Level 4 does pretty much everything. Level 5 and 6 enable 500/unlimited (from 200) tunnels and more user manager sessions. http://wiki.mikrotik.com/index.php?title=Manual:License&redirect=no#License_Levels
Is this 2008 or something? I thought everyone had been using Mikrotik for many years. MT switches are not as good in any form as an HP switch from what I've heard. MT would be good for OSPF/BGP. MT hardware is not MT software. A good x86 box (OEM, Baltic, Titan, etc) should have no problems. Routerboards for $39 can have flaky ports. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 3:26 PM, That One Guy <[email protected]> wrote: > After poking around at many different brands, it seems Mikrotik is the > right fit for our network and budget. > > I dont fully understand the licensing tiers > > Is there a sizing chart on these? > > Is the interface similar between the router models and the switch models? > Are the mikrotik switches comparable to the HP procurve in reliability? > > It would be the bees knees to see out network more universal as far as > management interfaces go, we have three purposes for routers: > > our upstream routers, which we have 2, will ultimately be running OSPF > internally and BGP externally (current thought) 200mbps-1gbps projected > need through the next couple of years. > > Our network/POP routers ranging from 1 customer at a POP to 150 > > A residential solution comparable to the UBNT AirRouters (1-25mbps rate > plans) wifi capable. > > If the switches have similar interfaces, we would look toward replacing a > combination of UBNT toughswitch POE, and a variety of HP procurves from > 1810G to 2510G and their other POE models. > > > > I note alot of discussion regarding MT ethernet negotiation flakiness, how > much of an impact does this present? Right now we have imagestream and > fortigate on the network, and have zero issues with that. > > > The decision to go toward mikrotik is primarily based on cost and > community support availability within the industry. (this consideration has > alot to do with a single point of administrative failure in only having one > person, me, training to design, maintain, support, and grow the network, in > the event i became absent from the picture) The winbox interface and > feature availability within was also a primary consideration for support > staff. > > I would like to her from people entrenched in MT who love/hate it, anybody > who turned their back on it, and anybody who moved toward it. > > > > -- > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >
