> added Layer3 hardware offloading support for CRS309-1G-8S+IN, CRS312-4C+8XG-RM, CRS326-24S+2Q+RM and CRS354-48G-4S+2Q+RM
The Marvell switch chip supports IPv6 but for now Mikrotik only implemented support for v4 offload.. :/
WireGuard support in Mikrotik RouterOS v7.1beta2
71–79 of 79 posts
Re: WireGuard support in Mikrotik RouterOS v7.1beta2
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand that amateurs love the Pi and other underpowered, junk hardware, but not everybody wants yet another science project in their life.
IDK if you know, but it seems you're shadow banned. Which I find annoying because I wanted to reply to another post you wrote.
Mention it to dang if you like my posts.
He's not too bright, but he's all we got. :)
Re: WireGuard support in Mikrotik RouterOS v7.1beta2
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't feel light to setup if you're trying to get a tunnel working between different providers. We had a strange dead peer issue between Fortigate and Mikrotik and could never figure it out as it happened so rarely. All phase 1 and phase 2 settings were identical. I can imagine that happens elsewhere too.
Try enabling Dead Peer Detection (DPD).
Both sides had that on from the beginning.
Re: WireGuard support in Mikrotik RouterOS v7.1beta2
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was never a fan of RHEL even before they got purchased. They've done some great things lately with Podman, Buildah, Skopeo, etc but never really been an innovator when it comes to desktop Linux. I see Arch and Alpine being the real innovators, and projects like wlroots.
How did Arch and Alpine innovate ?
They provided a greatly improved package manager and package interface. Fedora and most other distros don't even come close in terms of the amount of high quality modern packages available from the official repos and AUR, but Alpine has also been growing substantially.
Re: WireGuard support in Mikrotik RouterOS v7.1beta2
#75Re: WireGuard support in Mikrotik RouterOS v7.1beta2
#76We have been waiting for years for UDP OpenVPN, but we get WireGaurd before most major distros. That's something
Actually, WireGuard has first class support now on a large number of distros, without the need for any additional compilation: Ubuntu 16.04, 18.04, 20.04, Fedora, Debian, OpenSUSE, Arch, Mandriva, Alpine, Nix, Void, OpenWRT, and others. Check out www.wireguard.com/install/ for the whole list.
AFAIK most of these are DKMS, so compilation (although automated and supported by distro) is still necessary.
Re: WireGuard support in Mikrotik RouterOS v7.1beta2
#77The ball's in your court, Ubiquiti
It's not. Why would one want that workload on their router when they can offload it to a $35 Pi?
There are also benefits to running your VPN endpoint on your network gateway - otherwise it can be difficult to configure routing tables to allow a user connecting from outside the network to access both internal and Internet IPs from the tunnel endpoint.
Re: WireGuard support in Mikrotik RouterOS v7.1beta2
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, WireGuard has first class support now on a large number of distros, without the need for any additional compilation: Ubuntu 16.04, 18.04, 20.04, Fedora, Debian, OpenSUSE, Arch, Mandriva, Alpine, Nix, Void, OpenWRT, and others. Check out www.wireguard.com/install/ for the whole list.
AFAIK most of these are DKMS, so compilation (although automated and supported by distro) is still necessary.
At least it will eventually propagate to all distros now that it's in the stable kernel!
Fedora and other distros with recent kernels already have it.
Re: WireGuard support in Mikrotik RouterOS v7.1beta2
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are lots of stable Linux distros running the stable kernel which is 5.8. it is just distros like RHEL that call themselves stable, but are actually antiquated and honestly just give users a bad experience because most of the software is outdated. Wouldn't expect anything less from IBM.
And it's somewhat silly to freeze the kernel. The Linux kernel is meticulous about backwards compatibility. Spin up any distribution user space in docker, and watch it work.
User space, yes.
Try loading (or recompiling) kernel modules. It’s a different story there, as they have no issues breaking that between releases.