WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

[cantechit]

Subject says it all...  We need proper IPV6 support in the MX Platform...    Even IPV6 tunnelling doesn't work at this point.

Anyone else have soem comments?

[BHC_RESORTS]

---

@cantechit wrote:

Subject says it all...  We need proper IPV6 support in the MX Platform...    Even IPV6 tunnelling doesn't work at this point.

Anyone else have soem comments?

---

Can't agree enough. Specifically, on the WAN portion.

[micahawitt]

I have spent about a total of 8 hours over the last few weeks searching upon scouring the interwebs and my portal for any sort of snippet on this.

Nothing, its the same sob story, im kind of amazed how they do not have this implemented.  I am actually starting to pull some of my clients from this and switching to Ubiquiti.  

Thanks Cisco.

[RickJames]

Well this thread makes me want to just cry. I just spent crazy amounts of money on this stuff only to learn ipv6 over vpn doesn't work so now i have a 10 thousand dollar utm that can't even provide a vpn? What the ...

Seriously meraki fix this like yesterday please. I can't even begin to explain my amazement by this whole situation. I feel like a complete moron for buying this thing. The AP's work fine but this is completely unacceptable for a device in this price range. I need to be able to provide a vpn through my utm. All I can say is i am not spending another penny on a meraki product until i see this resolved.

[nikiwaibel]

As of 2018: The lack of an IPv6 stack is a BUG, not a missing feature!!!

[micahawitt]

The very sad reality is that they want this as a push for you to buy asa's and more of the enterprise gear.  The also sad reality is that from a IT support as consultants or engineers, we love the dashboards and simplistic views and being able to manage on the fly with things.  Cisco is also getting a sh*&ton of $$ with either product that we are purchasing from them.

So please.  Implement it already.

[Cohort_Networks]

---

@RickJames wrote:

Well this thread makes me want to just cry. I just spent crazy amounts of money on this stuff only to learn ipv6 over vpn doesn't work so now i have a 10 thousand dollar utm that can't even provide a vpn? What the ...

Seriously meraki fix this like yesterday please. I can't even begin to explain my amazement by this whole situation. I feel like a complete moron for buying this thing. The AP's work fine but this is completely unacceptable for a device in this price range. I need to be able to provide a vpn through my utm. All I can say is i am not spending another penny on a meraki product until i see this resolved.

---

If you purchased it less than 30 days ago request an RMA but be sure to tell them why you are doing so.

[nikiwaibel]

[nikiwaibel]

[nikiwaibel]

[MRCUR]

@nikiwaibel While I understand what you're going for, badgering Support about this isn't going to change anything right now. Make sure your sales team knows you want IPv6 support in the MX line so they can add your account ($$$) to the feature request. 

[adymeblack]

@MRCUR:

Badgering support would probably have a better result. The last people I would want to speak with is the Meraki Sales team. They probably don't know, or care, about the technical requirements of today. They are there to sell the product.

I personally would badger any and every soul that works @ Meraki about this.

These MX devices should have NEVER hit the public market without IPv6 support. Let alone all of the 'new' devices that STILL don't support it. How much use is that LTE connection going to be when more and more mobile ISP's are moving to IPv6 ONLY every day like T-Mobile?

I mean, for the love of god (or whatever deity you choose....or not), even Windows XP could support IPv6.

Also, just to throw it out there, IPv6 is a network standard, not a feature, and should be treated as such.

[Cohort_Networks]

Not my intent to be disrespectful in suggesting this but this requires drastic measures at this point. Perhaps it's time to Contact Todd Nightingale is SVP, General Manager at Cisco Meraki since everyone below him in the Meraki organization has  ignored our cries for transparency on IPv6 or provided useless responses on the matter.

He has a profile on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/todd-nightingale-a106b510/

He is also on Twitter here: https://twitter.com/tnight?lang=en

Why introduce the new MX products supporting LTE when some carriers and ISP are only supporting IPv6 this late in the game? Meraki needs to focus their resources on fixing this IPv6 predicament NOT releasing new products.

[nikiwaibel]

@MRCUR: i disagree. sales, in my case, does actively ignore *all* my IPv6 comments. if there is a response, it is this: https://documentation.meraki.com/zGeneral_Administration/Other_Topics/IPv6_Device_Compatibility. i am pretty sure, most of sales have no clue what i am / we are talking about.

but, the support teams know ***exactly*** what i am / we are talking about! and they may have the power to raise a hand.

i see two possible reasons for this situation:

a) cisco wants to keep the meraki produkt line "low"; maybe irrelevant in the future. (meraki may have been seen as a real competition, so they acquired them back in 2012).

b) the hardware may be cheap/old and no IPv6 stacks are available. not sure, if all MR/MX/… run linux.

i hope i am wrong with both points.

at least, i did not get an immediate, standard answer to my last post in case 03249519. for the record: the lack of an IPv6 full stack is not a missing feature. that's a BUG!!!

i suggest, if anyone is still interested in meraki, open a supportcase (example above) and tweet/message Todd Nightingale, as @Cohort_Networks suggests:

 Twitter: https://twitter.com/tnight

 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/todd-nightingale-a106b510/

if you want, also create a feature request / wish and contact sales. maybe that helps as well.

[Bovie2K]

I was told the hardware supports IPv6 but there are some current software packages they need to replace before they can support it.

[nikiwaibel]

@Bovie2K: that's great news. porting/extending/replacing/updating some packages may take some time and get the GUI and logic ready as well. i still have some hope, that they have already gotten the shouting and have some surprise for all of us in 2018.

[Owen]

I agree that it is a software issue rather than hardware, the hardware certainly supports it. The MX64 can be booted into the broadcom reference software image which supports IPv6. Even though the Z1 is EoL you can load openwrt onto it which runs IPv6 dual stack.

[nikiwaibel]

[smccloud]

Honestly, I don't care if the hardware supports it and they are just replacing packages at this point.  To me it sounds like more excuses.

[MRCUR]

I've been requesting this for a while now. Clearly not a priority for the MX team unfortunately. 

[aws_architect]

One year past  what about IPv6 ? 

Any ETA ?

Someone at meraki to give a bit of visibility to us ?

[JasonCampbell]

@davidvan You post on other threads but won't address rebuttal to your non-answer post from June. Can you please comment on posts made RE: IPv6 since your last post?

[davidvan]

@JasonCampbell Unfortunately, I'm hamstrung on talking internal R&D efforts in a public forum. My last response is all I discuss publicly at this point.

But, don't hesitate to continue to put pressure on us. As soon as I have any update for you on this, I will be sure to notify the community.

[Bovie2K]

@davidvan Thanks for the post. I understand you are limited on what can be said but I think this forum thread is enough to take back to management to show there is a real NEED and WANT for full IPv6 and NAT64 support from MX. Like I said in an earlier post it wouldn't please everyone but even a middle ground of the phone home still using IPv4 but the MX's at least having NAT64 support would be great in the nearer term.

Also not knowing is the worst. We don't know if its two years away or two months away. Some statement at all would be helpful.

Thanks

[davidvan]

@Bovie2K I understand your point not knowing, and i'll see what I can do. Do you have a Meraki sales representative you can contact and discuss this issue with?

[BBFred]

Please don't bother talking to your sales rep. since they know even less. Its a sales rep. why would it bother with technical stuff anyway.

[smccloud]

My sales rep has changed 3 times in under a year, makes it hard to develop a relationship. Plus, I got my setup free for attending webinars.

[Bovie2K]

@davidvan Yes I can ask my rep.

[Morgan]

This has become a problem for our customers that use the client VPN and have T-Mobile iOS devices. Since T-Mobile has moved to IPv6 only, and the iPhone's lack of CLAT support, the VPN client doesn't work.

[Bryan_Vukich]

I've been waiting for IPv6 support for years now, and there's been little or no apparent movement on it.  I'd be happy with a separate beta firmware branch that has it enabled even if it's a bit broken.

[BHC_RESORTS]

---

@Bryan_Vukich wrote:

I've been waiting for IPv6 support for years now, and there's been little or no apparent movement on it.  I'd be happy with a separate beta firmware branch that has it enabled even if it's a bit broken.

---

This. All of our WAN providers have IPv6 being given to us, and we can't use it.

[Bovie2K]

I'll second. The time has come for full IPv6 support.

[CharlieCrackle]

Yes much needed support.  Have to sell cisco solutions when customer need IPv6 which is more and more    Websites behind meraki need IPv6 support.   Would love to sell meraki solution

[Rol]

Fully agree... and if IPv6 is too complicated for Meraki's developers, they probably can get some help from Cisco dev. team 😉

Meraki, you've added the possibility to have an IPv6 to the Switches... now finish the work and add a full IPv6 support to the MX, the AP, ...

Rol.

[BHC_RESORTS]

At this point I'm genuinely curious about the lack of IPv6 support on the WAN for the MX series. They have expanded IPv6 support to much of the other product lines, yet it remains missing from the WAN side.

[MRCUR]

@BHC_RESORTS Agreed. I've been asking about it for a while now. Perhaps they're having a hard time making it Meraki simple to run dual-stack. 

[etamminga]

Can we get a formal statement from Meraki Product Manager on the lack of IPv6 support on the MX products? Is the PM listening in on this thread?

This is now more and more a must-have!

Regards,

Erik

[gutree]

Totally agree. Chasing them for a year now. Just cannot believe that this is so hard to develop. Every other plastic box has it.

[nikiwaibel]

agreed. especially for clientVPN.

[Cohort_Networks]

Completely agree, especially for Client VPN.

Meraki MX Product Managers, why are you so silent on this topic? What is the point of having a "community" if you aren't going to update those of us deploying and managing Meraki based networks for our mutual customers? IPV6 has landed and you can't support it?

[Chris_M]

The main thing is IPv6 is supported on the CIsco platform, its adapting it for the Meraki Dashboard that takes an effort and they haven't informed us of their time/effort on this.

I really strongly recommend IPv6 implementation since more and more web resources are efficient via IPv6 due to NAT traversal that IPv4 has to perform.

[MRCUR]

---

@Chris_M wrote:

The main thing is IPv6 is supported on the CIsco platform, its adapting it for the Meraki Dashboard that takes an effort and they haven't informed us of their time/effort on this.

---

Just to be clear - the MX devices don't run IOS. 

[DataBitzNZ]

Does anyone have a update on this, and did anyone see this post below by chance then attend the webinar?

Also I see there is another quarterly update webinar coming up, maybe an opportunity to ask Meraki directly.

https://community.meraki.com/t5/Security-SD-WAN/MX100/m-p/7718/highlight/true#M1987
Correct @MRCUR IPv6 routing is not there now but being developed on the MX line.  @JeromeBL tune into a Meraki Quarterly or Meraki MX webinar and you can ask live Q&A.  For example there is an MX webinar coming up on Jan 4th.  https://meraki.cisco.com/webinars

[Chris_M]

I will be attending the quarterly update webinar. We'll see if anything being said there.

[Chris_M]

The quarterly update confirms that they are aware of the increasing request for IPv6. Some regions are becoming exclusively or dominantly IPv6 and a team is working on it but no projections at this time.

Its recommended to provide a use case so they can optimize their development process to fulfill our wishes.

[nikiwaibel]

use case: VPN clients with IPv6 only connectivity must be able to connect.

[MRCUR]

---

@Chris_M wrote:

Its recommended to provide a use case so they can optimize their development process to fulfill our wishes.

---

This sort of drives me nuts about the Meraki internal feature request process. What is the use case for IPv6 on the MX line (or ANY product line)? IPv6 connectivity is the use case. It's 2018. IPv6 is not new. It's widely available from the ISP side. 

Not everything can directly be tied to a specific sale or use case. The MX line is meant to be a modern UTM/firewall appliance... IPv6 should probably be part of the feature set. 

[Bovie2K]

@MRCUR Agreed. I heard MS's are getting IPv6 Routing and MR's already have some support its time for MX's to get full IPv6 support. Especially when cheap consumer routers are getting it.

I totally understand providing use cases to justify some feature requests but @MRCUR hits the nail with this one the use case is getting the support.

[BHC_RESORTS]

@MRCUR: Completely agree. Our ISPs offer us IPv6 and it would be great to offer it as well.

[BlakeRichardson]

I agree, other vendors have been offering this for a while now. I suggest we all go to our dashboard now and make a request for it, if you have already made a request do it again.

At the end of the day we need products that work for us and if Meraki won't listen they will lose business.

@MerakiDave @CarolineS Can you push this, the community have been asking for a long time now!