I wanted to make a special call-out after a document update by @CameronMoody. The Cisco Meraki VMX can now be run on-premises if you are using Cisco UCS-C series servers and using Cisco's NFVIS virtualization system.
That's great...but why are we limited to UCS-C series servers? Whats the timeframe for implementation onto none Cisco servers? Off the top of my head surely its cheaper to procure a physical MX at this point...especially if a new deployment.
If you’re only looking for a single MX, then the hardware appliance is the best option. I believe this is really a play for MSPs who may need many MXs in a rack, now you can put multiple (virtual) devices in a single RU. The other positioning is for enterprises that need scale beyond the MX450; rather than deploying multiple MX450 you can deploy multiple VMX on the same hardware (although the redundancy might not be so appealing).
>That's great...but why are we limited to UCS-C series servers?
That's like saying why not let MX software run on a competitors hardware, like Juniper.
That's like saying to your customers you don't mind if they use a competing MSP instead of you.
It just makes good business sense to use your own products that you already sell.
@PhilipDAth I'd guess it is to have a known base, a bit like when CUCM first could be virtualized, it had to be on UCS and then others followed, although we just used unsupported others with no issues...!
Oh do I wish people would just use that word instead of using that completely wrong word.
I also wish I was less OCD on this because I'm basically triggered all day every day with the massive amount of people who don't know (or care) about the difference 😞
I always thought premises was the plural of premise. Thanks for updating me on that.
I think that's what most people think, but yeh... Two totally different words.
Sorry for being the grammar police in your thread. No one likes that guy.. 🙂
And sorry for you not being able to unsee it going forward. Welcome to my hell.