where did you buy your device? i couldn't find itI just received my RB5009, and it comes with 7.0.5 RouterOS.. when it checks for upate, it says latest stable version is 6.48.4 !
+1Is there any support for L3 HW offload on RB5009? And, especially, NAT?
...can be powered in 3 different ways
It's not saying anything about redundancy.
When the RB5009 ether1 WAN port is "advertising" 2.5G full duplex and is connected to a 2.5G ISP modem with gigabit speed service, the data transfer speed drops by about half to 300 to 400 Mb/s.
have you checked this with latest V7.1 ??+1Is there any support for L3 HW offload on RB5009? And, especially, NAT?
the question is how this was left behind? also the RB5009 have no way to use it's switch with different vlans without completely loosing fasttrack support.
When the RB5009 ether1 WAN port is "advertising" 2.5G full duplex and is connected to a 2.5G ISP modem with gigabit speed service, the data transfer speed drops by about half to 300 to 400 Mb/s.
Probably some interaction between bufering in the WAN device (which has to smooth bursts exceeding 1 Gbps). If flow control is disabled on RB5009, then WAN device can only drop some frames and dropping frames affects TCP throughput a lot. Try to enable flow control on WAN port to see if it helps.
Probably some interaction between bufering in the WAN device (which has to smooth bursts exceeding 1 Gbps). If flow control is disabled on RB5009, then WAN device can only drop some frames and dropping frames affects TCP throughput a lot. Try to enable flow control on WAN port to see if it helps.
Thank you for the suggestion. I gave it a try but it did not have any affect. I still have slow speeds when ether1 is set to 2.5G. I think I will order an SFP+ module to see if it can provide proper performance on the cage port.
I have a very similar problem, but in my scenario, I have 4 VLAN's and I'm using 2.5G port as an access port for LAN.I just migrated to a new RB5009UG+S+ from an RB3011. I have encountered a download speed performance issue that is easy to duplicate. When the RB5009 ether1 WAN port is "advertising" 2.5G full duplex and is connected to a 2.5G ISP modem with gigabit speed service, the data transfer speed drops by about half to 300 to 400 Mb/s. If I remove advertising 2.5G and only advertise 1.0G full duplex, the transfer rate increases to 650 to 850 Mb/s. CPU load runs about 1 to 10% in all scenarios. Bypassing the RB5009 and connecting directly to the ISP modem yields a fairly consistent 850Mb/s. There are no other switches, routers, or devices in the chain. The ISP modem is a Motorola MB8611.
I am running firmware 7.1. Basically a factory reset configuration with a fast-track firewall setting.
One of the reasons I opted for the RB5009 is the 2.5G WAN port. I didn't want to use an SFP+ module until I had a much faster Internet service speed available in my area.
+1, seeing very similar results, see below.I just migrated to a new RB5009UG+S+ from an RB3011. I have encountered a download speed performance issue that is easy to duplicate. When the RB5009 ether1 WAN port is "advertising" 2.5G full duplex and is connected to a 2.5G ISP modem with gigabit speed service, the data transfer speed drops by about half to 300 to 400 Mb/s. If I remove advertising 2.5G and only advertise 1.0G full duplex, the transfer rate increases to 650 to 850 Mb/s. CPU load runs about 1 to 10% in all scenarios. Bypassing the RB5009 and connecting directly to the ISP modem yields a fairly consistent 850Mb/s. There are no other switches, routers, or devices in the chain. The ISP modem is a Motorola MB8611.
I am running firmware 7.1. Basically a factory reset configuration with a fast-track firewall setting.
One of the reasons I opted for the RB5009 is the 2.5G WAN port. I didn't want to use an SFP+ module until I had a much faster Internet service speed available in my area.
I'll be interested to see your results, I've got my popcorn ready...
Probably some interaction between bufering in the WAN device (which has to smooth bursts exceeding 1 Gbps). If flow control is disabled on RB5009, then WAN device can only drop some frames and dropping frames affects TCP throughput a lot. Try to enable flow control on WAN port to see if it helps.
Thank you for the suggestion. I gave it a try but it did not have any affect. I still have slow speeds when ether1 is set to 2.5G. I think I will order an SFP+ module to see if it can provide proper performance on the cage port.
Welcome to the RB5009 unfinished product club.Have 7.1 version installed. Still no hardware offloding option.
Try this:+1, seeing very similar results, see below.I just migrated to a new RB5009UG+S+ from an RB3011. I have encountered a download speed performance issue that is easy to duplicate. When the RB5009 ether1 WAN port is "advertising" 2.5G full duplex and is connected to a 2.5G ISP modem with gigabit speed service, the data transfer speed drops by about half to 300 to 400 Mb/s. If I remove advertising 2.5G and only advertise 1.0G full duplex, the transfer rate increases to 650 to 850 Mb/s. CPU load runs about 1 to 10% in all scenarios. Bypassing the RB5009 and connecting directly to the ISP modem yields a fairly consistent 850Mb/s. There are no other switches, routers, or devices in the chain. The ISP modem is a Motorola MB8611.
I am running firmware 7.1. Basically a factory reset configuration with a fast-track firewall setting.
One of the reasons I opted for the RB5009 is the 2.5G WAN port. I didn't want to use an SFP+ module until I had a much faster Internet service speed available in my area.
My service plan is 1GB/40Mb. Prior to discovering your post, I experimented with numerous other tweaks without much difference in results, from adding/removing fastrack to adjusting firewall rules. When running speed tests I noticed CPU was 60-80% with 2.5G advertising included, where as without I'm seeing 10-16%.
FYI, I recently migrated from Edgerouter POE5, where I was consistently getting 800-900+ Mb/s. Regardless of these results I still very much like the RB5009, it's got much more horsepower and performance feels snappier. Given this router is still really new, I'm optimistic that future fw will improve performance and make it even better/consistent experience. I'm hoping L3 offload is coming soon...
Try this:
Disable interface. Remove 2.5G full from Advertise options. Enable interface. It should work OK for 1G.
Now, disable it again and add 2.5G full in Advertise. Enable interface. It should negotiate 2.5G, and wonder if it make it faster.
I'll be interested to see your results, I've got my popcorn ready...
Thank you for the suggestion. I gave it a try but it did not have any affect. I still have slow speeds when ether1 is set to 2.5G. I think I will order an SFP+ module to see if it can provide proper performance on the cage port.
Have you had a chance to test S+RJ10 ?removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
Have you had a chance to test S+RJ10 ?
Just received a MikroTik S+RJ10 (RJ45) today. I'll get it installed and configured and post the results.
Have you had a chance to test S+RJ10 ?
Have you had a chance to test S+RJ10 ?
Well, bad news. I installed the S+RJ10 and I'm still getting the slower speeds. Behavior is exactly the same as using the Ether1 port. Also, it seems I cannot get the SFP+ module to negotiate at any speed other than 2.5G. I've tried to only advertise it as 1000M, but it makes no difference. It will still connect to the modem at 2.5G. My modem has only a single 2.5G port. Speeds are not configurable on the modem. Also, I have upgraded my RB5009 firmware to 7.1.1. Any ideas?
removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
Unless its a problem similar Intel had with I225-V. Then it means it cannot be solved with firmware updatend and CR5009 is a crapremoved unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
Actually I was wondering how exactly the "multiple power source" works. I can safely plug my RB5009 connected to both DC jack input and POE on ETH1?
In this scenario, one power source is "active" power and other stay just "standby" ready for "fail over"? What will be the primary?
Thanks very detailed explanation, I just need now to rethink my "power backup" plan, since I would like to have the the standard power jack AC/DC converter as my primary source and not POE....
So yes, it is the way that one power source (with the highest voltage) is used for all power consumption, the rest of power sources are stand-by.
...
Same kind of problem here as well. WAN port is connected to ZTE MC7010 5G modem. Negotiating the link as 2.5Gbps leads to poor speedtest results: max 300 Mbps. Negotiating the port to 1Gbps helps in getting 1 Gbps through.+1 On the issue where the RB5009 only gives ~400Mbps with 2.5Gbps to a MB8611.
If I keep the modem>router on the 2.5Gbps, but connect the sfp+ via 10G to my switch I do get the full ~1.4Gbps however, so it seems the issue is not with the modem>router link over 2.5Gbps, but the 2.5g>1G interface within the router.
I have just installed RB5009 to my office environment, I have fully updated my router (both OS and firmware, to the latest 7.1.1).
Router itself is connected over ether1 (2.5gbit connetion, verified) to my cable modem (Fritzbox 6660), and to my CRS326 through 10gbit spf+ port.
I am managing to get full 1gbit connection in this setup (I am yet to try with two computers at the same time to see what is my exact cable limit), but the point is that my 2.5gbit ether works and I do not have slowdowns like many people reported.
I'm actually having the issue even if I'm using a 1Gbps port in the switch attached via SFP+. For now I've just had to remove the 2.5Gbps advertising and lock it at 1Gbps so all devices can at least get that speed. Sort of sucks to leave ~300Mbps unused though. Tried everything I can think of, so at this point I think Mikrotik would need to look into this and probably update firmware to solve this issue.removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
In my tests, 2.5GB has isssues on ether1 and also on SFP+. 10GB works fine on SFP+, 1GB works fine on all ports.Does anyone know if the same issue happens on 2.5GB+ LAN connections?
removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
The only possible "fix" I see is to glue 1G sticker over 2.5G label under that port, remove 2.5G advertisement in setup (as default)
/queue type set ethernet-default pfifo-limit=300
/queue interface set [find where queue!=no-queue] queue=ethernet-default
removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
I had a 3m CAT6 cable, and at some point after having some issues with a router, I've tried to switch my cable as well. At that point it didn't solve the issue, but afterwards, I found that using CAT8 cable increased my Internet speeds to 800/900Mbps on 1Gbps connection. Previously on CAT6 cable I had 300/200mbit limit. Which is ridiculous, because its supposed to hold up to 10Gbps. I don't know what kind of interference I'm having around the router, but it'd be interesting to find that out. If someone knows what kind of equipment is better to use to measure EM fields, would be glad to get a hint =). I live in a kilometer range from high voltage power lines, and 3km from local electrical grid station.Hello again:)
I'm using Cat 6 cables and is about 3 meter from the modem..So i think i should be good right??
regards
Hello,Hello people
I'm new here, and i want to purchase a router, RB5009UG+S+IN.. The problem is that i've read on multiple sites that it has problems with the 2.5G port?? Does anyone have a update on that ??
Can it be fixed (firmware update) or do i have to look for something else ??
thank you.
regards
I just tried a CAT 8 cable, and the only difference was my wallet was $8 lighter. Same poor (480Mbps) download performance with a 2.5Gbps link. Changing the router-to-modem link to 1Gbps gives me 900Mbps downloads.I had a 3m CAT6 cable, and at some point after having some issues with a router, I've tried to switch my cable as well. At that point it didn't solve the issue, but afterwards, I found that using CAT8 cable increased my Internet speeds to 800/900Mbps on 1Gbps connection. Previously on CAT6 cable I had 300/200mbit limit. Which is ridiculous, because its supposed to hold up to 10Gbps. I don't know what kind of interference I'm having around the router, but it'd be interesting to find that out. If someone knows what kind of equipment is better to use to measure EM fields, would be glad to get a hint =). I live in a kilometer range from high voltage power lines, and 3km from local electrical grid station.Hello again:)
I'm using Cat 6 cables and is about 3 meter from the modem..So i think i should be good right??
regards
Back to the subject of a 5009 router problem - if one person got it working at above 1Gpbs on 2.5G connection, and the rest could not, this could be something everyone is doing wrong. I haven't got this router yet, but was planning to purchase one to have 2.5G LAN with low deployment cost. Could someone please test all their devices used in setup separately and using CAT8 cables? Thank you.
The links you provided are not at all applicable to this issue. Those links are about using Google 2.5g over fiber. The RB5009 problem is with the 2.5g copper port. The 2.5g port doesn't have any issues connecting at 2.5g and will run at full speed if you test from a PC on the SFP+ port connected at 2.5/5/10g. The problem is that any 1g devices on your network will get around 500mbps. Mikrotik has confirmed the issue on their side and is working on a fix.Y'all having issues with your 2.5g WAN connections are posting info only about one-half of the puzzle, and your omission of any discussion concerning other aspects involved in determining compatibility is telling.
Where did Mikrotik confirm the issue and state that they are working on a fix? I was hoping that was the case but did not find anything official.removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
They confirmed it in a support ticket with forum user wojo, post is here: viewtopic.php?p=915477#p915477removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
I did have one PC with a 2.5gbps Asus USB network adapter that was acting a little strange. Enabled flow control and updated the Realtek driver and it started acting a bit more consistent. Here's my results after working that out (just pasting what I sent to Mikrotik)I tried 4 different versions dated Feb 25.. Version 7.99. Unfortunately the issue was not resolved for me with that version, did anyone else have better luck?
For the the above tests I had each device connected directly to the RB5009. I do have a switch connected to the RB5009 with multiple 1G links using LACP. I just tested with my PC in the switch and it seems to give the full 1G. I don't have a 10G switch at home unfortunately.Are you plugging the 1G clients directly into the RB5009? When I do that the new FW is a bit better, but my typical setup has the RB5009 connected via 10G DAC to my switch, the 1G clients in there saw no noticeable improvement while the 10G clients in the same switch still got ~1400Mbps.
What is your setup? What are your ports?removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
My test shows switching between ether1 and rest of 1G ports not working correctly.removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
Thanks, I found it.removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
Did you get official reply from Tech support ?Tech Support sucks. Looks like hardware is not fixable. Time to sell this piece of *** on Ebay and never, ever buy anything from mikrotik!
Yes, I opened the case, but they pretend something else is wrong. Like LACP not giving more than 1G regardless 4 ports used for it. OK! So, I use ether1 as a regular port, not WAN port, and directly connect 3 computers to ether2, 3 and 4. And computer with proven working 2.5G port connected to ether1. All the same. Port ether1 is nor 2.5G port. It's 1G port. They refuse to accept their hardware is not tested well and is actually an alfa version. I was downloading movie files from ether1 connected computer to three others at the same time, Combined speed is less than 45MB (360Mb/s), when 2.5G removed from ether1 advertisement - speed goes up to 113MB(904Mb/s). And my HD is M.2 Samsung 980 PRO SSD 2TB PCIe NVMe Gen 4.removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
My topology is still 2.5G AT&T Fiber <---> RB5009 <---10G DAC---> CRS328 <---> 1G/10G clients.Are you plugging the 1G clients directly into the RB5009? When I do that the new FW is a bit better, but my typical setup has the RB5009 connected via 10G DAC to my switch, the 1G clients in there saw no noticeable improvement while the 10G clients in the same switch still got ~1400Mbps
I tried both: 1G clients directly to RB5009 1G ports (ether2,3,4) or to 1G switch connected with a LACP team of 4 ports (ether5,6,7,8). Results ~same.Are you plugging the 1G clients directly into the RB5009? When I do that the new FW is a bit better, but my typical setup has the RB5009 connected via 10G DAC to my switch, the 1G clients in there saw no noticeable improvement while the 10G clients in the same switch still got ~1400Mbps.
---------------------------------Download--------------------------------------->
CableModem<---2.5GB--->[ether1].RB5009bridge.[ether2]<---1GB--->LANclient
| |
Flow RX on off
Flow TX off on
<---------back pressure--------
Unfortunately my cable modem (FAST3896U) has everything (like firewall, wifi6, router, 4 ether ports) but no setting for flow control. Love to try, but...This allows the RB5009 to apply back pressure towards the modem in case the 1GB output queue towards the client on ether2 is overrun by incoming 2.5GB downlad traffic on ether1.Code: Select all---------------------------------Download---------------------------------------> CableModem<---2.5GB--->[ether1].RB5009bridge.[ether2]<---1GB--->LANclient | | Flow RX on off Flow TX off on <---------back pressure--------
This is how the same problem is often solved on 100GB core switches aggregating 10GB link to/from floor switches.
I have a similar problem with 1Gb devices and WiFi APs connected through the SFP+ port on the RB5009. I'm running 7.2.3. I'm using the 2.5Gb port for my cable modem and have the SFP+ connected to a CRS326-24S+2Q-RM with fiber. I got a little more speed... about 200Mbps. Playing with flow control helps a little, but ~200 is the best I've come up with. I forget which settings worked best... I tried "all" of them, then punted and plugged some stuff into the 1Gb ports on the RB5009. 10Gb hosts and my laptop using an Asus 2.5Gb USB adapter and an S+RJ10 get full internet speed, about 1.4Gbps. If I gimp ether1 to 1Gb the WiFi and computers connected at 1Gb work as they should, but of course that also limits the 10Gb machines and 2.5Gb laptop to 1Gb.Today I've got Wiitek SFP-10G-T. (It supports 1G,2.5G,5G,10G)
First, I connect my PC with 2.5G NIC to SFP+ at 2.5G,full. Download speed test (ether1 advertised as 1G) shows same ~900Mbs.
When I turned ether1 advertisement to 2.5G,full, my download speed drops to 95Mb/s (new firmware 7.2rc6) What was that?
Disabling hardware offload in the bridge settings for the 1Gb ports seems to help, at least with my simple setup. Worth a try if you haven't tried it already. I'm getting close to 900 from the 1Gb ports on the RB5009 from the Internet and nearly full speed locally. OTOH your Internet connection is faster than mine, so maybe that makes the problem worse?Next step: SFP+ as WAN port, connection to modem as 2.5G, full. Ether1 as regular bridge port, 2.5G,full, connected to PC 2.5G NIC - download speed test shows ~2G!!!
Now, the final test: same PC connected to ether2 (should be 1G) Oops! Download speed on all 1G ports is only ~740Mb/s Tested multiple times - same result, sad...
Thank you for the tip (hardware offload) - will try it today at night..... and an S+RJ10 get full internet speed, about 1.4Gbps......
Load doesn't actually seem to do much to it's temperature. My S+RJ10 idles around 47-48C and only goes up to 50C whacking it with repeated local speed tests or file transfers. I'm sure I could get it a little hotter with a load generator. My setup is maybe a little out on the cool end for S+RJ10 temps outside of a datacenter. It's all alone in a group of 8 ports in my CRS326-24S+2Q-RM, which has 3 cooling fans. The port count is overkill for me, but 8 ports wasn't enough and I thought the 2 QSFPs were worth the price difference over the CRS317.Just curious, what is the temperature of the S+RJ10 module during the test? I bought Wiitek SFP-10G-T and It is not made by MikroTik but it's temperature is 43C max.
I have big problems with turning on(booting) the device!
It turns on the third or fourth time.
I tried different power supplies and connected via POE.
The symptoms are:
Power supply - The blue LED lights up, and the green LED on the ETH2 port starts to dimly burn. Then nothing happens - the device is frozen!
photo_2022-01-14_18-37-32.jpg
Similarly, on the POE, the orange LED lights up on the ETH1 port, and the green LED starts to dimly burn on the ETX2 port. Then nothing happens - the device is frozen!
photo_2022-01-14_18-37-33.jpg
Green LED starts to glow dimly on the ETH2 port - both without a patch cord and with a patch cord!
At the same time, all ports are in the "down" status! There are no links, netinstall and winbox do not see anything because the ports are in the down!
After 3-4 times the device normally starts and works!
What does the dim green LED on the ETH2 port mean?
How to solve the problem?
I tried different firmware, used netinstall - nothing helped
photo_2022-02-07_10-09-47.jpg
P.S.
Sorry for Google translate.
I can run 2.5G on SFP+ port as a WAN port. Ether1 in 2.5G mode works fine as a part of a bridge (never full 2.5G), as a WAN port in 2.5G mode it gives definitely less speed on ether2,3 and so on, than 1G.removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
No, that problem was quietly swept under the rug.removed unneeded quotation
Can confirm, the issue is still very much there. The "fixes" they implemented seemed to work for some ppl that connected directly or use MT switches, but I have an Aruba switch to the 10G spf+ port and the 1G devices in that switch get around 400Mbps while the 10G clients get 1.3Gbps. Apparently we're just meant to accept that and move on?removed unneeded quotation
SFP port works at 2.5G as WAN port. Ether1 gives 2.5G speed in this case.removed unneeded quotation
removed unneeded quotation - use "Post Reply"
What alternative router have you chosen?No more hope and definitely no help and no desire on their part to fix their problem - Ebay! Final decision.
I would try MS510TX.What alternative router have you chosen?No more hope and definitely no help and no desire on their part to fix their problem - Ebay! Final decision.
Greetings Sir, can you please confirm a few data points for me ?The preinstalled 7.0.5 can be upgraded only to a better v7, currently I suggest upgrading to 7.1rc4 which is a much better version in all aspects....
Read before posting.Rubbish.
I can do speedtest between rb5009 and ax3 using 2.5gb port as trunk.
Speed comes out around 2.3- ish gb both ways, udp or tcp.
My rule of thumb when something went wrong:...If I remove 2.5G advertisement and it renegotiates down to gig I can get 920M or so ...
You are correct in you description: this problem was never fixed. I use 5" cat7 patch cables. And Yes, using SFP+ at 2.5G as WAN and ether1 at 2.5G as LAN works - you will have full speed.I just purchased one of these and I'm sad to see I may have to return it as not working as advertised. For the life of me I cannot get good performance using the 2.5G port ever.
My topology: 1.5g down 50M up cable modem w/ 2.5G port in bridge mode -> 2.5G Port on RB5009 configured as WAN -> SFP+ configured as LAN Direct Attach Copper cable to 10G LAN switch
If I remove 2.5G advertisement and it renegotiates down to gig I can get 920M or so which is pretty decent, but with the WAN port set to 2.5 performance tanks to 450 or so, I have tried a number of configurations and nothing seems to make a difference, I read on here somewhere using an SFP+ to 10G copper module as the WAN and the 2.5 as the LAN works, but can anyone verify this? Why does Mikrotik not fix this issue?