Mikrotik CRS317-1G-16S+RM / 10GbE

BLinux

cat lover server enthusiast
Jul 7, 2016
2,519
964
113
artofserver.com
so i learned a few things and thought I'd share in case it helps someone else...

1) I made the false assumption that some of the basic configuration for RouterOS would be shared with SwOS. I had configured RouterOS with an appropriate IP address for my network and setup account/password; I was expecting that when I booted into SwOS, it would remain on that same IP and I could login with the account I had setup. The configuration for RouterOS and SwOS are apparently completely separate.

2) When I switched to boot SwOS from within the WebFig interface of RouterOS and rebooted, since it was my first time booting SwOS, it was using factory default configuration. However, there's an error in Mikrotik's documentation. The factor default IP address for RouterOS is 192.168.88.1; this is NOT the factory default IP address for SwOS. So when I booted into SwOS for the 1st time, it was no longer configured for my network and it was using IP address 192.168.88.2 instead of the address RouterOS uses. Mikrotik wiki still claims it uses the .1 address as default but it is not.

3) I was able to figure out the default IP address of SwOS by connecting to the serial console. When it boots up it prints a message about it's IP address/MAC address/SwOS version/etc, and then gives you a menu to select from.

4) My CRS317-1G-16S+RM came with SwOS 2.3, which has the bug that runs the fans at full speed. So, when I rebooted into SwOS, the switch kept running fans with full speed and "appears" as if it is still booting forever. The combination of this behavior, with the wrong IP address information mentioned above, had given me the impression the unit wasn't working when I rebooted to SwOS and I did a factory reset to get back to RouterOS.

5) Once I got into SwOS, i configured the unit's IP address as I did for RouterOS. One thing to note is that there is not place to specify IP netmask or default gateway. Apparently SwOS uses some discovery algorithm to figure out how to talk to things on the network.

6) Because of #5 above, when I initially tried to update the SwOS firmware, it said it could not download the firmware. There is a manual upload option so I was just going to download the firmware and upload it. But after a few minutes, the switch figured out how to talk to the internet and was able to download SwOS 2.7. So, if you run into this, let it run for 10 minutes and come back and try again.

7) Once the unit booted up with SwOS 2.7, the fan noise was gone. It runs the fans during initial boot sequence, but once the OS is loaded, the fans should shut off. So, this is just confirmation that the fan noise problem with SwOS is fixed. (it was something I wasn't sure of myself) At this point, I almost feel like there's no point in replacing the fans unless you know for sure you're going to run into the 40C threshold.

8) SwOS is very, very different than RouterOS. It's not just a "layer 2 only version of RouterOS", it seems totally different. I would describe RouterOS as "unpolished, but workable". But I would describe SwOS as "unfinished". I haven't done much with it yet, but I did configure a LAG port with 2x 10Gbps SFP+ ports and that seems to work just fine. However, its configuration options are very limited ; it is basically "active" or "passive" or "static".

9) SwOS WebUI is http ONLY; there is no option to enable HTTPS like you can in RouterOS. If you plan to use this switch with SwOS in anything other than a lab environment, considerations must be made to isolate and protect management traffic as it will all be cleartext.

that's it ...
 

I_D

Member
Aug 3, 2017
81
20
8
109
ugh, reading about all these problems makes me not want to buy one of these anymore
I just wish EU people like me had access to cheap quanta/arista gear like you US people do :(
there really is no cheap refurb SFP+ switches under 500 euro here :(
 

BLinux

cat lover server enthusiast
Jul 7, 2016
2,519
964
113
artofserver.com
ugh, reading about all these problems makes me not want to buy one of these anymore
I just wish EU people like me had access to cheap quanta/arista gear like you US people do :(
there really is no cheap refurb SFP+ switches under 500 euro here :(
I don't know what exactly you are referencing with the phrase "all these problems", but if you were talking about my post above, I should clarify that I'm not regretful of my purchase (at least not yet). The biggest problem so far was really the SwOS default IP error in documentation. Aside from that, most of my points above are meant to identify some false assumptions *I* had made (and perhaps others might make as well). In that sense, I was hoping it would help someone else who is new to this device and the RouterOS/SwOS stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stringfellowhawk

Necrotyr

Active Member
Jun 25, 2017
179
46
28
Denmark
I don't know what exactly you are referencing with the phrase "all these problems", but if you were talking about my post above, I should clarify that I'm not regretful of my purchase (at least not yet). The biggest problem so far was really the SwOS default IP error in documentation. Aside from that, most of my points above are meant to identify some false assumptions *I* had made (and perhaps others might make as well). In that sense, I was hoping it would help someone else who is new to this device and the RouterOS/SwOS stuff.
Yeah, SwOS is quite "simple" and rather poorly documented, but once you figure it out, it just keeps tanking.
 

RobstarUSA

Member
Sep 15, 2016
92
25
18
44
I can't get SwOS 2.7 to negoiate lacp (in either active or passive mode) with my Cisco SG220. "On/static" works, but was hoping for lacp.

Anyone get lacp on this to work with 1Gbit sfps? The links are physically up (if I switch it to "static" and on the cisco switch I set "on") it works, but lacp doesn't work.
 

fsck

Member
Oct 10, 2013
51
12
8
the switch looks nice, really looking forward to a review though.
I really dig the cooling solution, I'm surprised that more non-enterprise (as in environments where turbines are fine) switches don't do it
 

BLinux

cat lover server enthusiast
Jul 7, 2016
2,519
964
113
artofserver.com
I can't get SwOS 2.7 to negoiate lacp (in either active or passive mode) with my Cisco SG220. "On/static" works, but was hoping for lacp.

Anyone get lacp on this to work with 1Gbit sfps? The links are physically up (if I switch it to "static" and on the cisco switch I set "on") it works, but lacp doesn't work.
i am using active LACP on 2 10Gbps SFP+ ports to a TP-Link switch using HP branded DAC cables. that appears to work fine and both ends show the links. see #8 point in my post above.
 

RobstarUSA

Member
Sep 15, 2016
92
25
18
44
i am using active LACP on 2 10Gbps SFP+ ports to a TP-Link switch using HP branded DAC cables. that appears to work fine and both ends show the links. see #8 point in my post above.
I actually need this on two 1Gbit/s links, not sfp+. My SG220 does NOT have 10Gbit/s support.

I also don't (yet) have experience with RouterOS. I'm not sure I can use DAC cables as the SG220 may lock out non cisco modules.
 

RobstarUSA

Member
Sep 15, 2016
92
25
18
44
So switching this back to RouterOS 6.41.3 and attemping to make the lacp bond it worked as expected...go figure.

Seems like switchos really just isn't that usable yet.
 

maul0r

New Member
May 7, 2016
7
2
3
34
2) When I switched to boot SwOS from within the WebFig interface of RouterOS and rebooted, since it was my first time booting SwOS, it was using factory default configuration. However, there's an error in Mikrotik's documentation. The factor default IP address for RouterOS is 192.168.88.1; this is NOT the factory default IP address for SwOS. So when I booted into SwOS for the 1st time, it was no longer configured for my network and it was using IP address 192.168.88.2 instead of the address RouterOS uses. Mikrotik wiki still claims it uses the .1 address as default but it is not.
I just booted mine into SwitchOs for the first time. It seems they have noticed it and in version 2.7 it is 192.168.88.1. I upgraded the switch today (21.05.2018) before I switched to SwitchOS. Spend 10 minutes waiting for a connection until I decided to try .1 :)

Btw: I have a LB6M plus some CISCO gear in Germany to sell if anyone is interested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustinClift

zanechua

Member
May 6, 2016
57
8
8
27
Current list of working SFP+ Optics:
Intel AFBR-703DZ-IN2
Myricom 10G-SFP-SR
FiberStore SFP-10GSR-85
Finisar FTLX8571D3BCV-IT (Intel E10GSFPSR)
Finisar FTLX8571D3BCL-1H (HP PN: 721000-001)
HP 10Gb SR SFP+ (HP PN: 455885-001)
HP X130 10G SFP+ LC SR (HP PN: JD092B)
FTLX8571D3BCL
FTLX8571D3BCL-C2 (Cisco SFP-10G-SR FNS[FINISAR])
SFBR-709SMZ-CS1 (Cisco SFP-10G-SR AVD[AVAGO])
PLRXPL-SC-S43-CS (Cisco SFP-10G-SR JUR[JDSU])
 

rysti32

New Member
Apr 14, 2018
10
3
3
35
Has anybody had luck with 1GbE copper SFPs? I tried a FS.com one and didn't have a lot of success. I managed to get it to link some of the time if I disable autonegotiation on both sides of the link, but it was very inconsistent.

The Mikrotik S+RJ45 seems to have no problem doing 1GbE as long as I force the speed to 1G in the CLI.
 

woodshop2300

New Member
Dec 17, 2016
27
18
3
35
Has anybody had luck with 1GbE copper SFPs? I tried a FS.com one and didn't have a lot of success. I managed to get it to link some of the time if I disable autonegotiation on both sides of the link, but it was very inconsistent.

The Mikrotik S+RJ45 seems to have no problem doing 1GbE as long as I force the speed to 1G in the CLI.
Huh, my FS one works just fine, its the uplink to the rest of my network.
SwOS lists it as SFP-GB-GE-T, i think i got it as generic coded.
EdgeSwitch lists that link as 1000 full no errors.
 

zanechua

Member
May 6, 2016
57
8
8
27
Will be getting some FCLF-8521-3 which is 1Gbit RJ-45 transceivers.

Will keep you guys posted. I am using SwitchOS though.

EDIT:

Seems like I am facing auto-negotiation issues with these transceivers too.

They detect fine and I can see them in the web interface however auto-negotiation doesn't work.

If I plug in the transceiver into a Cisco Switch, auto-negotiation works fine.
 
Last edited:

compuguy

New Member
Aug 23, 2017
15
4
3
so i learned a few things and thought I'd share in case it helps someone else...

1) I made the false assumption that some of the basic configuration for RouterOS would be shared with SwOS. I had configured RouterOS with an appropriate IP address for my network and setup account/password; I was expecting that when I booted into SwOS, it would remain on that same IP and I could login with the account I had setup. The configuration for RouterOS and SwOS are apparently completely separate.

2) When I switched to boot SwOS from within the WebFig interface of RouterOS and rebooted, since it was my first time booting SwOS, it was using factory default configuration. However, there's an error in Mikrotik's documentation. The factor default IP address for RouterOS is 192.168.88.1; this is NOT the factory default IP address for SwOS. So when I booted into SwOS for the 1st time, it was no longer configured for my network and it was using IP address 192.168.88.2 instead of the address RouterOS uses. Mikrotik wiki still claims it uses the .1 address as default but it is not.

3) I was able to figure out the default IP address of SwOS by connecting to the serial console. When it boots up it prints a message about it's IP address/MAC address/SwOS version/etc, and then gives you a menu to select from.

4) My CRS317-1G-16S+RM came with SwOS 2.3, which has the bug that runs the fans at full speed. So, when I rebooted into SwOS, the switch kept running fans with full speed and "appears" as if it is still booting forever. The combination of this behavior, with the wrong IP address information mentioned above, had given me the impression the unit wasn't working when I rebooted to SwOS and I did a factory reset to get back to RouterOS.

5) Once I got into SwOS, i configured the unit's IP address as I did for RouterOS. One thing to note is that there is not place to specify IP netmask or default gateway. Apparently SwOS uses some discovery algorithm to figure out how to talk to things on the network.

6) Because of #5 above, when I initially tried to update the SwOS firmware, it said it could not download the firmware. There is a manual upload option so I was just going to download the firmware and upload it. But after a few minutes, the switch figured out how to talk to the internet and was able to download SwOS 2.7. So, if you run into this, let it run for 10 minutes and come back and try again.

7) Once the unit booted up with SwOS 2.7, the fan noise was gone. It runs the fans during initial boot sequence, but once the OS is loaded, the fans should shut off. So, this is just confirmation that the fan noise problem with SwOS is fixed. (it was something I wasn't sure of myself) At this point, I almost feel like there's no point in replacing the fans unless you know for sure you're going to run into the 40C threshold.

8) SwOS is very, very different than RouterOS. It's not just a "layer 2 only version of RouterOS", it seems totally different. I would describe RouterOS as "unpolished, but workable". But I would describe SwOS as "unfinished". I haven't done much with it yet, but I did configure a LAG port with 2x 10Gbps SFP+ ports and that seems to work just fine. However, its configuration options are very limited ; it is basically "active" or "passive" or "static".

9) SwOS WebUI is http ONLY; there is no option to enable HTTPS like you can in RouterOS. If you plan to use this switch with SwOS in anything other than a lab environment, considerations must be made to isolate and protect management traffic as it will all be cleartext.

that's it ...
9) I may be wrong but you should be able to configure the switch in winbox when running SwOS?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tha_14

WANg

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2018
796
441
63
Looks tempting - what's the expected noise footprint on this thing? How does it compare to, say, an HP MicroServer G7?