Meraki

MarcP · ‎Apr 3 2022

you mean one of the following? Before you need to go to network - generel and select "detailed traffic analyse" Network - Traffic analyses network - packet capture clients detail page

MarcP · ‎Apr 3 2022

Depends on how much bandwidth you have in generell... And what would be in these different vlans. If you have only a small bandwidth this could be an option, as you don´t want to share too much of your own 😉 Example of my szenraio, we just don´t want to provide to much for our workers... But they should be able to receive messages, whats some YT etc. in their lunch break. In another vlan, for Guest, there is a higher limit, as they may have to use VPN, stream content to show something etc.

MarcP · ‎Mar 31 2022

Maybe something to do with: https://community.meraki.com/t5/Wireless-LAN/api-meraki-com-SSL-Certificate-expiring/m-p/145126#M20266

MarcP · ‎Mar 31 2022

@MarkAyash-1 wrote: My only hunch is the AP is looking for a certain voltage and maybe Its getting a tad under so it goes off and one? After switching the port or or maybe connect it to a different switch, for testing, the AP seems to be faulty. Or it will go on working, the initially port seems to have a problem, as the cable tester said all is fine.

MarcP · ‎Mar 31 2022

If I get your question right, have a look here. https://documentation.meraki.com/General_Administration/Other_Topics/Returns_(RMAs)%2C_Warranties_and_End-of-Life_Information

MarcP · ‎Mar 31 2022

The more who request it, the sooner it will be added 🙂 Already told my colluegues to do so 😄

MarcP · ‎Mar 31 2022

Interessting, same "problem" as using a AGGR on switch uplinks. You only get a alert when both links went down. In that case support also told me to make a wish.

MarcP · ‎Mar 30 2022

Can you tell/show us your settings under flow preferences - internet traffic?

MarcP · ‎Mar 30 2022

limited ports sound like limited LAN ports = at least two ? If so, why a switch? Use VRRP on the Merakis and connect them to the router. If you have only one ISP Router lan port, I´m going with @MarkB2 , possible - problem if the switch got fails.

MarcP · ‎Mar 30 2022

mmhh.. Meraki Website, so they´ll update it.

MarcP · ‎Mar 30 2022

Only uses Systems manager for fun a couple of days. When I used it, I used "geofencing" and remembering it will install/uninstall apps when leaving the area which is marked. Maybe something in this direction?

MarcP · ‎Mar 30 2022

If there has been nothing done on both sites and its comes back after upgrading to the newest firmware, you should open a case at Meraki.

MarcP · ‎Mar 30 2022

OK, got it now. Traffic shaping bandwidth is the one which counts. GP does not overwrite it. Bandwidth limits in a GP is for each client, not for all clients. So this solution does not work for me 😞

MarcP · ‎Mar 30 2022

Yesterday I had a wifi client which connect through a GP and took about 10 minutes to appear in the client list. Client was shown at the MR after a couple of seconds. But reading your comment it sound like you were waiting for more than this(?). Didn´t have a look how long it took, but have got wired clients in the list with 36kb usage.

MarcP · ‎Mar 30 2022

I haven´t work with BPDU Guard so far, because I never had this problem. But why not test it at a hand full of specific ports? Sounds good to me.

MarcP · ‎Mar 30 2022

Hi all, to apoligize before, I´m not in the office at the moment and nearly no one is. Those who are don´t have time to test 😉 Have got a existing SSID, with PSK and just read about the IPSK without radius. The existing has got a SSID bandwidth limitation of 10mbit. Now I want to change the access control from PSK to IPSK and have got some questions on this. Never worked with GroupPolicies btw.: Target in generell, I have one SSID, which is for workers private devices, limited to 10mbit for all together. But want to use the same SSID for a iMac, where we are not able to get it into our WPA2-Enterprise SSID. This iMac should have unlimited bandwidth (iMac will be put into a different vlan using the ipsk). - will the general bandwidth limitation overwrite a group policy bandwidth limitation? (Firewall & traffic shaping) - if I change the traffic shaping bandwidth limitation to unlimited and define it in the GP, will the GP limit per client or for all together? - "When bandwidth limitation is enabled, each client on which the group policy is applied will be capped at the chosen bandwidth limit." <-- looks like each client gets 10mbit instead of for all, for example.

MarcP · ‎Mar 29 2022

Have got kind of same view... I see MX´s as well even though in this Org there is no MX at all, and never has been. Just saw that one network has a MX as good and up to date, but there is no MX in 😄

MarcP · ‎Mar 29 2022

@PhilipDAth When using iPSK and having a bandwidth limit in generell for the SSID, I have a question on... Creating three goup policies for the SSID (10mbit ssid bandwidth) 1 group "use network bandwidth" - will it have the 10mbit defined in Firewall & traffic shaping? 2 group "ignore" - unlimited whatever id defined in fw&traffic shaping? 3 group "custom" - for each device in this network?

MarcP · ‎Mar 29 2022

@ToryDav wrote: So nothing actually can be done. Don´t use a template seems to be the answer 😉 While reading your initial post I already thought, why to use a template for a Corestack? Within one network you normaly only have one. Our Meraki SE even told me, if I have one site with several access switches and a core, I should put the core in its own network. <-- example was for firmwareupdates...

MarcP · ‎Mar 28 2022

Within Switch - Switch Settings - STP Configuration is enabled and your correct switch has got the lowest priority? Additional info, do not use 1 or something like this as this can be horrible when changing the root bridge. <edit> Maybe you answered this question in here... https://community.meraki.com/t5/Switching/Configuration-Templates-switch-profiles-and-STP-root-bridge/m-p/144559 </edit> I very often see that new MRs become a bridge for a couple of minutes when first ever connect them to a network. But then they are just normaly online as they should. Also connecting MRs should not effect the switches to change the RB. Or is one of the MR going to be the RB and the switches just show the direction to the switch, where the MR is connected? - Never saw that and don´t know if this can happen, tbh. Remembering the case, when I got to a new company I saw the RB was a unmanaged switch for "mobile device scanners"... Meaning, not only "normal" switches can be the RB.

MarcP · ‎Mar 28 2022

Oh, you had configured an IPSec on the DB as well... MX IPSec traffic was put into the DB IPSec tunnel.

MarcP · ‎Mar 28 2022

Well... If it works since a couple of days... I would cancel them 😄 Or find another position for the accesspoint near to this position. Never had this "problem" so far.

MarcP · ‎Mar 28 2022

When it is up, you can do a cable test through the dashboard... Indeed it is not the best cable tester, but it works for me most of the times... Select your switch: Or select the port and scroll down to:

MarcP · ‎Mar 28 2022

So really nothing is coming in... I´m wondering if there shouldn´t be at least some packets, trying to initiate the IPSec tunnel (?) Can you show the portforwarding configuration of the ISP? Are you sure you managed to set up the IPSec parameters correctly on both sites?

MarcP · ‎Mar 28 2022

As you cann see above, these are "sample filter expressions" Assuming you do not have wireshark, (all on the left site) change output to "view output below" set the filter as mentioned in my screenshot ("port 4500" and/or "port 500" (ohne Anführungsstriche)) and hit start capture As i don´t have a running IPSec Tunnel I cant show an example of the ouput. But this one is without any filter expression (tempoary unused network at my site)

About MarcP

MarcP

Community Record

Badges