> <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
> Yep, just a private layer 2 pipe over the public internet.
>
> From: Josh Luthman <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 10:04 AM
> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
> Subject: Re:
3, 2015 11:17:02 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
On related subject when will Mikrotik support IKEv2?
Many megabytes per second.
EOIP isn't really that costly in terms of overhead.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:
> What kind of throughput can you expect from
What kind of throughput can you expect from an m’tik with encrypted EOIP?
; *From:* Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:54 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
>
> What is the cost for one of those routers?
>
> *From:* Keefe John <keefe...@ethoplex.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 23
* Wednesday, December 23, 2015 10:04 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
>
> I'd expect most of the CCRs to do 1 gbps - there's a nice chart at the
> bottom that shows small 64 byte packets and the throughput each model will
> do. Assuming you're just carrying dat
NEVA
I had my fill of ikev2 on metarouter config using strongswan.
KILL ME NOW !
On 12/23/2015 11:33 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Soon (TM)
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Keefe John
Thanks
From: Keefe John
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:37 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
Some guys did a test with encrypted EOIP and got 7.5 gbps with CCR1072s.
http://www.stubarea51.net/2015/10/16/10-gbps-of-layer-2-throughput-is-possible-using-mikrotiks-eoip-tunnel
What is the cost for one of those routers?
From: Keefe John
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:37 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
Some guys did a test with encrypted EOIP and got 7.5 gbps with CCR1072s.
http://www.stubarea51.net/2015/10/16/10-gbps-of-layer-2-throughput
Silly question $2500
From: Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:54 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
What is the cost for one of those routers?
From: Keefe John
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:37 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
Some guys did
maginenetworksllc.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:57 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
>
> I'll sell it to you for $2000...
>
> http://routerboard.com/CCR1036-8G-2SplusEM
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct
On related subject when will Mikrotik support IKEv2?
Yep, just a private layer 2 pipe over the public internet.
From: Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 10:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
I'd expect most of the CCRs to do 1 gbps - there's a nice chart at the bottom
that shows small 64 byte packets
when is v7 coming?
On 12/23/2015 11:18 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
v7
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=1=90266
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Matt
Soon (TM)
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Keefe John wrote:
> when is v7 coming?
>
> On 12/23/2015 11:18 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> v7
>
>
I wonder if this works on all M’tik routers (at lower rates of course).
I have an application that needs perhaps 1 Gbps.
From: Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:57 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EOIP
I'll sell it to you for $2000...
http://routerboard.com/CCR1036
Some guys did a test with encrypted EOIP and got 7.5 gbps with CCR1072s.
http://www.stubarea51.net/2015/10/16/10-gbps-of-layer-2-throughput-is-possible-using-mikrotiks-eoip-tunnel/
On 12/23/2015 10:30 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Many megabytes per second.
EOIP isn't really that costly in terms
v7
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=1=90266
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Matt wrote:
> On related subject when will Mikrotik support IKEv2?
>
With eoip 1500 byte packets have to be fragmented.
You should consider MPLS/VPLS.
Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Adam Moffett
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. November 2015 15:33
An: af@afmug.com
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] EOIP with IPSEC throughput cut in haf
Watch
Watch the statistics on the interface list.is it moving 60mbps on
the wire while the speedtest is running 30mbps?
Also, are you hitting 100% CPU on either end of the tunnel? The speed
test is CPU heavy, and so is the tunnel.
On 11/11/2015 11:44 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
So
gt;
>
>
>
> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *Adam Moffett
> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 12. November 2015 15:33
> *An:* af@afmug.com
> *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] EOIP with IPSEC throughput cut in haf
>
>
>
> Watch the statistics on the interface list
Yes. You cant do MPLS/VPLS over external IP network.
Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von That One Guy /sarcasm
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. November 2015 17:25
An: af@afmug.com
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] EOIP with IPSEC throughput cut in haf
i was running speedtest.net <h
t;s...@genias.net> wrote:
> Yes. You cant do MPLS/VPLS over external IP network.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *That One Guy
> /sarcasm
> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 12. November 2015 17:25
> *An:* af@afmug.com
> *Betreff
More interested in eoip comments, but when are these two bad ideas, eoip
with the ipsec in particular.
I have two scenarios where eoip will be necessary to maintain upstream
static routing between providers, one tunnel over the interwebs and one
tunnel over our network since our providers are
;thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 1:28:53 AM
Subject: [AFMUG] Eoip and mpls
More interested in eoip comments, but when are these two bad ideas, eoip with
the ipsec in particular.
I have two scenarios where eoip will be necessary to maintain upstream
If you dont need to bridge traffic you might look into ipip tunneling.
Why transport MAC Headers where not needed …
Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Mike Hammett
Gesendet: Montag, 19. Oktober 2015 14:51
An: af@afmug.com
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] Eoip and mpls
If it stays
EoIP is non-standard, and while multiple platforms have it, they are
probably not compatible.
The main reason to do EoIP is if you need the entire layer2 header. I
use it now and then to default a device, then bridge it's port with an
EOIP tunnel back to my office so that I can access it from
in the mikrotik implementation with ipsec, how much less "secure" than
something like an ipsec VPN tunnel? For the most part, since its all routed
traffic anyway, security isnt all that great a concern, other than maybe
some snmp strings I cant think of much that would matter
We do have an
quot;That One Guy /sarcasm" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Monday, October 19, 2015 2:09:12 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Eoip and mpls
>>
>>
>> I plan on MPLS internally over the OSPF network, at least I think thats
>
ent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"That One Guy /sarcasm" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Monday, October 19, 2015 2:09:12 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Eoip and mpls
>
>
@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Sent: *Monday, October 19, 2015 2:09:12 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Eoip and mpls
I plan on MPLS internally over the OSPF network, at least I
think thats what I should do. We have a bunch of customers
with more t
I plan on MPLS internally over the OSPF network, at least I think thats
what I should do. We have a bunch of customers with more than two sites
that would benefit.
Right now, for the upstream tunnel, since we dont currently have any BGP, I
am planning on the EOIP tunnel being part of the OSPF
Wow cool.
On 10/19/2015 1:37 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
Here we go - from the .30 changelog:
*) tunnels - eoip, eoipv6, gre,gre6, ipip, ipipv6, 6to4 tunnels
have new property - ipsec-secret - for easy setup of ipsec
encryption and authentication;
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Mathew
You can layer EoIP over top of another VPN for security and I usually use
PPTP for this as I can see if the link is connected and
for how long. If you aren't familiar with MPLS, EoIP is a lot easier to
debug and doesn't require your entire network to be running
MPLS.
Running across CCRs, I can't
Here we go - from the .30 changelog:
*) tunnels - eoip, eoipv6, gre,gre6, ipip, ipipv6, 6to4 tunnels
have new property - ipsec-secret - for easy setup of ipsec
encryption and authentication;
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Mathew Howard
wrote:
> I'm pretty sure
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 2:09:12 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Eoip and mpls
I plan on MPLS internally over the OSPF network, at least I think thats what I
should do. We have a bunch of customers with more than two sites that would
benefit.
Right now, for the upstream tunne
So what is this doing?
*ipsec-secret* (*string*; Default: )When secret is specified, router adds
dynamic ipsec peer to remote-address with pre-shared key and policy with
default values (by default phase2 uses sha1/aes128cbc). Both local-address
and remote-address of the tunnel must be specified
I'm pretty sure you can use encryption with EoIP these days... it's a
fairly recent addition, if I remember right.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:29 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So what is this doing?
>
> *ipsec-secret* (*string*; Default: )When secret is
One Guy /sarcasm" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com
<mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>>
*To: *af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Sent: *Monday, October 19, 2015 2:09:12 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Eoip and mpls
I plan on MPLS internally over th
s
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> --
>>> *From: *"That One Guy /sarcasm" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Monday, October 19, 2015 2:09:12 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re
100% less secure. There's no encryption at all in EoIP.
On 10/19/2015 11:44 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
in the mikrotik implementation with ipsec, how much less "secure" than
something like an ipsec VPN tunnel? For the most part, since its all
routed traffic anyway, security isnt all
*Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 5:17 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
Could you elaborate on this? We have a couple EOIP links across other
networks and have never adjusted the MTU anywhere. I just pulled up the
EOIP interfaces on each router
, December 11, 2014 8:35:41 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
So looks like this may be a reason not to use UBNT stuff for our backup links.
Looks like the highest I can set the MTU is 1515 on a couple units and 1524 on
another. Neither capable of 1528 or more.
I'll have
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
--
*From: *Kade Sullivan via Af af@afmug.com
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Thursday, December 11, 2014 8:35:41 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
So looks like this may be a reason not to use UBNT
Of Mike Hammett via Af
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 9:39 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
You have old, old units. The new ones do 2024 or better. Still Rocket Ms. They
changed that 2 - 3 years ago.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett via Af
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 9:39 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
You have old, old units. The new ones do 2024 or better. Still Rocket Ms. They
changed that 2 - 3 years ago.
-
Mike
: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:25 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
So I have an EoIP tunnel setup over two fiber connections for a customer, I am
seeing high latency over the tunnel any idea? MTU Issue? Using RB1100AHx2 on
both ends.
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
So I have an EoIP tunnel setup over two fiber connections for a customer,
I am seeing high latency over the tunnel any idea? MTU Issue? Using
RB1100AHx2 on both ends.
[mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Erich Kaiser via
Af
*Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:25 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
So I have an EoIP tunnel setup over two fiber connections for a customer,
I am seeing high latency over
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
Could you elaborate on this? We have a couple EOIP links across other
networks and have never adjusted the MTU anywhere. I just pulled up the EOIP
interfaces on each router and they are all set for 1500. Should we be
increasing this number
: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
Could you elaborate on this? We have a couple EOIP links across other
networks and have never adjusted the MTU anywhere. I just pulled up the
EOIP interfaces on each router and they are all set for 1500. Should we be
increasing this number as a best
[mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Kade Sullivan via Af
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 5:17 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
Could you elaborate on this? We have a couple EOIP links across other
networks and have never adjusted the MTU anywhere. I
52 matches
Mail list logo