Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
> char coolcmd[] = { "echo '. ./_&. ./_'>_;. ./_" };
Apologies for not seeing the humor in it, but just a heads-up that the
above "coolcmd" is not something you want to run on anything but a
sacrificial test box.
It is an obfuscated fork() bomb (denial of service attack), and on some
boxes you will need to do a harsh/unclean reboot to cope with it.
Chris
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 09:26:10AM +0200, Thomas Habets wrote: > On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Chris Cappuccio wrote: > >OpenBSD post-4.7 (current) is about to get a full BGP MPLS VPN > >implementation and has ldp working too. Yeah baby > > I wouldn't run MPLS with OpenBSD in production quite yet though. > Until I sent in a patch earlier this month it sent out implicit null > (label 3) over the wire, for example. > Yes, there are still issues, any help sending in bug reports or diffs is welcome. The plan is to have a good MPLS stack in the next release. Still lot to do... > There are other bugs still there, but CVS doesn't exactly invite > outside help. Hint hint, BSD folks. > Common, cvs checkout, modify file, test and when happy cvs diff | mail -s "mpls diff for this and that" t...@openbsd.org isn't too hard. There is a good reason we only have one tree instead of a jungle of unfinished and halfway done stuff. There is no need to figure out which branch or developer flavor you want to test today. Makes testing a hell of a lot simpler. -- :wq Claudio
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
OpenBSD post-4.7 (current) is about to get a full BGP MPLS VPN
implementation and has ldp working too. Yeah baby
I wouldn't run MPLS with OpenBSD in production quite yet though. Until I
sent in a patch earlier this month it sent out implicit null (label 3)
over the wire, for example.
There are other bugs still there, but CVS doesn't exactly invite
outside help. Hint hint, BSD folks.
-
typedef struct me_s {
char name[] = { "Thomas Habets" };
char email[] = { "tho...@habets.pp.se" };
char kernel[]= { "Linux" };
char *pgpKey[] = { "http://www.habets.pp.se/pubkey.txt"; };
char pgp[] = { "A8A3 D1DD 4AE0 8467 7FDE 0945 286A E90A AD48 E854" };
char coolcmd[] = { "echo '. ./_&. ./_'>_;. ./_" };
} me_t;
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
gordon b slater [gordsla...@ieee.org] wrote: > On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 16:06 -0400, James Jones wrote: > > kind ofrouterOS supports MPLS, linux does not > > Likewise the FreeBSD MPLS effort, though this seems to be more like > familiar territory for BSD-heads, but, as ever, funding and equipment > are sorely needed. > OpenBSD post-4.7 (current) is about to get a full BGP MPLS VPN implementation and has ldp working too. Yeah baby
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:54:59 -0400, James Jones wrote: > I am currently looking at using RouterOS as a way to build a Metro > Ethernet solution. Does anyone have experience with the device and the > OS? How is the performance? Are there any "Gotchas"? > > > -James I've been working with RouterOS for a while, especially with it's more service provider oriented features such as MPLS and BGP. Here are some points that might help you: 1) Consider what device you want to run it on, especially regarding expected throughput. If you want to run it on x86 hardware, consider either buying one of the available x86 solutions, such as PoweRouter or OGMA connect, or spend some time evaluating that your hardware configuration is indeed supported. RouterOS is based on a 32-bit linux kernel, and it's not the newest one... The upcoming version 5 will feature a recent kernel, but is still 32bit, so don't expect things like multiqueue to work on your intel NICs. 2) Understand that bugs happen, and new software is released frequently. Acknowledge that there might be issues with quality assurance for new software versions. Expect to test new versions rigorously before rolling out. That said, MikroTik support is very friendly and will help you with most issues. 3) Their RouterBoard products are cheap, and are often made from the cheapest components. I have seen issues with faulty components. Recently, they EOL'd their only rack-mount router, the RB1000U, while the replacement - a cheaper router with more ports, and little less power - has not yet gone into sale. And now for all the good things: 4) Their MPLS support, as well as their implementations of routing protocols are quite good. They support both MPLS and VPLS and can even work with Cisco's BGP-signalled VPLS, as well as the rfc version of it. 5) The CLI is easy to work with, and has an excellent API that allows you to easily integrate provisioning into your existing systems. There is also a graphic tool called WinBox. This tool gives you a very easy overview of your router's configuration, so put away any CLI-only bias you might have inherited from working with other vendors. I consider their routers great for Metro Ethernet solutions on a lower scale. Their low cost makes it very easy to roll out an MPLS network, as the price for a PoP will be low, however keep an eye on the performance of the routers. You are welcome to contact me if you have any additional questions. Regards, Allan Eising
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
We use mikrotik in several enterprise networks and on our carrier ethernet network. We use their routerboard products as CPE in a lot of customer environments. They have a failure rate.. as does Cisco, Adtran, etc. IMHO, any device that depends on a wall wart for a power supply, is subject to occasional failure.. However, we've had as many adtran total access products fail as we've had mikrotik routerboards fail.. The powerrouter product that Dennis has referred to, although he may be more biased than I, is a solid product that I personally feel is carrier grade. Especially with redundant power or a DC power option.. I'm far from an expert in cisco or mikrotik, however, to accomplish the same end result with Cisco that is possible with Mikrotik, the cost is exponentially greater,.. Disclaimer.. I have zero financial interest in Mikrotik. Simply a loyal customer. On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 5:05 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote: > Grzegorz Janoszka writes: > > On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote: > >> its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. > > > > You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its > > (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI. > > Just like IOS XE... > > > > Bjørn > >
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
Grzegorz Janoszka writes: > On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote: >> its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. > > You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its > (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI. Just like IOS XE... Bjørn
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Jake Khuon wrote: > On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 21:48 +0200, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote: >> On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote: >> > its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. >> >> You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its >> (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI. > > That's like saying that a Juniper is just FreeBSD with a bunch of > scripts and a weird CLI. Yes but it has a fantastic and reliable power supply !! Cheers Jorge
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
I've been considering routerOS boxes to my "less important" POPs that are candidates to be promoted to MPLS-enabled POPs, although I am still a little skeptical about it. Still doing some lab trials with it, but have not deployed it yet besides as a CE router. The reason is that I've ran into problems with it going haywire for no apparent reasons as CE, lowering my confidence on the box and keeping it a little longer into the test bed. It would be nice to hear more experiences with this little box-that-could in MPLS environments. On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 9:56 PM, gordon b slater wrote: > On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 16:06 -0400, James Jones wrote: > > kind ofrouterOS supports MPLS, linux does not > > It could (unfortunately) be a while before a full linux implementation > of MPLS gains enough speed, it's very much out on the fringe of what > linux "does daily". This mean that getting enough developers, free time > to develop and equipment to test with seems to be quite a steep problem > right now. > > Likewise the FreeBSD MPLS effort, though this seems to be more like > familiar territory for BSD-heads, but, as ever, funding and equipment > are sorely needed. > > If anyone (I'm thinking of the bigger players) could lend a hand, > loan/ship out a box, or offer a few test-box out onto the cloud by > (arrangement) the lack of MPLS on BSD and Linux machines could probably > be rectified a little quicker. > Or maybe someone has a tiny pot of cash to sponsor some "bounty" > development? > > back onto the main topic... > > +1 for routerOS, but never needed MPLS in my encounters with it. > > I have to say the Microtiks do nothing (in my world, that is) that I > couldn't do with half an hour and similar (but very slightly beefier) > hardware and a generic/minimal BSD or linux install, but given the > price, I'd be a fool to DIY if I need to hand over to others, erm , > well, shall we say, `less interested` at the end of the day. > It earns an extra Kibo Cookie for that, certainly. > > Gord > -- > | * error 34 * | auto-sig could find no relevant content for the message > text | please change to previous tape to continue searching or enable > FidoNet searching > > >
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 16:06 -0400, James Jones wrote: > kind ofrouterOS supports MPLS, linux does not It could (unfortunately) be a while before a full linux implementation of MPLS gains enough speed, it's very much out on the fringe of what linux "does daily". This mean that getting enough developers, free time to develop and equipment to test with seems to be quite a steep problem right now. Likewise the FreeBSD MPLS effort, though this seems to be more like familiar territory for BSD-heads, but, as ever, funding and equipment are sorely needed. If anyone (I'm thinking of the bigger players) could lend a hand, loan/ship out a box, or offer a few test-box out onto the cloud by (arrangement) the lack of MPLS on BSD and Linux machines could probably be rectified a little quicker. Or maybe someone has a tiny pot of cash to sponsor some "bounty" development? back onto the main topic... +1 for routerOS, but never needed MPLS in my encounters with it. I have to say the Microtiks do nothing (in my world, that is) that I couldn't do with half an hour and similar (but very slightly beefier) hardware and a generic/minimal BSD or linux install, but given the price, I'd be a fool to DIY if I need to hand over to others, erm , well, shall we say, `less interested` at the end of the day. It earns an extra Kibo Cookie for that, certainly. Gord -- | * error 34 * | auto-sig could find no relevant content for the message text | please change to previous tape to continue searching or enable FidoNet searching
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 21:48 +0200, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote: > On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote: > > its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. > > You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its > (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI. That's like saying that a Juniper is just FreeBSD with a bunch of scripts and a weird CLI. -- /*=[ Jake Khuon ]=+ | Packet Plumber, Network Engineers /| / [~ [~ |) | | | | for Effective Bandwidth Utilisation / |/ [_ [_ |) |_| NETWORKS | +==*/
RE: Mikrotik RouterOS
Most of the major features of RouterOS are not "Linux" native apps anymore. Back in v2.9 this was the case, i.e. the Proxy server was SQUID, OSPF was again, the same way using a Linux app. However, especially in v3, and 4, as well as now v5, MikroTik has really made their own system. Not wishing to go into, what is better, the key here is that they have a super small footprint, and their hardware (for the cost) can't be beat. A sub 20-40 meg MPLS router with 5 ports for $40 USD. . 7200VXR replacements for under 1500. Other than they primary focus on Ethernet/Fiber/Wireless hardware, virtually no Legacy WAN interfaces anymore. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, Mikrotik Certified Trainer, MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCUME Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS" -Original Message- From: James Jones [mailto:ja...@freedomnet.co.nz] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 3:07 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Mikrotik RouterOS kind ofrouterOS supports MPLS, linux does not On 4/12/10 3:48 PM, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote: > On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote: >> its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. > > You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its > (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI. >
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
kind ofrouterOS supports MPLS, linux does not On 4/12/10 3:48 PM, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote: On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote: its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI.
RE: Mikrotik RouterOS
It runs the Linux kernal, bout it anymore! A few existing linux apps but super clean CLI, easy to use, awsome GUI. ;) Heck, the whole OS runs within 64meg of disk space if you wanted it too! --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, Mikrotik Certified Trainer, MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCUME Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS" -Original Message- From: Grzegorz Janoszka [mailto:grzeg...@janoszka.pl] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 2:49 PM To: nanog list Subject: Re: Mikrotik RouterOS On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote: > its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI. -- Grzegorz Janoszka
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote: its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI. -- Grzegorz Janoszka
RE: Mikrotik RouterOS
As it said, it was two fold, one the MT allowed it, and 2, the Cisco's crashed with it! --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, Mikrotik Certified Trainer, MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCUME Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS" -Original Message- From: Gustavo Santos [mailto:gustkil...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 2:44 PM To: Adrian Minta Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Mikrotik RouterOS its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. 2010/4/12 Adrian Minta > James Jones wrote: > >> >> I am currently looking at using RouterOS as a way to build a Metro >> Ethernet solution. Does anyone have experience with the device and the >> OS? How is the performance? Are there any "Gotchas"? >> >> >> -James >> >> >> Be carefull not to crash the whole internet: > http://www.renesys.com/blog/2009/02/longer-is-not-better.shtml > > > > > -- Gustavo Santos Analista de Redes -Cisco Certified Network Associate -Juniper Certified Internet Associate - ER -Mikrotik Certified Consultant
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while.. 2010/4/12 Adrian Minta > James Jones wrote: > >> >> I am currently looking at using RouterOS as a way to build a Metro >> Ethernet solution. Does anyone have experience with the device and the >> OS? How is the performance? Are there any "Gotchas"? >> >> >> -James >> >> >> Be carefull not to crash the whole internet: > http://www.renesys.com/blog/2009/02/longer-is-not-better.shtml > > > > > -- Gustavo Santos Analista de Redes -Cisco Certified Network Associate -Juniper Certified Internet Associate - ER -Mikrotik Certified Consultant
Re: Mikrotik RouterOS
James Jones wrote: I am currently looking at using RouterOS as a way to build a Metro Ethernet solution. Does anyone have experience with the device and the OS? How is the performance? Are there any "Gotchas"? -James Be carefull not to crash the whole internet: http://www.renesys.com/blog/2009/02/longer-is-not-better.shtml
