Empowering small internet service providers worldwide

Generally speaking PPP adds an extra encapsulation layer of 8bits per packet so as a result the speed is a bit reduced (but negligible). However, there is also a case that is related to MTU mismatch. For example if the client (PC/router) uses MTU 1500 while PPP interface is 1492, fragmentation kills speed. 🛠 **Fix**: Set: * PPP MTU = 1492 * Adjust client MTU = 1492 Check those if they are matching and let us know so we debug further. 🖐👨‍💻

Experiencing slow speeds on some clients while connected via PPPOE but on Static IP speeds looks okay. Kindly assist

You can check out the new traffic shaper feature, @sohanur. By editing a router, settings, advanced: Queues+NAT you select there the traffic shaper router, the queues will automatically move under the parent router (traffic shaper). Anyone in the community who’s interested, please give it a try and share your feedback.

For ISPs that have already set up custom domains, you will soon see the following message: > **Action required: TXT record for your custom domain (before October 1, 2025)** > My Account > Custom Domain This update is required to securely link your custom domain to your organization and prevent unauthorized use. Adding the TXT record follows the same process as when you added your CNAME. Step-by-step instructions are available on your **Custom Domain** page. Please make sure to complete this step before **October 1, 2025**. After this date, your custom domain will stop working until the TXT record is added. If you need assistance, our team is available anytime via webchat or support email. 🖐👨‍💻

Just following up on this. A must-needed feature. Thank you for the hard work!

sure, currently Zima propagates config to all routers the same: Auth, Queues (ratelimit + traffic accounting). What you asked for is the following: > they assign bandwidth limit in core router > distribution router will only handle pppoe without bandwidth limit So in order to instruct Zima about this config we need a new field called: "Traffic shaper" (It is a dropdown that is empty by default). Here is how it could be implemented: Suppose you have 2 routers called: a/ core_router b/ distribution_router Steps: 1/ You select **distribution_router** >> Edit 2/ You go to the field "Traffic shaper" and assign core_router and you save. This will instruct Zima that: distribution_router will only handle authentication of clients routers while core_router will handle traffic shaping. Does this explanation make the idea clearer for you? And does it cover your use case, or are there any caveats we should still address?

sounds good to me, can you explain more on this ?

We can work on that, technically it is possible for Zima to separate shaping in Router1 and Authentication in Router2. From a UX perspective: We go to Router2, edit How about a dropdown "Traffic Shaper" that contains all routers. By default, it is blank, it means that the router will do Auth and Shaping (as it is the case now with all routers). If the "Traffic shaper" drop down is set on a specific router, then Zima will propagate the shaping config to that router. This should be enough to instruct Zima about this new setup. Do you agree with this method? Any other considerations?

You are absolutely right. I have been using it like this, and it's working perfectly for me..

If you assign static IP that does not belong to an IP pool in Zima you will have to manage this IP manually in Mikrotik. For example you NAT an IP range in Mikrotik and then you assign an IP from that range in Zima for a customer. They will be assigned the IP and they will have internet and you could track their consumption graph normally in Zima. could you please share a screenshot to make it clearer what is the issue that you are facing?