4 ms·

How is Mikrotik's software? I find UBNT's to be excellent for someone who doesn't want to do everything via CLI.

by mbesto 9y ago

isostatic 9y ago
Some things are better via the gui (web or a windows exe that's wineable), but I prefer ssh access. I like the fact everything is included, ospf, bgp, pim, mpls/vpls, you name it it's there (aside from decent user management). I used to run bgp at home but moved to ospf recently
- cdancette 9y ago
  Yeah it's pretty impressive to have all of those protocols included in such "low cost" routers (less than a hundred dollars). Why do you need bgp/ospf for your home network? Are you just experimenting? I used to manage the network of my school campus, we connected about 1000 persons, and ospf was working great! We didn't use mikrotik though, we used extremenetworks routers
  - isostatic 9y ago
    Multiple subnets to keep the wireless domain, wired domain, protected domains and dmz apart. I used to run the backbone over wireless when I rented (couldn't run cat5 through the walls), so didn't vlan everything back to a single router. OSPF makes it far easier to manage those, but I did used to run BGP as it made more sense to me when I learned about routing protocols and was more forgiving of wireless issues (which could have been me using the wrong OSPF mode to be honest) In addition to the normal fixed infrastructure, I have a cluster of 5 cheap mikrotiks that I use for a little experimentation with things like failover time, but that's mainly for work purposes.
    - colanderman 9y ago
      Mikrotik does in fact support VLAN bridging over WiFi (only between Mikrotik devices), unless you're running in CAPsMAN mode. When I switched to CAPsMAN, I ended up using VPLS for my wireless backbone, thus giving me proper layer 2 isolation, without fragmentation (MPLS not being limited by the L3 MTU).
      - isostatic 9y ago
        One goal was to keep layer 2 multicast network off wireless where possible. Mikrotik's don't do IGMP snooping (until very recently). The wireless backbone had to support multi-networked traffic of course, but local traffic (between a couple of devices in one room) could be kept off the link
eltoozero 9y ago
MikroTik Webfig (www GUI), winbox (Windows native eve), and SSH/Telnet CLI have parity feature sets. The CLI is nice in ways Cisco IOS isn’t, like a safe mode, auto-complete and in-line tab suggestions. As if the feature parity between UIs wasn’t huge, the feature-set itself is major. RouterOS runs on PCs, there is a VM version as well, but you can get a an performant SOHO Routerboard unit for stupid cheap and they even have the actual Routerboard hardware available in bare PCB form-factor for OEM integration.
stephen_g 9y ago
Perhaps it's an acquired taste. Some of our older office/test network routing is Mikrotik hardware, but since I started pitching in, all the new stuff has been Ubiquiti. I think it's night and day, the UBNT stuff is great but I really dislike the Mikrotik UIs - I find it really confusing and in my experience the documentation is generally poor (unless you only use the CLI). The Ubiquiti hardware generally seems much higher performance and is also low cost. But on the other hand, I do know some guys who really like the Mikrotik stuff so maybe it's just me...
colanderman 9y ago
It's a "pretty" UI around what is basically Linux. E.g. you won't get far without understanding Linux's iptables, but both MT's command line and GUI are a heck of a lot more discoverable and user-friendly than the iptables command line. If you want to do anything more than very basic single AP home scenario, you have to be willing to get your hands dirty. BUT they are very configurable, make for great learning experiences, and (from my experience) are very reliable, both hardware and data-plane software. That said, the configuration software DOES have bugs from time to time, but MT is decently responsive.

How is Mikrotik's software? I find UBNT's to be excellent for someone who doesn't want to do everything via CLI.

by mbesto 9y ago

How is Mikrotik's software? I find UBNT's to be excellent for someone who doesn't want to do everything via CLI.

Some things are better via the gui (web or a windows exe that's wineable), but I prefer ssh access. I like the fact everything is included, ospf, bgp, pim, mpls/vpls, you name it it's there (aside from decent user management). I used to run bgp at home but moved to ospf recently

cdancette 9y ago
Yeah it's pretty impressive to have all of those protocols included in such "low cost" routers (less than a hundred dollars). Why do you need bgp/ospf for your home network? Are you just experimenting? I used to manage the network of my school campus, we connected about 1000 persons, and ospf was working great! We didn't use mikrotik though, we used extremenetworks routers
- isostatic 9y ago
  Multiple subnets to keep the wireless domain, wired domain, protected domains and dmz apart. I used to run the backbone over wireless when I rented (couldn't run cat5 through the walls), so didn't vlan everything back to a single router. OSPF makes it far easier to manage those, but I did used to run BGP as it made more sense to me when I learned about routing protocols and was more forgiving of wireless issues (which could have been me using the wrong OSPF mode to be honest) In addition to the normal fixed infrastructure, I have a cluster of 5 cheap mikrotiks that I use for a little experimentation with things like failover time, but that's mainly for work purposes.
  - colanderman 9y ago
    Mikrotik does in fact support VLAN bridging over WiFi (only between Mikrotik devices), unless you're running in CAPsMAN mode. When I switched to CAPsMAN, I ended up using VPLS for my wireless backbone, thus giving me proper layer 2 isolation, without fragmentation (MPLS not being limited by the L3 MTU).
    - isostatic 9y ago
      One goal was to keep layer 2 multicast network off wireless where possible. Mikrotik's don't do IGMP snooping (until very recently). The wireless backbone had to support multi-networked traffic of course, but local traffic (between a couple of devices in one room) could be kept off the link

eltoozero 9y ago

MikroTik Webfig (www GUI), winbox (Windows native eve), and SSH/Telnet CLI have parity feature sets. The CLI is nice in ways Cisco IOS isn’t, like a safe mode, auto-complete and in-line tab suggestions. As if the feature parity between UIs wasn’t huge, the feature-set itself is major. RouterOS runs on PCs, there is a VM version as well, but you can get a an performant SOHO Routerboard unit for stupid cheap and they even have the actual Routerboard hardware available in bare PCB form-factor for OEM integration.

stephen_g 9y ago

Perhaps it's an acquired taste. Some of our older office/test network routing is Mikrotik hardware, but since I started pitching in, all the new stuff has been Ubiquiti. I think it's night and day, the UBNT stuff is great but I really dislike the Mikrotik UIs - I find it really confusing and in my experience the documentation is generally poor (unless you only use the CLI). The Ubiquiti hardware generally seems much higher performance and is also low cost. But on the other hand, I do know some guys who really like the Mikrotik stuff so maybe it's just me...

colanderman 9y ago

It's a "pretty" UI around what is basically Linux. E.g. you won't get far without understanding Linux's iptables, but both MT's command line and GUI are a heck of a lot more discoverable and user-friendly than the iptables command line. If you want to do anything more than very basic single AP home scenario, you have to be willing to get your hands dirty. BUT they are very configurable, make for great learning experiences, and (from my experience) are very reliable, both hardware and data-plane software. That said, the configuration software DOES have bugs from time to time, but MT is decently responsive.