Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
About GavinMcMenemy
GavinMcMenemy
Building a reputation
Member since Oct 17, 2017
Oct 21 2021
Community Record
77
Posts
8
Kudos
0
Solutions
Badges
Oct 7 2021
2:49 AM
Does it matter if the router is on another switch. We have 2 switches and they're uplinked
... View more
Oct 7 2021
2:22 AM
@ww wrote: Cant they send the #show ip route To verify Go to the switch live tools. Try ping to 8.8.8.8 from source vlan 1 and source vlan 10 It doesn't appear to be reaching the router. If I ping 192.168.1.1 from vlan 1. It responds. If I ping from vlan 10 I don't get a response.
... View more
Oct 7 2021
2:20 AM
This is the way I thought I would have to set it up. Is this not right?
... View more
Oct 7 2021
2:17 AM
@AGONI wrote: What is the next hop (192.168.1.1) ? I believed whatever is at 192.168.1.1 doesn't - know where to send any traffic destined to 192.168.10.0/24. you have to point any data traffic with destination 192.168.10.0/24 to go via 192.168.1.254. Kind of proper static route needs to be set for that. Good luck Yes. In our current infrastructure there are no VLANS. It's a small office without any real need. We have visitors coming into the offiec who want to use their own network: a few wired ports and a wireless ssid. The logical choice is to set up their own subnet. I still can't get this working. their subnet will be 192.168.10.0/24 : their interface IP would be 192.168.10.254 (but could be anything really). The router is on 192.168.1.1 How do I tell the router to send the packets to this IP? The exisitng subnet is 192.168.1.0/24. The gateway is 192.168.1.1. If I only add subnet 10 it won't send packets to the router. So I had to add the IP of the router and this is where i am stuck.
... View more
Sep 17 2021
5:33 AM
2 Kudos
And as an aside. The reason I put this in the community was because I was on hold to meraki support. I got through eventually and they tell me that the VLAN config looks fine. I guess I just need to wait & hear back from the router guys.
... View more
Sep 17 2021
5:27 AM
I'm waiting on them coming back to me about that. @ww wrote: Cant they send the #show ip route To verify Go to the switch live tools. Try ping to 8.8.8.8 from source vlan 1 and source vlan 10 As for that. Works ok from vlan 1 but not vlan 10.
... View more
Sep 17 2021
5:10 AM
This is what I suspect but the problem I have is I don't manage that router and the provider are adamant that VLAN 10 is routing.
... View more
Sep 17 2021
4:15 AM
The only meraki switching video I can find is this one. https://youtu.be/-_ysGtJQLU4 This is old and the interface is quite different now. When I started the routing I wasn't given the option to prepopulate any data
... View more
Sep 17 2021
3:54 AM
We have a small branch office. At this point our MS320-48LP doesn't have any VLANs on it. There is a single lan: 192.168.1.0/24. default gateway 192.168.1.1 (the ip address of our cisco). We are givng access to a small group for a couple of weeks. We'd like to retain our existing LAN but give them a different LAN to use. So I'd like to add this subnet 192.168.10.0/24 and to keep it separate I'd like to tag it VLAN 10. We will provide them with access to a wireless SSID which will have its traffic tagged vlan 10 and a couple of physical ports on one of our switches. How do I add this config? I've added the VLANs in this configuration (see image). I have been tinkering... I Understand that the interface ip has to be different to our default gateway hence me choosing something completely different: 192.168.1.254. This has created a static route to 192.168.1.1 VLAN 10 says it is already routed. Have I set this up correctly is there anything else from a switch perspective I need to do? At this point I am not getting internet on vlan 10. Clients connected to the switch or the new SSID ARE picking up the correct IP settings (192.168.10.0/24 ip and gateway of 192.168.10.1). Supplemental question. I have another Switch to which we have a couple of APs. The new SSID should be available on these. I've stacked the switches, will this be enough to route VLAN 10 if clients associate with the APs on that switch?
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Interfaces
-
Layer 3
Aug 26 2021
1:54 AM
@JeremyBresley wrote: For a small iSCSI SAN, there shouldn't be any issues using a Meraki switch. The Meraki switches can absolutely handle jumbo frames (specific sizes vary depending on the model, but most are 9570+ bytes max size). The support for jumbos and specific limitations are in the specifications tab of each switch. The only current model I didn't see it mentioned on was the MS350s, but all the other MS1XX/MS2XX/MS355/MS4XXs did mention jumbos and their specific limits. The biggest concern with using a general purpose switch for storage uses is when you start pushing large amounts of bandwidth through it. Unless the switch is capable of line-rate forwarding, you can potentially have dropped packets. For normal IP traffic this isn't a big deal, but when you drop packets in a storage environment, it's a big problem very quickly and some systems do NOT handle these drops gracefully (you're doing the equivalent of yanking the cable to your hard drive out in the middle of writing to it, which tends to lead to bad things happening). Interesting. That's fair.
... View more
Aug 26 2021
1:49 AM
@KarstenI wrote: My number one reason *NOT* to use the regular Meraki switches for iSCSI is that I don't want the servers to lose their hard drives when I reboot the switches or anything related to fat-finger-syndrom happens. Is this something that happens to you a lot??
... View more
Aug 23 2021
3:23 AM
The switch we use for our SAN has failed. It was an old Dell switch but we weren't too worried about it because we are moving more and more traffic into the Cloud. We're not using the fibre channels on the SAN - just the RJ45 ports - it's just 3 node setup running on 10gig ports. It works fine, or rather it did. Today I need to replace that switch. We have a sticking plaster solution but I am not happy and I'd like to think a bit more long term. I've had a look at a couple of conversations on here about using a Meraki switch to run a san. The consensus is... don't??? Why? There seems to be some discussion that the Meraki switches don't handle jumbo frames. Surely a modern switch should be able to handle the traffic? And as we already have Meraki switches it makes sense to keep using the interface we like. Am I missing something? Anyway, hoping for a decent discussion on the pros and cons. We are a small setup. As time moves on I expect we will move even more stuff into the cloud and leave the switches just handling a small lab setup and lan traffic.
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Interfaces
-
Layer 2
-
Layer 3
Oct 15 2019
2:58 AM
Doesn't look like it's possible from that. This is actually the route we were already exploring but havent so far been able to make work. We're possibly looking at wrapping the installer into a build at hardware deployment time but it's pretty painful that we can't fnd a way to do this using Systems Manager. I mean it's fine when we first roll out the kit but if you pivot at some point (as we've just done) you're left having to insall manually. PITA for us. I know managemnt are thinking of switching us away from SM into MS 365 enterprise. (We'd get the enterprise device management that way). Shame really because I like having one window for all of this work.
... View more
Oct 10 2019
7:46 AM
Does anyone know if it's possible to push SOPHOS endpoint to MacOs? I've read some older threads which suggested that it wasn't possible. However we've moved to the new SOPHOS Central. Unlike Windows machines we don't have any tools to push the AV to macs which means we need to put it on the Macs by hand - which is painful. I've found this article which suggests some command lines. https://community.sophos.com/kb/en-us/120570 Has anyone tried? My colleague is having a go but he's stuck with the "invalid app for Mac" error even though it's a DMG installed.
... View more
Aug 14 2019
1:21 AM
No idea why my formatting has been stripped out. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
... View more
Aug 14 2019
1:20 AM
I think these are the 3 main trends for us: 1. User Experience Good processes, good working and good reationships need a good user experience. Technology should, as much as possible, get out of the way. I'm not talking about a facebook black box approach but a serious appreciation of the needs of others. If we ask the questions the right way, we will get the right data and everyone's experience will be good. 2. Taking privacy and security seriously But that doesn't mean that we don't take people's expectation of privacy less seriously. If our users are going to trust us and our decision making then we need to assure them that we respect them as people. In digital transformation we don't chuck out good practise just because it doesn't meet our design [or corporate] needs, instead we build that in. 3. Collaborative working At the end of it all, this is where we want to be. I'm really serious about collaboration. Whether it's documents, desicion making, relationships as part of our digital transformation we need to learn from each other. Users must feel empowered to come forward with their ideas and make their own decisions, our management need to feel they have the space to lead. If we've done this then our customers can trust us and our digital transformation.
... View more
May 3 2019
1:51 AM
If you are using voice/video sensitive applications over the wireless, then I would disable as it will most likely cause your fast-roaming to not be so fast, dropping voice calls etc. To be honest Nolan this isn't a major issue for us. All that might go over WiFi is the occasional Teams/Skype call. Not much more than that. I would basically just check the power levels, that is usually the reason if an AP is blasting and the others are not. You can change the Indoor Profile for the power level range, in case its still set to default values of 5-30dBm. You might want to close that up to like 11-14dBm for example, or whatever your initial survey results intended for. TBH I can't remember what the initial survey suggested for power levels, I'll tinker and see what works.
... View more
May 3 2019
1:34 AM
My thoughts are speed issues might be related to the amount of clients on AP1 or the traffic on it. 2 things you could try is turn off AP1 and see if the devices connect to the closest AP and experience the same issue, if they do maybe you need to do a new site survey after hours to better determine your AP locations. The other thing would be to check the traffic on the AP1, if there is high Youtube or streaming video traffice, create some shaping rules or find the problem device and see if you can correct it. I couldn't reboot the AP but I do have a MR18 that can be moved around. I simply moved it closer and then watched to see what would happen. I noticed that the number of clients balanced out much more evenly. An annoying thing is that Friday is a quiet day in the office. So I'll probably have to sit on this until next week.
... View more
May 3 2019
1:30 AM
Way ahead of you Philip. I've changed from the default to open plan office profile.
... View more
May 2 2019
8:57 AM
Hi Nolan, Many thanks. This makes much more sense. The APs are all on the default indoor profiles (the same profile throughout). I'll alter these settings and see how that plays out. I designed our deployment when we had a different operating structure so it's not that surprising that we're seeing some strange things happening now. It's been a over a year since our last review. I moved one of our APs closer to AP1 and I've noticed that everything has settled down a bit. We do see some clients connecting with 2.4 and 5ghz. I'll need to figure out who is connecting to what and why. So another question. Reading between the lines are you suggesting I switch off Client Balancing?
... View more
May 2 2019
7:18 AM
I still don't understand. The minimum bitrate is the default across all SSIDs. Why would this cause some clients to cluster around one Access Point over another?
... View more
May 2 2019
7:12 AM
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. We have 2 SSIDs available and these are available on all APs.
... View more
May 2 2019
6:58 AM
Hi, We have 5 Access points. Some of wireless users are complaining that they are experiencing poor performance at their end of the office. There's nothing obviously wrong and there's been no changes to AP location, underlying infrastructure etc. I HAVE read this: https://documentation.meraki.com/MR/Other_Topics/Client_Balancing We notice that of our access points the distribution is something like this: 1. 45 2. 15 3. 10 4. 15 5. 14 The access points are roughly equidistant.... What I don't understand is, what is causing all of these wifi clients to cluster round AP 1?
... View more
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 4965 | |
| 1 | 6978 | |
| 1 | 3161 | |
| 1 | 7794 | |
| 1 | 3893 |
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
