Re: [Mikrotik Users] RB2011UiAS Performance Tuning

[David Jones via Mikrotik-users]

you are actually doing good with routing 150-200mbps with that router. I
have never gotten mine to route over 185mbps. MPLS/VPLS around 600mbps.

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 6:40 PM Mike Francis via Mikrotik-users <
mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:

> Sorry, gotcha, was reading too many emails.  I feel your pain. I toasted a
> Cisco 6509 once replacing a card. All we had laying around was a rb450 and
> had to run our core on it until the replacement 6509 chassis arrived. Not
> fun! It's a great Mikrotik story though!
>
> John Michael Francis
> Entrepreneur & CEO
> JMF | WAVEFLY | DLI
> Main: +1-877-WAVEFLY
> Support: supp...@wavefly.com
> Direct: +1-251-517-5069
>
> --
> *From:* mikrotik-users-boun...@wispa.org 
> on behalf of Nick Bright via Mikrotik-users 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 10, 2019 7:50:29 PM
> *To:* Mikrotik Users
> *Subject:* Re: [Mikrotik Users] RB2011UiAS Performance Tuning
>
> Right, almost all of my traffic is showing up in the FastPath counters; it
> appears to be turned on properly.
>
> On 7/10/2019 6:47 PM, Mike Francis wrote:
>
> I'm telling you, Fastpath is what you want.
>
> https://mikrotik.com/product/RB2011UiAS-2HnD-IN#fndtn-testresults
> 
>
> John Michael Francis
> Entrepreneur & CEO
> JMF | WAVEFLY | DLI
> Main: +1-877-WAVEFLY
> Support: supp...@wavefly.com
> Direct: +1-251-517-5069
>
> --
> *From:* Josh Luthman 
> 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 10, 2019 7:33:01 PM
> *To:* Mike Francis; Mikrotik Users
> *Cc:* Nick Bright
> *Subject:* Re: [Mikrotik Users] RB2011UiAS Performance Tuning
>
> Fast track.  Path is for switching.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 7:16 PM Mike Francis via Mikrotik-users <
> mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:
>
>> You need fastpath.  You have to disable all rules for that to happen.
>> That's not a problem,  especially if this is just a router. Make sure you
>> specific allowed subnets for your ssh and win box services under UP
>> Services. Get rid of all rules. Go to IP Settings and make sure it has
>> enabled fastpath.  If not then you missed something.
>>
>> John Michael Francis
>> Entrepreneur & CEO
>> JMF | WAVEFLY | DLI
>> Main: +1-877-WAVEFLY
>> Support: supp...@wavefly.com
>> Direct: +1-251-517-5069
>>
>> --
>> *From:* mikrotik-users-boun...@wispa.org <
>> mikrotik-users-boun...@wispa.org> on behalf of Nick Bright via
>> Mikrotik-users 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 10, 2019 7:03:09 PM
>> *To:* Mikrotik Users
>> *Subject:* [Mikrotik Users] RB2011UiAS Performance Tuning
>>
>>
>> Had a CCR1009 get blown by lightning today. The only thing I had with an
>> SFP to swap in its place was an RB2011UiAS.
>>
>> Typically running peak of about 500Mbps in traffic in the evenings.
>>
>> I have disabled the LCD, turned off connection tracking, disabled all
>> mangle rules, and disabled as many filter rules as possible without
>> compromising security (3 simple port filter rules remain). All services are
>> disabled except SSH and Winbox for management. No NAT rules are enabled
>> (some are configured, but they are disabled).
>>
>> BGP is in use with one peer, receiving only a default route by filter
>> (peer sends all routes, but I'm filtered for only default).
>>
>> The only interfaces in use are ether1, ether5 and sfp1. All are routed
>> (no switch or bridges configured). Each interface, except sfp1, has one
>> VLAN for telemetry management.
>>
>> I'm still seeing 70-100% cpu usage at only around 150Mbps (13kpps) with 
>> *nearly
>> *all traffic falling in to Fast Path on 6.43.16 with the CPU set to
>> 750MHz.
>>
>> Have I missed any performance tuning options? I just need it to work half
>> way decent for the night, I have a new CCR1009 on the way.
>>
>> --
>> ---
>> -  Nick Bright-
>> -  Vice President of Technology   -
>> -  Valnet -=- We Connect You -=-  -
>> -  Tel 888-332-1616 x 315 / Fax 620-331-0789  -
>> -  Web http://www.valnet.net/ 
>> 
>>  -
>> ---
>> - Are your files safe?-
>> - Valnet Vault - Secure Cloud Backup  -
>> - More information & 30 day free trial at -
>> - 

Re: [Mikrotik Users] Anyone used RBwAPG-60ad AP mode with RBLHGG-60ad Wireless Wire Dish?

[David Jones via Mikrotik-users]

Got some up and tested quite a bit.

Channel 1,2, and 3 750 meters connected at -67 full gigabit download.
Channel 4 (New in the latest firmware) I ran out of testing space at 900M
-65 full gig.

This is far better than the metrolinq PTMP that we have. They have a
problem with the return beamforming. limits max distance to  600 meters at
chanel 4. The stupid AP cant hear it.
Plus the mikrotik Wireless wire dishes and AP's are so much easier to aim.
no need for a scope to get it to connect. all the way to 900M was just
eyeballed.

So many more plusses for the mikrotik 60ghz.

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 1:04 PM, Brian Vargyas via Mikrotik-users <
mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:

> Should work just fine.  700m distance, 8 clients max per AP
>
> Brian
>
> Get Outlook for iOS 
>
> --
> *From:* 32101514000n behalf of
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 18, 2018 9:33 PM
> *To:* al...@highspeedlink.net; 'alex phillips'; 'Mikrotik Users'
> *Subject:* Re: [Mikrotik Users] Anyone used RBwAPG-60ad AP mode with
> RBLHGG-60ad Wireless Wire Dish?
>
>
> Just got some, will report after we deploy!
>
>
>
> Paul Tackett, COO
>
> (406)284-3174x105
>
> p...@latmt.com
>
> [image: LAT-Web-Logo-Small]
>
>
>
> *From:* mikrotik-users-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:mikrotik-users-
> boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *alex phillips via Mikrotik-users
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 18, 2018 12:31
> *To:* Mikrotik Users 
> *Subject:* [Mikrotik Users] Anyone used RBwAPG-60ad AP mode with
> RBLHGG-60ad Wireless Wire Dish?
>
>
>
> I am just curious about performance and feedback.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> *Alex Phillips*
> CEO and General Manager
> RBNS.net
> HighSpeedLink.net
>
> *540-908-3993*
>
>
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> 
> <#m_-7594119245050925261_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> ___
> Mikrotik-users mailing list
> Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
>
>


-- 
David Jones
NGL Connection
307-288-5491 ext 702
___
Mikrotik-users mailing list
Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users

Re: [Mikrotik Users] howto test ISP threshold

[David Jones via Mikrotik-users]

This is the main reason why we went to a Peering Exchange. Our Provider
(Century Link) had horribly congested links going to Netflix Hulu and the
like. Our customers would complain about buffering yet they could pull
20mbps+ speed test.

The problem was not our connection to them rather there connection to the
content.

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:31 AM, Josh Luthman via Mikrotik-users <
mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:

> They can't get there at all?  Steams don't start?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Jul 27, 2017 12:59 AM, "Jan-OOLLC via Mikrotik-users" <
> mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:
>
>> I need a simple method for testing my interface to the internet for
>> packet loss.  Customers keep calling about hulu or netflix not working
>> and I can't find the trouble inside my network.  It's either the main
>> router or my ISP modem.  I am seeing an occasional etherlink gateway
>> down message in the log.  1 or 2 times per day, but I can't see anything
>> in the log relating to data or packet loss.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Janv
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mikrotik-users mailing list
>> Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
>>
>
> ___
> Mikrotik-users mailing list
> Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
>
>


-- 
David Jones
NGL Connection
307-288-5491 ext 702
___
Mikrotik-users mailing list
Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users

[Mikrotik Users] Hmm.. Mikrotik or Cisco...

[David Jones via Mikrotik-users]

Good morning.

I have a deep question for the Mikrotik people and the Cisco people.

Let me give you an overview of where we are.
Currently we have all of our tower sites using Mikrotik connecting to our
core with MPLS/VPLS to our core that is multiple Mikrotik routers using
VRRP (I had a core die from power supply failure and our network didn't
skip a beet while it was replaced.) The VRRP core then connects to our edge
that is a Cisco ASR1001-x that connects to our BGP peers.

The reason we went with Cisco was because all the CCR Mikrotik Lagged
horribly when doing BGP full tables. We had a Maxxwave router that did fine
with the BGP but had crap interface support with Mikrotik not having good
drivers for the interfaces. Different MTU for the MPLS caused problems.

It appears that now with Mikrotik's CHR fixes the driver problems. the
Virtual host deals with the drivers so Mikrotik doesn't have to.

All has been fine for a few years... but now the Cisco has reset itself
twice in the past week. For whatever reason a reboot on a Cisco = 15-20min
down time. We are now needing a VRRP solution for the Edge.

So here is the cross roads... Do we get another ASR1001-x and struggle for
a while to get a form of VRRP to work between them? Or do we get something
like this
(https://www.amazon.com/Supermicro-SuperServer-5018D-FN8T-Rackmount-10GbE/dp/B01LXUATHB

)
and keep it all Mikrotik for ease of training and use?

We do not have much experience with Cisco. It takes us quite a bit to
configure and change them. is it worth learning and paying the 12x the
price for less throughput?
Cisco ASR 1001 2.5gbps throughput = $6,680
Cisco Licence for 10gbps throughput = $13,099
Total for 1 Cisco router + Repair of current + 1 Spare = $41,558

vs Mikrotik
Supermicro SuperServer 5018D-FN8T + 16G mem + SSD = $986
CHR 10Gbps upload per interface = $95
Total for 2 routers + 1 spare = $3,243

Is Cisco still the better option? would it be better to say use 3 MK
routers in VRRP with one spare so 2 can fail and not be a problem?

-- 
David Jones
NGL Connection
307-288-5491 ext 702
___
Mikrotik-users mailing list
Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users

Re: [Mikrotik Users] [OffList: Mikrotik Users] OSFP considerations for WISP

[David Jones via Mikrotik-users]

If you plan on ever using MPLS or TE tunnels you have to use broadcast. For
whatever reason PTP and PTMP do messed up things with TE. That was about a
year ago I discovered that so it may be fixed now. Who knows with how much
they change on RouterOS.

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Scott Reed via Mikrotik-users <
mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:

> I am a consultant that can help with this.
>
> I have helped several other networks move from bridged to routed and
> implement OSPF as well.
>
> Let me know if you are interested in some services and we can work out how
> I can best help you.
>
> On 6/27/2017 8:57 AM, Robert Dillon via Mikrotik-users wrote:
>
> Hello all, we are going to be running OSPF on our network using Mikrotik
> CCR routers at each tower.  We are transitioning from a fully bridged
> network to a routed network.  Network is made up a several interconnected
> rings using full duplex microwave links.  We have 2 different upstream
> providers in geographically dispersed locations that are not yet providing
> us BGP upstream redundancy but that is the plan in the future.
>
>
>
> So questions are:
>
> - What OSPF network type are most WISPs using?  I'd assume not broadcast
> due to just that, broadcasts=bad.  NBMA?, PtP, PtMP?  NBMA or PtMP see to
> make the most sense to me.
>
> - With multiple upstream ISPs, how do I handle default route
> advertisements across the network?  Some default routes need to point to
> ISP 1 and some routes need to point to ISP2.
>
>
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
>
>
> Robert Dillon
>
> In the Stix Broadband LLC, Co-Owner
>
> 814-472-2662 <(814)%20472-2662> Office
>
> rdil...@itxbb.net
>
> www.itxbb.net
>
>
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> 
> <#m_8855365165932787835_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
>
> ___
> Mikrotik-users mailing 
> listMikrotik-users@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
>
>
> --
> Scott Reed
> IN UMC Associate Lay Leader
> SLI Coach Trained
> SBRConsulting, LLC
> Network and Wireless Consulting
> WISPA Vendor Member
>
>
> ___
> Mikrotik-users mailing list
> Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
>
>


-- 
David Jones
NGL Connection
307-288-5491 ext 702
___
Mikrotik-users mailing list
Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users

Re: [Mikrotik Users] Use case for MPLS/VPLS?

[David Jones via Mikrotik-users]

We have found that you can move a considerably more data through weaker
routers like the RB2011 when you use MPLS/VPLS and don't have them routing
internet traffic. It also drops latency. It also gives you the ability to
us Traffic engineering tunnels.

We would recommend it... Just be warned that it will increase your
complexity and you will have to have MPLS across all connections between
your towers and the CHR.

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Josh Baird via Mikrotik-users <
mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:

> We are starting to deploy more and more small 'micro' pops (1-15 customers
> typically).  Often times, they 'hang' off of our larger (routed) sites and
> we just bridge from the larger site to the micropop.
>
> Some of them are routed individually due to their location on our
> network.  For these particular sites, I'm thinking of spinning up a CHR in
> our datacenter and using MPLS/VPLS (or something) to create 'tunnels' from
> the micropops back to the CHR.  The CHR will handle customer
> authentication, DHCP, firewall, etc for all of these sites.  This also
> keeps me from having to allocate multiple public IPv4 blocks to each of
> these smaller routed sites (I can allocate one block to the CHR).
>
> The 'routed' micropops currently have a mix of RB2011 and RB450G routers.
> Is this a good use case for something like MPLS/VPLS?  Would the router(s)
> downstream of the CHR need to speak MPLS as well or would it be sufficient
> to just 'terminate' everything on the CHR?
>
> ___
> Mikrotik-users mailing list
> Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
>
>


-- 
David Jones
NGL Connection
307-288-5491 ext 702
___
Mikrotik-users mailing list
Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users

Re: [Mikrotik Users] BFD

[David Jones via Mikrotik-users]

That is a great question... I think it would depend on the version. I last
tried on 6.34 and it flapped faster than a scared hummingbird...  I have
not tried it since.

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Adair Winter via Mikrotik-users <
mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:

> Is anyone using it successfully with ccr's or mikrotik in general for ospf
> routing applications?
>
>
> ___
> Mikrotik-users mailing list
> Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
>
>


-- 
David Jones
NGL Connection
307-288-5491 ext 702
___
Mikrotik-users mailing list
Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users

Re: [Mikrotik Users] A new question- blocking Chromecast

[David Jones via Mikrotik-users]

wait... I am confused... are you saying that you have the printer that's
indoors hook up to your outdoor AP? that you are not using airmax but
standard 802.11n?

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:22 PM, ralph via Mikrotik-users <
mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:

> I apologize that I may have forgotten to mention that I do have a few
> users who I don’t mind using me to network their printer to their pc
> because printers are such low bandwidth and it eliminates a lot of calls to
> our help desk by allowing it.  That’s why P2P blocking is not really what I
> wanted to have to resort to.
>
>
>
> The Chromecasts use a lot of bandwidth though.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Judd Dare [mailto:judd.d...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 27, 2016 5:20 PM
> *To:* ralph ; Mikrotik Users <
> mikrotik-users@wispa.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Mikrotik Users] A new question- blocking Chromecast
>
>
>
> Enable client isolation on the AP and that will force communications
> through the hotspot.
>
>
>
> On Sep 27, 2016 2:07 PM, "ralph via Mikrotik-users" <
> mikrotik-users@wispa.org> wrote:
>
> Lots of people are abusing the fact that I allow peer-to-peer connections
> on my APs (Ubiquiti).
>
> They are tying up bandwidth sending video, and then if they have a poor
> signal they are complaining to me.
>
> I want people to use a local router and set up a LAN on their boat, rather
> than using my WAN as their own personal LAN.
>
>
>
> I would like to block Chromecast but not restrict peer-to-peer.
>
>
>
> According to some information I found,  the Chromecast protocol  uses a
> UDP transmission to 239.255.255.250 on port 1900 for its discovery.
>
> How would I block that on the Mikrotik Hotspot?  I know I should be more
> up on firewall rules but I never can find the time to get deep enough into
> it.
>
>
>
> The info I found (and it was all I could find) was on a Cisco site.
> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/controller/
> technotes/7-6/chromecastDG76/ChromecastDG76.html
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> ___
> Mikrotik-users mailing list
> Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
>
>
> ___
> Mikrotik-users mailing list
> Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
>
>


-- 
David Jones
NGL Connection
307-288-5491 ext 702
___
Mikrotik-users mailing list
Mikrotik-users@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users