I think the feature you are looking for is "Site-to-site VPN Translation": https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/Site-to-site_VPN/Using_Site-to-site_VPN_Translation   I sometimes implement it differently: I have unique IP networks on both sides for the VM infrastructure and the replication process. I use the same IP networks for the production VLANs but I don't route any traffic to the DR side. In case of DR, routing changes to DR and is disabled on HQ. Yes, it's a "poor mans DR", but it works quite well. ... View more

I am not aware of a document describing these migrations. Only the general Meraki documentation on Wireless which is quite good. The most important aspect is that, by default, there is no central switching with Meraki. If you want something similar, you need to place a Meraki MX into your network that can be used to tunnel an SSID to it. ... View more

First do a packet-capture on the port to the phone to see if the option is present in the DHCP-answer. If it is there, look for traffic from the phone to the server. ... View more

Do you want to add the new device for High-Availability on the network with the MX100? Then it will not work as both units have to be the same model. But if you want to add an additional network (like a new branch office) that connects via AutoVPN, then you can take any model you want. This is quite common. For example one customer has the MX250 on the headquarter and a mix of MX67/MX68/MX84 in the branches. ... View more

This is one of the strange behaviours of the MX. I have never seen any documentation on this, but based on observations I would describe it in the following way (to compare it to classical IOS routers): WAN1 has its own VRF with only a default route and it's own SLA-config to check internet-reachability WAN2 has its own VRF, similar to WAN1. All internal VLANs, static routes and also learned VPN-routes share a common VRF Based on the reachability-checks and the flow-preferences there is some route-leakage and inter-VRF NAT to direct the traffic to WAN1 or WAN2 Something like this could be the reason that the directly connected networks are not always reachable. ... View more

No, it doesn't have to as long you don't break STP. I would expect that most deployments have a trunk to the MX. Either because the core-routing is done on the MX for smaller deployments, or because multiple VLANs (Transfer to Core, Guests, internal DMZs) terminate on the MX. ... View more

@RumorConsumer wrote: I just bought some acoustic dampening pads and I’m going to take a run at creating an envelope that this MR 52 could go in and sit somewhere out of sight. My guess is it won’t require very much ventilation A lead housing has a great acoustic dampening ... 😉 ... View more

External antennas don't get you more clients connected. But with the right antenna you can make sure that the signal is only strong in a particular area of the room and not "everywhere" (depending on the size of the room), The AP would be an MR46E instead of the "normal" MR46. Did you go through the link for High-Density design that @ww provided? ... View more

What you did is a misconfiguration of Spanning tree because the Meraki Switches won't do a per-VLAN STP as the "normal" Cisco switches do. There will be only one active connection (regardless of single link or aggregate) between both switches. In you first Case the above link was active and your test was done for systems that are active on the first link. But very likely, the systems on vlans 40 to 42 hadn't worked. On the second case the active link was the aggregate where only VLANs 40-42 were active and every other VLANs were dropped. What do you have to do: Option 1: Bundle all three links in one aggregate and allow all needed VLANs. For a better distribution of traffic I would add a forth link, but that is not necessary. Option 2: If you want to keep this setup with one aggregate and one individual link, you have to allow the same VLANs on both the single Link *and* the aggregate. With this, the aggregate would be used and the single link would be only a backup connection. But IMO, this setup doesn't make any sense and Option 1 is the way to go. ... View more