellent, thanks Sam - that works....

In my case here, I have two pppoe connections to the same isp... at the isp end. One of the connections is a 256k connection, is it commited, where the other is a 2m connection, that is contented bandwith.

Currently on one of the MicroTik boxes that connects to the isp we have the add default route ticked... (under PPPoE settings)

Once connected it adds the following route:
Destination = 0.0.0.0/0 Gateway=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx

Basically we want to be able to have both connections, running, on the same device. Then mark packets to be sent via different interfaces, our important data (voip etc) will go out via the smaller link, where as general downloads etc will go out via the larger contended link.

The links will each have there own public IP address assigned, and will use the same gateway....

Sound doable? or am I pushing up hill!?

PS: Sam, correct, it can only be done via a terminal session.

I've tried creating a route by specifying an interface name instead of an IP address with 3.0RC3 via the CLI. No joy. Would you be kind enough to post an example?

Winbox now has the field, but it isn't editable - text box control missing.

William