Reputation
46,393
Next tag badge:
96/100 score
31/20 answers
Badges
17 113 183
Newest
 Guru
Impact
~2.6m people reached

Apr
2
comment Using a computer with many COM ports as a low cost out of band solution?
@red888 the device has published pinouts. You could easily connect the 8P8C connector on the device to the 8P8C connector on Cisco (and many other) devices. In fact, you'll notice that the pinouts of the console match the pinouts of the 8P8C end of a rollover cable. A straight-through CAT5 cable would go straight in and work out of the box.
Apr
2
answered Using a computer with many COM ports as a low cost out of band solution?
Mar
31
awarded  Nice Question
Mar
30
comment 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
It looks like the extra 200Mhz in speed between the 750 and the 2011 hasn't made any difference to the IPSec speeds. I wish Mikrotik would publish these figures somewhere.
Mar
30
revised 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
Better CPU graph that sort of lines up with the other graphs I've posted.
Mar
30
accepted 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
Mar
30
comment 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
Unfortunately not. I found some threads on the Mikrotik forums where 11Mbps was thrown around as the maximum for this router (and seems like I have confirmed this here). The blog I linked to the guy ran his tests and got around 1Mbps of traffic, but on a much, much lower powered router. Mine should be around 6-10x more powerful and I seem to be getting 6-10x the amount of IPSec traffic, which all matches up. It doesn't look like a CPU bound issue, or an IRQ bound issue, or a memory bound issue. I have no idea what's actually going on here.
Mar
30
revised 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
added 124 characters in body
Mar
30
answered 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
Mar
30
revised 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
added 301 characters in body
Mar
30
comment 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
@xeon bare metal host to bare metal host, no difference.
Mar
26
revised 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
added 309 characters in body
Mar
26
revised 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
edited title
Mar
26
revised 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
Previous version had a red herring about HTTP. My initial tests were faulty and were giving me incorrect data. This no longer seems protocol dependent.
Mar
26
comment 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
@GregL no luck I'm afraid, same story. However I have concluded this morning that my initial tests were faulty, and it does not seem to be isolated to SMB, as with a different (more accurate) test, I can now reproduce this issue over HTTP. I've removed the HTTP red herring from my question now.
Mar
26
revised 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
Previous version had a red herring about HTTP. My initial tests were faulty and were giving me incorrect data. This no longer seems protocol dependent.
Mar
26
comment 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
@MichelZ yes. At least I damn well hope so - Server 2012 R2 and Windows 7 at either end.
Mar
26
comment 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
@joeqwerty that calculator is great. When I'm back in the office tomorrow I'll muck around and see what's what. Right now it looks like my total packet size is going to be 1536 bytes, which is too big.
Mar
26
comment 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
@MichelZ I have. Tried lots of different source/destinations with the same result
Mar
26
comment 20Mbps WAN limited to 10Mbps over IPSec Tunnel
@joeqwerty well the problem probably did occur before the upgrade, but because it was a 10/10 link it was by coincidence capping out at the maximum available bandwidth anyway.