Meraki

cmr · ‎Sep 19 2019

That does seem odd, back to using a PC (or similar), if you connect it to the trunk port and set the NIC to VLAN 347, does it get an address from the appropriate DHCP pool?

cmr · ‎Sep 19 2019

Do you have a layer 3 interface for each VLAN on the MX, I'm guessing you need it to create the DHCP pool but as all our MXs are in single LAN mode I thought best to ask..

cmr · ‎Sep 19 2019

Have you set a VLAN tag on the AP itself, we have (ahem) about 9 SSIDs all with their own VLANs and we trunk to the APs with one VLAN set as native and all others allowed. The native VLAN isn't 1, but all our APs are connected to Cisco or Meraki switches, not MXs, I do think though that you are supposed to be able to trunk from an MX

cmr · ‎Sep 19 2019

If you set a port as access VLAN 347 on the MX and plug in a device, does it get an IP from the the MX DHCP pool?

cmr · ‎Sep 19 2019

@SchoolTechFW we have been running 11.22 on 225s and 210s for a while with no issues, but we don't do L3 so I can't comment on the stability of that layer.

cmr · ‎Sep 19 2019

You are correct in your assumption of the calculation. It would be nice to select what is shown as once you have two uplinks, you only get the total for each one with no upload/download breakdown. Perhaps time for Make a Wish?

cmr · ‎Sep 18 2019

What code are you running, if a bug the support can up/downgrade you to a working version, even if it isn't on the web UI

cmr · ‎Sep 18 2019

New Added ability to disable 802.11r r0 key timeout given some client incompatibilities with the default 3600 second timeout. Please contact support. (802.11n/ac/ac Wave 2 MRs) General Numerous stability patches implemented for MR26, MR32, MR34, MR72 Numerous single & multi-client performance improvements implemented for 802.11ac Wave 2 MRs Stability improvements for MR45, MR55 Bug fixes Unexpected beacon behavior after channel changes with 11ax mode disabled (MR45/MR55) Mesh stability fixes (MR18 / 802.11ac Wave 2 MRs) Upon losing default gateway connectivity, and regaining connectivity, the MR would not broadcast it’s SSIDs as expected (802.11ac Wave 2 MRs) The MR26 (2.4 / 5 GHz radio) & MR34 (2.4 GHz radio) would broadcast corrupted beacons when minimum bitrates differ across SSIDs. This has been addressed by ensuring that all client SSIDs (as well as the mesh SSID) for these radios are configured to use the same minimum bitrate by selecting the lowest common denominator across the enabled client SSIDs. (MR26/MR34) Potentially exhaust memory of MR30H when sending traffic at high rates between two wired LAN clients connected to the same MR (MR30H) MR still broadcasts mesh beacons when meshing is disabled (802.11ac Wave 2 MRs) Mesh beacons sent at maximum transmit power if 2.4 GHz radio disabled (MR45/MR55) Gateway IP was being spoofed by certain types of clients resulting in incorrect gateway IP information being propagated to other clients (All MRs) Invalid Implicit Beamforming operations from certain clients leading to MR reboot (802.11ac Wave 2 MRs) Meraki Proxy ARP interoperability issue with radio vendor implementation leading to MR reboot (802.11ac Wave 2 MRs) Fragmented packets dropped by gateway MRs when destined to clients behind a wired mesh repeater (All MRs) Clients unable to pass traffic on Open SSIDs (MR26/MR32/MR34/MR72) TPC report element missing from beacons & probe responses (MR45 / MR55) Prevent gateway MRs from forwarding BPDUs received from wireless clients (All MRs) Disable 802.11k Client Beacon Measurement due to client interoperability issues (802.11ac Wave 2 / 802.11ax MRs) Inconsistent formatting of User-Name and Calling-Station-ID attributes when using MAC-Authentication with Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) Authentication Splash (All MRs) Clients able to associate & send traffic prior to MR receiving Access-Accept from RADIUS server when using MAC-Authentication (All MRs) Some MRs were unable to download configuration due to required internal parameters not being properly stored in flash memory (802.11n/ac/ac Wave 2 MRs) Control frames sent at OFDM rates to non-OFDM clients (802.11ac Wave 2 MRs) Power Constraint IE missing from beacon/probe response frames for non-DFS channels (802.11ac Wave 2 MRs) Windows clients unable to reauthenticate after Change-of-Authorization (All MRs) Group policy not applying to clients immediately after MR boot (802.11n/ac/ac Wave 2 MRs) Known issues Downstream VOIP RTP Packet Loss (MR42/MR42E/MR52/MR53/MR53E/MR84) Issue under investigation where DHCP intermittently fails for bridge mode SSIDs (MR32) Sporadic packet loss & instability on Layer 3 roaming & Teleworker VPN SSID’s Reduced aggregate upload throughput for Windows clients (MR45/MR55) When upgrading from MR25.x firmware to MR26.x firmware, mesh repeater MRs may be slow to upgrade (802.11ac Wave 2 MRs)

cmr · ‎Sep 18 2019

26.5 has now been released and this is in the fixes section of the release notes: Gateway IP was being spoofed by certain types of clients resulting in incorrect gateway IP information being propagated to other clients (All MRs) It may resolve the issues mentioned above, be good to know either way!

cmr · ‎Sep 17 2019

You really need MXs for that, they support the concept of local and wide area networks. They also cope well with failover or load balancing. We tried two WANs with switches (Cisco 3850s that have full IP routing) and even then we never got the failover to be very good. You need either WAN routers or in Meraki world MXs.

cmr · ‎Sep 17 2019

What device is routing between the VLANs, if the MS is doing it then on the ASA all traffic should go to one of them, say the 10 VLAN

cmr · ‎Sep 16 2019

@PhilipDAthI think you are correct, it *should* show up there but there appears to be a bug where if you choose custom ports, the traffic doesn't show up...

cmr · ‎Sep 16 2019

The uplinks are down and cannot see the internet, do you believe otherwise?

cmr · ‎Sep 16 2019

@SFascotoh my, that is slightly under provisioned! You could put a PoE switch in the location and run cables locally I guess as one was or another you are going to need a significant number of additional APs...

cmr · ‎Sep 16 2019

Thanks @PhilipDAth That isn't ideal but would be acceptable. I gave it a go but as I need to recognise traffic on a particular port I created the below: Now on the clients screen when I look at the custom pie chart I get: More than 90% of the traffic for the network is on port 7563 and it was added last week, but it looks like the custom slices don't work with custom ports!

cmr · ‎Sep 16 2019

@-ray- which vendor are you using for the WAN devices, some of the ones we use now come with 40GbE interface cards so that might help?

cmr · ‎Sep 16 2019

Did you follow the instructions below and did you choose manual, if so what do you have for the first 3 and what are the equivalent on your router/firewall/L3 switch? 1. Connect the Ethernet cable from the theater network to the Management port on the input panel. 2. In the left navigation menu, tap Service Setup > Network Settings. 3. In the Port list, tap Management. 4. Enter the network settings: • To obtain the network settings automatically, tap Automatic. • To enter the settings manually, tap Manual and complete these fields: Field Description IP Address The IP address of the projector. Subnet Mask The subnet mask to which the IP address belongs. Gateway The IP address for the network gateway. Primary DNS The IP address of the primary DNS server. Secondary DNS The IP address of the secondary DNS server. 5. Tap Save.

cmr · ‎Sep 16 2019

Can you ping the projector from its own subnet? Can you ping it from a different subnet?

cmr · ‎Sep 16 2019

@Mahadevan What is the projector model, it sounds like there is no default gateway set. Can you ping it from a remote subnet? I haven't seen an IP capable device where you cannot set a gateway for a long time but perhaps this is a very old device?

cmr · ‎Sep 16 2019

@SFascot make sure any spectrum analysis and WiFi survey is carried out with as close to normal occupancy levels. We found hundreds of people with all their personal hotspots (mainly from iPhones), unsurprisingly, make a big difference to how the APs work! In the end we set up as per a survey and then looked at how the APs behaved using the tools in the dashboard, we have added about 50% more APs in key locations between busy APs and are nearly there for most of our auditorium style spaces.

cmr · ‎Sep 15 2019

You'll need a lot more APs to properly service that number of users, I'd suggest about 15. You'll also see that the auditorium profile in the dashboard turns down the radio power to limit the issues caused by frequency overlap. This also restricts the number of devices that can talk to each AP. We cover casino floors like this and we also set our device SSIDs to 5GHz and the public ones to 2.4Ghz.

cmr · ‎Sep 13 2019

@Uberseehandel I have used it for over a year and despite learning it, still think the Meraki one is much easier to use. Isn't that the purpose of managing through a GUI? Each to their own though, the main point of my post was that raw performance is only one aspect that needs to be considered when choosing a network vendor. For me reliability is first, ease of management second, support third. Of course, this is not the same for everybody.

cmr · ‎Sep 13 2019

@lpopejoy however Ubiquiti RMA is shocking; international postage fee to send, wait a week with no device, import duties and agent fees on replacement Vs get sent a new one and put the old one back in the box to be collected... Also have you tried the Ubiquiti GUI, I use both and would choose Meraki every time if possible.

cmr · ‎Sep 12 2019

@TheRealPucci are you trying to do SDWAN over MPLS without using a concentrator, or are you okay with a concentrator? We have a 9 site SDWAN using VPLS and MPLS as the two WANs (neither with internet) on v15 with a central concentrator, but fully meshed. we have Cisco voice and video and Zoom video but with NAT enabled. It seems to work quite well for our ~800 users. I guess we should try no NAT but perhaps we don't need it?

cmr · ‎Sep 12 2019

Is there a way to add your own category to the client application details screens? We have a large amount of surveillance traffic that we'd like to break out as its own row. It always uses a particular TCP port but it just comes up as part of the Non-web TCP category.

About cmr

cmr

Community Record

Badges