Meraki as core switch

SOLVED
AbbyDoc-UK
Here to help

Meraki as core switch

Hello,

 

My client has requested an all-Meraki solution for their network, Firewall, Switches, APs, and Cameras.  The network comprises of about 400 wired LAN ports for Data, Voice and Telephony and about another 50 for APs. No servers on site and user traffic will be directed towards the internet.

 

I was looking at 2 x MX 250 High Availability, 2 x MS 450 Aggregation switches High Availability (thinking deploying MS425 as core/aggregation) and 4 x MS 355 x2 Stacked (access layer) High Availability Stack. 

 

I am not sure what Meraki Switch to use for my High Availability Core switches.

 

Can anyone please make some suggestions?

 

Regards,

AbbyDoc

Meraki Rocks every time!
1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION
cmr
Kind of a big deal
Kind of a big deal

We use MS355s as the core and edge all stacked together.  Unless you need lots of SFP(+) ports there is no need for the MS425s. 

View solution in original post

8 REPLIES 8
UCcert
Kind of a big deal

mx250 (HA)

 

MS355-48Xs deployed at core and edge. Why bother with aggregation?  A couple of 355’s at the core will give you enough uplink capacity to your edge switches and MXs. Would be a waste to deploy the MS425’s.


All depends on budget and requirements…..

Darren O'Connor | uccert.co.uk
https://www.linkedin.com/in/darrenoconnor/

I'm not an employee of Cisco/Meraki. My posts are based on Meraki best practice and what has worked for me in the field.
KarstenI
Kind of a big deal

As @UCcert says, it all depends. And if you only have 4 Access-Stacks, I would also think about a 355s core/server-switch. But the moment I plan for more than four access-stacks, I would also directly go for a MS425 as the core/aggregation.

cmr
Kind of a big deal
Kind of a big deal

We use MS355s as the core and edge all stacked together.  Unless you need lots of SFP(+) ports there is no need for the MS425s. 

KarstenI
Kind of a big deal

A couple of my customers do it also this way. But if I am in charge I typically follow the approach to keep my stacks small (two to four switches). I am a little coward and each stack is it's own failure domain. The likelihood of a stack-failure might not be large, but I had large stacks that completely failed. With smaller stacks the impact is reduced and with virtual stacking I do not see any drawback in the maintenance. The only drawback is that now we need more SFP+ ports in the core because we have more stacks. And there the MS425 is again my choice.

UCcert
Kind of a big deal

I believe the words are “risk averse” and not coward. 😁

 

I would typically use the 425’s for larger networks requiring larger qtys of SFP+ ports.

Darren O'Connor | uccert.co.uk
https://www.linkedin.com/in/darrenoconnor/

I'm not an employee of Cisco/Meraki. My posts are based on Meraki best practice and what has worked for me in the field.
AbbyDoc-UK
Here to help

Thank you all for the great replies. They are informative. At least I know I am on the right path.

 

I did not mention this in my original post, but the environment needs to be reliable and highly available as it's being deployed in a country where there is wild fluctuation in power as well as power cuts. In addition, we are deploying a heavy AV infrastructure on one of the floors that includes devices like the Crestron NVX and others, as well as streaming devices and lots of meeting rooms. The idea is to directly connect the AV racks to the core/aggregation switch with LAG to provide redundancy other than that of the AV switch stack.

Meraki Rocks every time!
Network-Dude
Here to help

Nice slogan Meraki Rocks every time! 

BlakeRichardson
Kind of a big deal

We use MS425 but we have lots of SFP. 

www.btr.net.nz
Get notified when there are additional replies to this discussion.
Welcome to the Meraki Community!
To start contributing, simply sign in with your Cisco account. If you don't yet have a Cisco account, you can sign up.
Labels