While Im transitioning one leg of our network that is not redundant and is a combination of sites isolated by routers and sites on the layer 2 bridge still I have to have 2 interfaces facing the same network. I havent had an issue yet, hopefully it doesnt yell at me.
I set an ACL of our office IP space allowed with an input chain policy to drop everything not coming from that ACL. I didnt realize that OSPF was input and i broke it for a minute, so I added our infrastructure routing subnet to the ACL and all is well. Is that a sufficient firewall policy, drop eveything not specifically in the ACL? Another OSPF question is whether it is bad form to have multiple /30 on the same interface talking the the site routers on the layer 2 network doing OSPF? To get approval to fully deploy mikrotiks at every site and get the network fully routed I have to onboard this leg in its current state, starting in the middle instead of at the end. I only have the one rb1100ahx2 On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Dennis Burgess <[email protected]> wrote: > Not that I have found. > > > > Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc. > > [email protected] – 314-735-0270 – www.linktechs.net > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *That One Guy > /sarcasm > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 13, 2015 11:18 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik stable OS version > > > > Do these things have a limit to the number of secondary IPs you can put on > an interface? I cant find it documented > > > > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Stefan Englhardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > No problems with newer 6.x Version. We’ve 6.15 and 6.25 running on them. > > Seems 6.x tree matures. But it is MT. You never know ;-)). > > > > > > *Von:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *Im Auftrag von *That One Guy > /sarcasm > *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 13. Mai 2015 16:51 > *An:* [email protected] > *Betreff:* [AFMUG] Mikrotik stable OS version > > > > just got in an rb1100ahx2 What is the current most stable software version > recomended on these? > > > > -- > > 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. > > > > > > -- > > 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. > -- 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.
