Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
Proximo737
just joined
Topic Author
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 9:53 pm

2 Existing Wireless Backhauls - need bonded

Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:08 pm

I've been doing networking and wireless setup for some time now, but when it comes to new stuff and more intricate setups I'm a noob for sure. So, please keep it simple and winbox style. :)

I have two wireless backhaul links setup to a tower (Ubiquiti airFiber 5XHD). I want to bond the links to function as one "faster" link.

I have a RB750Gr3 to use at each end. I want to connect backhaul link A to ether1 and backhaul link B to ether2 on each RB750, then connect my network to ether3 at each end. No routing, just a bonded link that is in the same network subnet passing through data, without creating a network loop. Failover and/or balancing would be nice.
 
User avatar
Hominidae
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 12:50 am

Re: 2 Existing Wireless Backhauls - need bonded

Thu Jun 10, 2021 10:45 am

...so each site has an identical infrastructure?
You have two "wireless wires" at L2 level between Site A and Site B or are these two IP based ISP-Links each?

If your connection is transparent L2, you can create the bond directly on etherX interfaces on each side.
For an IP based link, create two EIOP Tunnels (which is a L2 over IP tunnel) between the MT-Routers, one for each link, and then create bond accross these, like in a physical ethernet bond.
Then setup your own IP network accross both sites.

Edit: but over a wireless link, your mileage mayvary, as EOIP requires ARP and the link will always be UP, creating overhead.
Another option would be to use Mulit-Link PPP, which is more efficient....but as far as I know, MT does not provide a MLPPP server in RouterOS.
 
Proximo737
just joined
Topic Author
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 9:53 pm

Re: 2 Existing Wireless Backhauls - need bonded

Thu Jun 10, 2021 5:30 pm

...so each site has an identical infrastructure? Basically yes

You have two "wireless wires" at L2 level between Site A and Site B or are these two IP based ISP-Links each? Yes, I have 2 "wireless wires". I love that phrase by the way! :)

If your connection is transparent L2, you can create the bond directly on etherX interfaces on each side. Yes, the wireless links run in transparent L2.
So, I should be able to use this from the wiki to setup the basic bonding with something like LACP or balance-xor?
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Interface/Bonding
I just want each RB750 to act as a regular switch with 2 ethernet ports bonded (connected to wireless bridges) and a third port running to my network equipment.
 
tdw
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 11:55 am

Re: 2 Existing Wireless Backhauls - need bonded

Thu Jun 10, 2021 5:53 pm

The radio links may not be transparent to LACP, the so-called 'slow protocols' need 802.1ad provider bridge support (not to be confused with 802.3ad LACP) to propagate across devices.

Additionally when you sent up a bond you may loose management access to some of the radios, a common cheat is to have different networks for each radio leg for management access and then run a VLAN over each and bond that for the main traffic.
 
jonah1810
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: 2 Existing Wireless Backhauls - need bonded

Thu Jun 17, 2021 1:03 am

I just set this up over some Ubiquiti backhauls. DO NOT use the mikrotik bonding example on the main page. it is meant for direct connection between routers. I had 20-50% packet loss using that configuration.

instead here is an example of how to configure it :

(scroll down to the solution)
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:L ... less_links


essentially don't bond ethernet interfaces but put a vlan on each interface you want bonded and bond the vlans instead.
 
syd
just joined
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: 2 Existing Wireless Backhauls - need bonded

Fri Oct 28, 2022 2:55 am

essentially don't bond ethernet interfaces but put a vlan on each interface you want bonded and bond the vlans instead.

But what about hardware offloading, when we bond VLAN interfaces, not an ethernet?

I need to keep all traffic passing by a switch chips, not a CPU on my switches from both sides (between them will be two 60Ghz/1Gbit links). As I know traffic to/from VLAN interfaces is processing by CPU, not switch chip. Am I right? In switches like CRS3xx VLAN interfaces are made up and adding to the bridge only for administrating purpose (not for passing traffic through these interfaces). So... I'd rather do no communication with my pair in-bond devices and passing the traffic via switch chips, than have all time visible all units and going through switches CPU on both sides. Minuses are obvious and hard to accept (no control, no monitoring, hard to update and so on), but is there a way to pass all traffic via switch chips (featured in some Mikrotik's devices and only for 802.3ad and balance-xor) and have a connection to devices inside bondings?

I will be appreciate to hear sth from users that tried that way!
 
fahadrgpmd
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu May 26, 2022 3:50 pm

Re: 2 Existing Wireless Backhauls - need bonded

Fri Oct 28, 2022 7:56 am

In today's world, it's more important than ever to have a dependable wireless backhaul. That's why many companies are turning to bonded wireless backhauls. A bonded wireless backhaul is two or more wireless backhauls that are combined to provide a single, high-speed connection. This type of connection is ideal for companies that require a lot of data transfer or have large files that need to be transmitted quickly.https://www.krogerfeedback.uno/ https://www.iliteblue.com/ https://www.upsers.fit/
 
syd
just joined
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: 2 Existing Wireless Backhauls - need bonded

Wed Nov 30, 2022 2:25 am

In today's world, it's more important than ever to have a dependable wireless backhaul. That's why many companies are turning to bonded wireless backhauls. A bonded wireless backhaul is two or more wireless backhauls that are combined to provide a single, high-speed connection. This type of connection is ideal for companies that require a lot of data transfer or have large files that need to be transmitted quickly.https://www.krogerfeedback.uno/ https://www.iliteblue.com/ https://www.upsers.fit/

OK, so what's Mikrotik's answer for that? If we bond two 60 Ghz (2 x 1 Gbit/s) links and put traffic through CPUs instead of switch chips (like here, where we're loosing hardware offloading: https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:L ... less_links), what we get? 100% CPU.
 
mkx
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 8936
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:23 pm

Re: 2 Existing Wireless Backhauls - need bonded

Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:20 am

... what we get? 100% CPU.
On which device? For R1 and R2, bond is between ether ports and whether it's HW offloaded or not entirely depends on ability of both devices. For APx and STx each link is just normal wireless link (those don't know anything about bonding) and performance is same as if there wasn't any bond. If 1Gbps over a 60GHz MT device means 100% CPU load, then bonding won't change it a iota.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], dpaiha and 44 guests