Metanoia V5311 VDSL SFP + Mikrotik

Forums › LAN (ethernet/Wifi/routers/Bluetooth) › Metanoia V5311 VDSL SFP + Mikrotik

MichaelNZ

1227 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Integrity Tech Solutions

#236125 18-May-2018 19:52

I am testing a Metanoia V5311 SFP and I have not been able to get it working. Everything seems to be in order and I have consulted multiple sources (including @michaelmurphy guide) but it just won't connect.

The logs say initialising, connecting, terminated/disconnected. I have called InspireNet and they report no auth attempts showing at their end.

I have setup a PPPoE client on Vlan 10 and this vlan-10 is tied to interface SFP 1.

So far, this is the most complicated and least (well basically none) documented VDSL modem I have ever come across. A Google shows several other people asking about it but getting no substantial replies.

I'm hoping that someone here may have a solution or a sample config please.

1 | 2

1227 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Integrity Tech Solutions

#2018607 18-May-2018 21:29

I have found the solution.

The SFP settings must be specified as follows:

Auto negotiation = off

Speed = 1Gbps full duplex

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

michaelmurfy

cat
12237 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2018690 19-May-2018 00:11

Wow I didn't even know such a device existed. I wish I knew about that a couple of weeks ago :)

Michael Murphy | https://murfy.nz
Referral Links: Tessie | Tesla | Quic Broadband (use R122101E7CV7Q for free setup)

Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by subscribing.
Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

hio77

'That VDSL Cat'
12984 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Voyager

Subscriber

#2018693 19-May-2018 00:18

MichaelNZ:

I have found the solution.

The SFP settings must be specified as follows:

Auto negotiation = off

Speed = 1Gbps full duplex

think @chevrolux mentioned that the other day ;)

#include <std_disclaimer>

Any comments made are personal opinion and do not reflect directly on the position my current or past employers may have.

cyril7

8950 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2018788 19-May-2018 08:54

Hi, yes I also mentioned that the device will not auto negotiate.

But Michael, I assume now that is sorted the device is working ok, what sync rates are you getting relative to previous modem, keen to hear

Cyril

MichaelNZ

1227 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Integrity Tech Solutions

#2018847 19-May-2018 10:44

I don't know yet but will post when I find out. Right now, I am trying to get my head around the Mikrotik bridges, ethernet interfaces and vlans. Based on the docs, the config I have should trunk vlan40 and vlan50 to the switch where I have my access ports. But it ain't working yet.

RunningMan

7966 posts

Uber Geek

#2018853 19-May-2018 10:56

You're probably aware, but there was some significant changes to bridge implementation with RouterOS 6.41 onwards - don't get confused with older documentation.

cyril7

8950 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2018855 19-May-2018 10:58

Yep, as RunningMan says, most documentation surrounds older (actually quite recent) implementations, which is different to lattest.

Cyril

MichaelNZ

1227 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Integrity Tech Solutions

#2018859 19-May-2018 11:11

I am using Winbox and have -

1. Set up 2 IP address pools - 1 public and 1 private

2. Tied them to Vlans 40 and 50

3. Removed port 4 from the default "bridge" interface

4. Tied Vlans 40 and 50 to port 4 (this should have the effect of creating a trunk?)

I can't ping the Vlan gateway IP address.

RunningMan

7966 posts

Uber Geek

#2018867 19-May-2018 11:19

Have you created an address and tied that to the VLAN?

/IP addresses

MichaelNZ

1227 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Integrity Tech Solutions

#2018868 19-May-2018 11:22

RunningMan:

Have you created an address and tied that to the VLAN?

/IP addresses

Yes - vlan40 is public IP's and vlan 50 is rfc1918 192.168* IP's.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#2018869 19-May-2018 11:24

RouterOS is complex. If you've never used it before and want to start doing anything that's not in the wizard the is realistically a few months of learning ahead and reading.

It's why I never recommend it as a solution to people.

cyril7

8950 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2018897 19-May-2018 12:33

Hi, maybe just back the bus up a bit and get a basic network going, then start adding other networks to bootstrap your understanding.

Edit: Also do the addresses you created show as reachable in Routes and shown as connected to the vlan

Cyril

JeremyNzl

356 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2018928 19-May-2018 13:15

When I needed scripts to achieve what I wanted to do on routerOs, I hired a Ukrainian from upwork.com for a fixed price think it was 20usd to set up a dual wan failover. using a ppoe and static gateway.

would do this again,

MichaelNZ

1227 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Integrity Tech Solutions

#2018931 19-May-2018 13:18

JeremyNzl:

When I needed scripts to achieve what I wanted to do on routerOs, I hired a Ukrainian from upwork.com for a fixed price think it was 20usd to set up a dual wan failover. using a ppoe and static gateway.

would do this again,

Personally, I either learn how to do it myself or pay someone a fair amount to do it for me.

MichaelNZ

1227 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Integrity Tech Solutions

#2019030 19-May-2018 16:13

Update - Making good progress. I had entered my public IP syntax incorrectly in the VLAN configuration and fixing this up made a big difference. I am now close to having similiar functionality to what I had with the Cisco - thus restoring the functionality of my network.

I had entered GW IP and netmask in the 2 spaces whereas I should have entered GW/netmask all in the same place.

Latency with the V5311 SFP has improved by around 3ms at the expense of some upload speed, which has gone from circa 25 to 20Mbps. Download speed is fairly similar at around 49Mbps.I have observed identical performance on both NAT and public-IP direct tests.

DLM has been unkind to me over the last few days likely due to my chopping and changing. I was getting as high as 59/29 recently.

1 | 2