This system is a mockery, you give people shit to upgrade, Only static routing works, the rest you can shuw....... even see from the filter syntax that it's a bird,or bird based. You don't know what kind of upgrade you've made. I feel sorry for you guys, and I'm pissed that I had to fumble with the code to start broadcasting IPv6 bgp prefixes. But it works for me, and I'm not fucking telling you how. Change your lames or just stop doing that.

Fuck RoS7.

That's also a way of doing ...

Moan, complain, ... whatever. Does it make you feel better ?
Good for you.
If you're really that negative, why bother posting ? Why still using Mikrotik ?
Solitary approach. Lone Wolf.

But you could also turn it around and say "Hey guys, this is the way to solve it. Take it into account for the next bug fix".
Social approach. People are social, in case you missed it.

你认为什么方法得到最多的回报吗?

That's also a way of doing ...

Moan, complain, ... whatever. Does it make you feel better ?
Good for you.
If you're really that negative, why bother posting ? Why still using Mikrotik ?
Solitary approach. Lone Wolf.

But you could also turn it around and say "Hey guys, this is the way to solve it. Take it into account for the next bug fix".
Social approach. People are social, in case you missed it.

你认为什么方法得到最多的回报吗?

No buddy, I'm not happy but maybe let those who take on such serious tasks do their job ?
How can they release this shit when they know that many networks have bgp on it, not only v4 but also v6.

这是牛屎。

This system should not show up until they learn bird config syntax. Czech bird, all the routing on the MT is based on the bird. I have already checked it and after corrections in the config, even in winbox, works announcing with v4 or v6 , only the prefix count does not work, and many more smallest things.

Great status [SOLVED]

Nothing is solved, 7.x is shit until some programmer learns the bird syntax and compiles it for winbox.

I am just a lowly homeowner, but one that is smart enough not to upgrade the CCR1009 until I know I wont lose internet unexpectedly for my family.
Not sure why anyone in business would put their network onto 7.X without testing all the functionality that they needed, in a lab, and actually confirmed it was stable and worked.
Thus my response, you are just making a mockery of your own ineptness.
So please take your BS elsewhere, cause no one here actually cares what you think.
Good day!

404 - I wish I could give you something for all the wisdom in this post
holo - your original reply is also great, I love it!

I'm also just a homeowner, but I happen to have a small test network and I run v7 there and it seems fine for just firewall filter, nat-masquerade, and simple queues (ipv4 only)...so now my whole network is on v7.1.3 [stable] and im doing ok....but my home network barely scratches the surface of ROS features and I know enterprise users have a lot more needs than myself.

why are there so many saying the update broke their production network when they got the newest rc (testing) release on either v6.x or v7.x? this was happening long before v7 was publicly available and it will continue to happen.....

so glad the ISPs of the world have it all together /s

What is bird syntax?

What is bird syntax?

https://bird.network.cz/doc/bird-5.html

Bird has a somewhat similar syntax to the route filters that RouterOS v7 uses, although not identical. Cisco and Juniper also use similar syntaxes.

A strong point of RouterOS used to be that one could config it without having to learn such syntaxes.
Instead of remembering what to write to match a network or AS number in a filter, just enter the value in the field already presented in the GUI (webfig or winbox).
Unfortunately that is now lost. I think it would have been better to keep the old method and add an "advanced" / "expert" filter option where such a Bird/Cisco/Juniper style filter could be typed.
(we can only hope it will be added back later)

(we can only hope it will be added back later)

I had a look at the new nftables syntax, which is the replacement for iptables in newer Linux versions. It looks a great deal more like the new RouterOS v7 route filter syntax than iptables. I wonder if this is also part of the reason for this decision.

Route filters have absolutely nothing to do with firewall filters.

Route filters have absolutely nothing to do with firewall filters.

Yes, except MikroTik's route filter configuration imitated iptables in RouterOS v6. What I am thinking is when RouterOS moves from iptables to nftables, we may lose the current GUI design for firewall rules and instead get something more like the v7 route filters for the firewall.

They could get away with manually written routing filters, because those are for professionals, but if I remember correctly, they said that they will come up with GUI for them later. It makes sense, because even professionals can appreciate simple and efficient interface, and writing everything manually is not that. But firewall, something used by everyone, including beginners, there's no way it could be without friendly GUI. It may not be exactly same what we have now (but AFAIK there's some compatibility layer with iptables interface and internal nftables, so it could be possible), but there must be something.

It may not be exactly same what we have now (but AFAIK there's some compatibility layer with iptables interface and internal nftables, so it could be possible), but there must be something.

I agree, that is why I said "we may lose thecurrent GUI design" instead of saying "we may lose the GUI". Whatever graphical rule builder they have in mind for the filters, I suspect we are likely to see the same thing (or close) used for an updated firewall based on nftables.