[AusNOG] Looks like a total beast but would you dare run your core network on it?

[Joseph Goldman]

It can also be frustrating as bugfixes were released on new versions so 
in some cases you were stuck either living with a bug or upgrading to an 
unknown release.

Luckily they have been listening a lot to the community of late and have 
started a bugfix/current/releasecandidate option in upgrading so you 
dont have to upgrade fully to get the critical bug fixes.

It really sounds like they are getting a lot of their processes 
perfected and hopefuly ROSv7 should bring a lot more trust & stability 
to the whole platform.

It would be good also if they released support contracts with a 
comparable TAC with engineers that can delve deep under the software and 
give real answers, they refer off to certified consultants still at the 
moment and the big trouble with that is its easy to know as much as the 
consultants if you follow the forums closely with the various bug 
reports (and they'll be forced to refer you back to mikrotiks free email 
support if it truly is a bug).

On 24/08/15 15:59, Andrew Cox wrote:
> >>I haven't had much issue with them, but I also pick and choose my 
> software releases, and don't configure new (or unused) features on 
> production to avoid bugs.
>
> This is the most important answer to any question people ask about 
> why/why not use MikroTik.
>
> There is no MikroTik equivalent to a TAC phone number you can call to 
> help you fix your problems, so as long as you test out the features 
> you're need in house before rolling out a new version you're going to 
> have a great time.
> If you find a new cool feature that you want to roll out on your BGP 
> sessions, or you see they've improved fastpath and you have a router 
> that could benefit, don't roll it out there.. test it on your home 
> router for a few weeks first like you should be doing with any other 
> vendor!
>
> - Andrew
>
> On 24 August 2015 at 15:00, Joseph Goldman <joe at apcs.com.au 
> <mailto:joe at apcs.com.au>> wrote:
>
>     Mikrotik's have been discussed for a while - plenty are using at
>     the edge, some are using at the core. I personally use
>     CCR1036-8G-2Splus at my core, which use the same CPU architecture
>     as the 1072 just less cores, and different interface options.
>
>     I haven't had much issue with them, but I also pick and choose my
>     software releases, and don't configure new (or unused) features on
>     production to avoid bugs.
>
>     I run 2 with as much active-active and failover redundancy as I
>     can, and the cost of the 2 ($3k~) still far cheaper than a couple
>     of Cisco routers for my networks ~500mbit / 200kpps throughput. (1
>     router is currently doing most of that work sitting at 10-15% CPU
>     with conntracking + firewall mangle rules + about 10 simple queues)
>
>     The biggest problem is multi-threaded use for some of the
>     important processes in them, BGP being the main one, and single
>     TCP stream being the other. They each seem to be limited to a
>     single core at a time so importing full tables and
>     updates/withdraws can take a bit to propagate in the route table.
>     TCP single stream only seems to be able to get to 1gbps, again
>     seems to be a single core restriction.
>
>     ROSv7 is meant to fix a lot of this but still in alpha stage, no
>     public betas even heard of yet.
>
>
>     On 24/08/15 14:48, James Mcintosh wrote:
>>     http://routerboard.com/CCR1072-1G-8Splus
>>
>>     With equivalent gear from Cisco costing 10x or more might it be
>>     worth taking a chance?
>>
>>     If not what else similar is this alternative. I don't mind paying
>>     a premium for quality but 10x is a bit ridiculous...
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     AusNOG mailing list
>>     AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net  <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
>>     http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     AusNOG mailing list
>     AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
>     http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20150824/4cdcda00/attachment-0001.html>