SSLVPN Implementation - Partner Discussion Thread

[JasonCampbell]

Similar to my previous post RE: IPv6 (https://community.meraki.com/t5/Security-SD-WAN/IPv6-MX-Implementation-Partner-Discussion-Thread/m-p...), we as partners need to continue to hold Meraki accountable to features available in all other firewalls other than Meraki MX.

We've been asking for SSLVPN for years now, with no real answers from Meraki. Partners, please express your needs for SSLVPN in this thread.

[lpopejoy]

100% agree. Meraki decided making phones and video cameras was a better idea than adding value to the current product.

Love Meraki, but it does seem a bit as if they have lost sight of what’s important.

VPN is a CONSTANT source of problems and we get more tickets and complaints about that than anything else.

[CptnCrnch]

+1!

Having a decent SSL VPN in place (AnyConnect of course would be simply perfect), there would be a lot of reasons to go against Forti (e.g.) in RFPs.

Customers (as well as myself) find IPSec is blocked in more and more locations at least across Europe. SSL VPN is simply the way to go here!

[PhilipDAth]

I would love AnyConnect to be bought to MX as well.  Mostly because AnyConnect works so well.

I would prefer something that supports both tcp and udp on port 443, like AnyConnect.  This combination means it will work in a wide variety of scenarios, while still giving great performance (if udp 443 works in particular).

Second choice it would use IKEv2.  IKEv2 seems to be more robust than IKEv1, and in particular L2TP+IKEv1.

Also I really really want the ability to assign group policies to VPN users.  I would especially like the Filter-Id RADIUS attribute to be supported so I can dynamically assign the policies.