If you are new to mikrotik, you should better use webfig/#Quick_Set until you are familiar with the concepts. When you only want a connection to your existing LAN/WLAN, then configure a bridge not a router. It is a 3 minute setup, including update to newest RouterOS and Router Firmware with two reboots.
And then next try to configure LoraWAN/TTN .
On this stage the question is simply off topic or placed in the wrong community
What question and post are you referring to?
Please post a screenshot from Bridge > Ports, are wlan1 or ether1 there?
Make sure to connect using winbox, and clicking on the wAP mac address in neighbors tab, in order not to lose the winbox connection while doing these changes.
Why are you using another dchp-client on ether1??
What happens if you enable the dchp-client on wlan1?
In this scenario, you usually create a bridge, then add ether1 and wlan1 as ports. Then add a single dhcp-client on that bridge, thatās all required from an L3 perspective.
Depending on your security, if this is a LAN I would also remove the firewall and for sure NAT, maybe use IP > Services available from to filter management access if is a concern.
Careful using QuickSet. Is only a preset of recipes, meant to be used on a just resetted to defaults router; manually setting the router then using QuickSet will lead to issues.
Absolute!
To precise my post:
Reset configuration to factory default and then use QuickSet wizard 
Another thought: especially for this devices: Since you can power them without additional effort over the included PoE injector and there is an ethernet switch in reach anyway, i prefer ethernet over wifi anytimeā¦
Absolutely, nothing like a good olā wire, specially if is the only one as you use PoE!
I like to use them as cAPs too; wire them, then use the AP wifi portion as another AP in the network, works beautifully using CAPsMAN or in standalone mode.
My LoRa equipped routerboard does in fact provide outdoors wireless coverage in addition to being a LoRaWAN device.
Thank you for your advices. That helped me alot. Now I have the gateway the way I wanted it, but it took more than 3 minutes 
Unfortunately, in my case, only a WLAN connection is possible. I would like to use the cable connection to get into RouterOS if necessary.
Here are my detailed steps after reset to factory default:
Change firewall for ether1 so that I can configure via the LAN cable.
Set to CPE in the quick setup
Wireless address acquisition: Automatic
Local Network:
IP Address: 192.168.88.1
DHCP server: check
DHCP Server Range: 192.168.88.10-192.168.88.254
NAT: check
Password: ā¦
Country: Germany
Select WiFi network name and set Password
reboot
Log into RouterOS via the WiFi network
Check for updates
DHCP server for wlan1 -> disable
DHCP client for ether1 -> disable
Configure TTN
Yes, advanced usage. Even MPLS or Ethernet over IP is possible with this products. It seems they have quite a hard start in TTN Community. Not open, but flexible reliable and payable as nothing else in Network equipment. I think the LoraWAN-UDP-Forwarder was only a quick win and more stable stuff will followā¦
Newbe question:
This page on TheThingsIndustries warns me for the Mikrotik wAP LoRa8:
"Currently, this gateway does not support changing frequency channels."
I want to set up a nice gateway for TTN in my area. What does this warning mean (and will it be a problem in the future)?
I use these just fine on TTN - fiddly to set up via web interface compared to some but otherwise works fine for TTN with well defined frequency plan. Bullet proof since deployment and recovers easily from e.g. power outage or WiFi loss. This may be a ref to fact some designs can support other bands, configure by s/w? In their case they have the LR9 Kit for the 915Mhz band etc. (havent looked in detail but suspect same base platform (case/routerboard) but with swapped (R11?) mini pcie card to support respective bands. Product details here:
and here
Thanks. Iām already a mikrotik user so I know the interface and PCIe-cards. [Mikrotik is extremely versatile and affordable, but has a steep learning curve.]
So your experience is that the LR8 / LR9 support TTN v3 without any legacy setting? (I would love to go for Mikrotik, but I am a bit warry that Mikrotik might not support the latest standards.)
Works fine for meā¦ was on TTN V2 from late '20/21 then moved Oct/Nov 21 to V3 before the Decā21 sunset, know of many others working just fineā¦
Not sure what you mean by thisā¦ they ājust workā once configured correctly per TTN V3 (and the document you link to above, though I ignore the microtck instance and just point at normal eu.cloud )
As I put up a while back its on standard SMTC PF over port 1700, on basis of if it aint brike dont āfix itā I havent looked at if able to support basicstation, otherwise supports LoRaWAN specification - not sure what you mean by ālatest standardsā whilst spec for LNS and nodes evolve over time the GWās are essentially transparent media convertors and dont materially impact passing traffic. Have recently been looking at getting a couple more for āshelteredā deployments (not quite in building/benign but not fully weather exsposed) - a farm, a market garden and a river marina, possiby off-grid with solar supplyā¦
Sorry for not elaborating.
On help.mikrotik.com, the instruction page says you have to select āI am using the legacy packet (Semtech) forwarderā when registering the gateway at TTN. This gives me an uneasy feeling.
Edit: Found this thread with an answer from you. 
āSemtech Legacy PF still supported (UDP based) by TTN (CE) (aka V3) but other more secure/authenticated options such as BasicStation recommended/preferedā¦though sometimes its easier to just go with prior defaultā¦ā
Feels like one day TSN could drop support for the legacy forwarder?
TSN??
Whoever they are, if they do, watch 80% of the gateways stop working!
The issue is that the āLegacy Packet Forwarderā uses UDP and isnāt encrypted. So there is a tiny chance an uplink thatās already encrypted may be lost or intercepted. Reality is that there is a bigger chance that the radio waves occasionally clash and an uplink is lost before it reaches the gateway.
So because of this tiny chance of UDP & no-additional-encryption and a lack of ability to manage a router remotely via the gateway server, a committee got together and now we have Basic Station which is still, after a few years, a royal pain to install.
I think the other problem was that the teenagers writing it felt it inappropriate that we can read the packet forwarder code in an evening and that it doesnāt have a FaceBook add-on or React or a No-SQL database or a sexy name. So the system was āimprovedā.