Z3 Throughput and Product Highlights

[IgorPodgorny]

Here is the snippet from Meraki Z3 Datasheet:

The question is why (highlighted ares) if the thing is artificially limmited to 100 Mbps throughput under Traffic Shaping, and that is exactly what you are capped at when doing any Internet speed test or anything for that matter?

I understand that they want to "preserve user expirience", blah, blah, blah, basically to sell a higher priced model, but why put those things as a product highlight? So what that radio does 1.3 Gbps, you'll never go past 100Mbps...

Sorry, there is no real question here. Just a little rant:)

[alemabrahao]

Wireless data rate has nothing to do with the throughput rate for the internet.

They are different things.

[IgorPodgorny]

I know that they are different, but one limmits the other so what the point of even mentioning it. Like I said they highlight the WiFi data rate and gigabit ports, but you'll never be able to use that because of Traffic Shaping which you can't set higher than 100Mbps an it limits your overall throughput.

Here is speed test on my home WiFi (it's around ~940 Mbps both ways when hardwired):

And here is the one while connected to Meraki Z3 (hardwired or wireless):

[alemabrahao]

It's the hardware limitation, if you want a higher throughput then you will need a bigger firewall.

That's why it's important to read the specifications first. The Z series is for use in smaller offices with few users, so I don't see it having a higher throughput.

And this goes for all manufacturers, there will always be products with smaller to larger capacities.

[IgorPodgorny]

If that's the case, why highlight the things I mentioned in an original post.

Doesn't matter if has gig ports or 1.3 gig wifi if there is a "hardware limitation" elsewhere.

I doubt that it's hardware. Really think about it, how is $50 router from best buy can do a gig, and $350 cisco device can't.

I know there are all the extra bells and whistles, but those kinda covered by a subscription.

Plus there aren't that many bells and whistles on Z3. There is no web filtering, threat protection, IPS / IDS, no packet inspection whatsoever.

[DarrenOC]

As @alemabrahao has already stated they’re two different things.

 It’s a bit like having stacked switches connected back to the core with dual 10Gbps uplinks and then having a 1Gbps internet pipe.

[IgorPodgorny]

It's the other way around, I have 1Gpbs fiber at the house and when connected to Meraki Z3 it's limiting me to 100Mbps.

[RaphaelL]

The hardware is limited to 100Mbps

[IgorPodgorny]

Back to my original point, why do these highlights matter? They don't.

It's just sad that a $350 device can't do a gig.

[mlefebvre]

This is similar to asking why have 48 gigabit ports on a switch if you only have 4 gig uplinks...even if your uplink won't do the entire capacity of the switch the technical specifications and port connectivity still matters.

Also "It's just sad that a $350 device can't do a gig."  umm no, you are not anywhere in the right price range for enterprise routing hardware...Meraki's -entry level- gigabit firewall (MX75) is over $2000 USD list price last time I checked

[IgorPodgorny]

IMHO calling z3 an enterprise routing hardware is a stretch. I tend to refer to Cisco ASR as enterprise routing hardware, and some other vendors / devices. As far as higher end MXs, I have 8 MX84 and 2x MX250 sitting on shelf because they are missing much of enterprise features.

We just kept ~20 teleworkers, and now thinking about going with something more robust.

The biggest compaint is that almost everyone has a much faster Internet connection and about half have 1 gig fiber and generally run faster using VPN client on their computers.

Anywhat the whole point of a post is why list something as a highlight when in fact you can't ever use it.

[CptnCrnch]

You get the full bandwidth internally, but nothing over there mentions that the full bandwidth to the internet is given.

Quite on the contrary, the Data Sheet clearly states that there is a Stateful Firewall Throughput of 100 Mbps.

Or are you simply trying to troll around?!

[IgorPodgorny]

A little, like I've said in an original post there is no real question here, just a bit of rant:)

[rhbirkelund]

Those speed tests you show are towards the Internet. Have you done a test between the wired ports? Or between a wired and wireless client?

As mentioned multiple times, Z3 is limited to 100 Mbps, but I’m fairly certain you still get gigabit speeds between the LAN ports. The firewall throughput limitation is outbound.

[ww]

On the same vlan. When using vlan a to b, you will be limited by the firewall throughput/ routing engine

[IgorPodgorny]

Just tested that. iPerf showed 200 Mbps on VLAN-to-VLAN.

[IgorPodgorny]

Internally VLAN-to-VLAN got 200 mbps (probably the real firewall limit), withing the same VLAN it's close to a gig.

[K2_Josh]

I am far more critical of the claim of "< 5 Sec" WAN failover that is patently false. Yeah, this is technically true in some specific conditions that doesn't help in 95% of cases. That's my rant for the day.

[IgorPodgorny]

We shelfed higher end MX (84, 100 and 250s) and only left with 1 MX64 and ~20 Z3 connecting teleworkers to it. For site-to-site and edge in general wasn't very happy with the lack of simple features that any business multi-wan firewall should have. Seems that they are adding some now, but a little too late, not enough and we moved on.

[alemabrahao · Accepted solution]

I think you didn't understand, that it was designed for smaller environments where it doesn't require so many resources, the main objective is to make Auto VPN easier to interconnect with the main DC and access resources for example.

[IgorPodgorny]

I don't think that my story is unique, but here is how it went... We got some trial equipment and liked it, then I attended one of the local Meraki workshops where they showcased some of the goodies and I was pretty impressed with it. I was aware of its shortcomings before we commited, but the guy at a presentation assured that they are developing and adding features to a dashboard all the time. I bought into its potential.

However, next 3 years felt like a development stagnation without anything new, and the SD-WAN improvements they talked about came years later in form of SD-Internet and additional license.

Overall, I can't say that it was a bad experience and we kept Z3s. Switching to something more robust (FortiGate) turned out to be cheaper than renewing MX licensing, but with a bit of a learning curve and much more stuff to configure and screw up:)

[alemabrahao]

I understand your frustration, the point is to understand the needs and based on that assess whether Meraki will meet them or not. I have customers who currently have an entire Meraki infrastructure and are happy because Meraki meets their needs, just as I have customers who left Meraki for another solution precisely because it did not meet certain points.

That's why it's important to understand the customer's needs first.