Hi to all.
I wish all the best for all of you for year 2023.

Now back to the business.
I bought ccr2216 for main router of our company.

Here is my problem.
I am using qsfp ports (1 and 2), which are connected with DAC XQ+DA0001 to CRS326 units. One port to one crs326. Disabled auto negotiation. Rate is manually choosed 40Gbps.

To point of my problem. If I am transferring data between QSFP1 and QSFP2 ports, my CPU have hight utilization. One core is always (at least ) utilized around 95%. Speed of this data transfer is around 2.5Gbps which is NOTHING for this unit.

If I make FIRST firewall rule for forward of these two ports with action fasttrack connection, utilization of cpu is much lover and speed of data transfer much higher. 1 CPU core it around 60% (around 35% better than before) and speed of transfer is around 5Gbps.
Still, It should be around 10Gbps (at least) and that cpu utilization is pretty high for my taste.





Update :
I managed to perform test where I was reaching around 10Gbps rate of data transfer.
Which is ok, server is connected via SFP+ 10Gbps link.

During this data transfer with speed around 10Gbps (about 1GB/s) between port qsfp1 and qsfp2 is ONE CORE of CPU (on CCR2216 unit ) ulitilzed around 91-95%.
Is this real performance ?
It is normal to have utilize one core to maximum value and have max performance around 10Gbps forwarding between ports qsfp 1 and 2 ?

Btw. I am transferring data with samba between two Windows 2019 servers.
I was also testing it with two NAS Synology servers.

You should give your configuration before we can say anything about your problems.

Sorry, I just can't. The main story is on each qsfp port is running one subnet.
Between these two ports (subnets) is required full forward without any restriction.

What batters me is relatively low speed of this forward and also one core cpu load.

I was trying to prevent all of that traffic going through all of firewall rules with fasttrack firewall rule on first position but it was not solved that problem entirely.

High CPU load remain.

Since you won't share an export, there is only so much others on the forum can do to help.

I would start by checking fasttrack requirements

https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:IP/Fasttrack

And then open a ticket with support.

It is possible for this use-case use this ?
https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... HWSettings

First, you come here asking for help but can't export configuration? Are you stupid or what?

Second, without the export, I will assume you're actively going against MikroTik guidelines i.e. to ensure using a single bridge for all downstream and redundant intra-AS ports to ensure hardware offloading/bridge FastPath/FastTrack: https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... plebridges

https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... +switching

First, you come here asking for help but can't export configuration? Are you stupid or what?

No, I am not. I am just not allowed to do that. There are some very strict rules in our company so it is cannot be done.
But I appreciate you hostility.

Second, without the export, I will assume you're actively going against MikroTik guidelines i.e. to ensure using a single bridge for all downstream and redundant intra-AS ports to ensure hardware offloading/bridge FastPath/FastTrack: https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... plebridges
https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ ... +switching

I cannot use just bridge to connect these two ports. Every QSFP port has his own subnet.

m8, remove the "top secret" parts from the export if you want help.
Like calling your doctor and saying "it hurts" while not telling where.

No, I am not. I am just not allowed to do that. There are some very strict rules in our company so it is cannot be done.
But I appreciate you hostility.

I cannot use just bridge to connect these two ports. Every QSFP port has his own subnet.

1. What kind of secret sauce are you building using MikroTik? You're not using any proprietary protocol that everyone cannot use as well. Export or don't expect help from anyone here.

2. A bridge supports VLAN filtering, meaning you're supposed to tag each QSFP port in a unique VLAN on layer 2, which you then map on layer 3 to whatever IP subnet you want. The whole point of DSA in Linux and that means RouterOS is to migrate away from traditional per interface configuration for downstream interfaces or redundant intra-AS interfaces such as LACP bonding, VRRP etc.

Other than typical Cisco or Juniper all modern day network OSes supports bridge configuration with ASIC offloading (depending on hardware model and vendor) and it is preferred over the Cisco style configuration.

You are clearly not very well informed in Linux networking, tries to outsmart official MikroTik documentation regarding bridge + bridge hardware offloading and expecting line rate performance, and overall a moron.

I've given you the solution to your performance issue. Take it or don't.

DSA:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/ ... a/dsa.html

m8, remove the "top secret" parts from the export if you want help.
Like calling your doctor and saying "it hurts" while not telling where.

He's a moronic patient clearly lol. At this point, it's clearly a troll.

update :
solved with L3 offloading and fasttrack

update :
solved with L3 offloading and fasttrack

Can you please elucidate on this.. having similar issue, but I will be glad if you detailed what you did on the L3 offloading and fasttrack.

update :
solved with L3 offloading and fasttrack

Can you please elucidate on this.. having similar issue, but I will be glad if you detailed what you did on the L3 offloading and fasttrack.

hi, just use something like "/ip firewall filter add action=fasttrack-connection chain=forward hw-offload=yes in-interface=qsfp28-1-1 out-interface=qsfp28-2-1" for forwarding between these interfaces...

It should help for cpu load a lot.