Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Become a member of the Cisco Meraki Community today
Get answers from our community of experts in record time.
Join now- About SimonReach
About SimonReach
SimonReach
Building a reputation
Member since Jan 9, 2018
Sep 19 2025
Simon Peart
UK
Community Record
98
Posts
22
Kudos
3
Solutions
Badges
Jul 26 2023
2:39 AM
If i wanted to prioritise traffic between 2 subnets across an SDWAN, what would be place to look at? As an example, if our head office has a range of 10.10.1.0/26 and i wanted to prioritise all traffic from any machines on that range to a subnet at our data centre of 10.20.1.0/26. I know it would presumably be in Security & SD-WAN > SD-WAN & Traffic shaping > then create a new rule under Traffic Shaping Rules.
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Other
Jun 13 2023
4:08 AM
Are we able to resort to SNORT 2.9 when we upgrade or is this something that Meraki support need to do?
... View more
May 22 2023
5:49 AM
We're having the exact same issue with our main site that has 2x MX100s, 1 being a hot spare. Runs absolutely fine on 16.16.8, upgrading it to any of the 17.x patches or even the latest 18.107.1 patch causes a lot of speed issues and connectivity issues, websites not loading first time round, things getting blocked with no logs informing us that it's getting blocked at all.
... View more
Mar 16 2023
6:53 AM
Just in addition to the internet issues we're having. Since Monday, we did the upgrades on 2 of our sites which connect via SDWAN to each other over the weekend, we've also had multiple issues with people getting corrupted Excel files and connectivity to external servers and ftp sites has also been affected. Last time we attempted to upgrade to version 17.x a month ago, we had major issues with the VPN so something isn't right with the 17.x updates in regards to our systems. The VPN issue we had was that the client vpn lost it's DNS name, luckily we had another dns name registered with our DNS supplier that worked fine still but still had to get every vpn client moved over.
... View more
Mar 16 2023
3:08 AM
Turned off all security and left it for 5 minutes, turned on the most important bits again and just giving it a try, will turn on the rest later when we know if there's been any difference. Thank you edit: No difference at all, we're rolling back to 16.16.8 tonight.
... View more
Mar 16 2023
2:20 AM
Upgraded to 17.10.2 on Friday morning and had people reporting slow and problematic internet since Monday, upgraded to 17.10.4 this morning and people are still reporting the issues. Internet loading slowly on some pages and other pages time out first time and then work fine after a quick refresh. We've got MX100s onsite and use AMP and the Intrusion Detection and Prevention in Prevention mode and Ruleset of Security. We also use url filtering and category blocking as well. Might look at seeing if we can roll back to 16.x tonight if no one else has any ideas?
... View more
Feb 3 2023
7:13 AM
1 Kudo
We've got multiple sites all running MXs and connected via SDWAN. Is it possible to set a NAT rule for one of our sites to an ip address at another site, at the minute i'm getting the below error: There were errors in saving this configuration: Invalid 1:1 NAT: The IP address 10.14.110.15 is not on a configured subnet. The MX100 at site 1 can ping the internal ip address at site 2, but can't get the NAT to work.
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Firewall
Aug 10 2022
5:20 AM
We're also having issues with Windows Update and our Dell Command Update application as well.
... View more
Aug 10 2022
4:43 AM
As an option, not one we'd take at the moment, but will turning off the Intrusion Detection and Prevention resolve the issue? Anyone tried?
... View more
Aug 10 2022
4:10 AM
All of our VPN users, using the client VPN, are having the issues in the UK but onsite people connecting through the MX100s are fine.
... View more
Jul 19 2022
3:55 AM
Wonderful, so deleting the stack, which now only contains the 1 switch that's still plugged in, won't cause any connectivity or configuration issues?
... View more
Jul 19 2022
3:24 AM
Hi everyone, Hopefully a very quick question. We've got 2 switches working on our network and we need to move the switch to another network, which is no drama. We've removed the switch from the physical stack but is it as simple as deleting the stack on the dashboard, will that remove any of the configuration on the remaining switch?
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Other
Feb 23 2022
7:30 AM
With step 2, is there anyway to automate making that change across multiple laptops? A powershell or cmd script?
... View more
Feb 21 2018
6:15 AM
Thank you.
... View more
Feb 21 2018
4:29 AM
Simple question, is there a way to manually edit the Network Topology?
... View more
Feb 13 2018
2:00 AM
1 Kudo
Everything is now working fine with a multimode SFP and a multimode fiber connection. I always thought a fiber cable was a fiber cable and that the only differences were the ends, i'm a bit smarter now so thank you everyone.
... View more
Feb 9 2018
7:59 AM
1 Kudo
Thank you Ordered a Cisco Meraki MA-SFP-1GB-SX 1000Base-SX which is multi-mode and a 1m 62.5/125 LC - ST multimode fiber cable. Hopefully this is correct.
... View more
Feb 9 2018
7:41 AM
The layer 3 switch at the other end, in the server room, is ethernet only i'm afraid otherwise it would have been easy. I haven't seen any Meraki branded SFP connectors at all? Does the wave length matter on the spec of the SFP connector? edit: The TP-Link MC200CM converter at the other end is a Multimode 1000BASE-SX connector. So presumption is that i need an SX 850nm Multi Mode converter.
... View more
Feb 9 2018
7:31 AM
At the other end of it all in the server room, the fiber connection goes into a TP-Link MC200CM Multi-mode Media converter but fiber cable that plugs into that is grey which isn't any help. The yellow fiber cable is definitely single mode and the SFP states that 'single-mode fiber (SMF) is supported' on it, which presumably means i've got a single mode SFP with a single mode cable one end with a multi mode converter at the other end. So to resolve the issue, i need to get a multi-mode cable and a multi-mode SFP?
... View more
Feb 9 2018
7:03 AM
The yellow Fiber cable is new, it's a different connection into the SFP than into the Fiber converter so the only 2 things i can't test are the new Fiber cable and the SFP. The description of the Fiber cable is 'Fiber Mode Structure - Single-Mode'. Looking at the old fiber cable, that works fine, is there a way to spot if it's singlemode or multimode?
... View more
Feb 9 2018
6:47 AM
Made sure the fibers were the correct way round but i tried it both ways as one of the ways the fibers were; the port didn't light up at all. I don't see any jumper at all on the SFP and the cable is a LC/ST, M/M that's 1m long.
... View more
Feb 9 2018
6:21 AM
Just having a small issue configuring a new Meraki switch that is replacing a very old Cisco switch. The very old Cisco switch connected to our Layer 3 switch through an Ethernet to Fiber converter with another Fiber to Ethernet converter on the other end of the fiber to plug it into the Layer 3 switch. The plan with the new Meraki switch was to make use of 1 of the 4 SFP connections on it but that doesn't seem to work at all. I've plugged a brand new 'ProLabs SFP-LX-10-D-C, 1250 Mbit/s, SFP, LC, LX, Fiber Optic, 1310nm' into one of the SFP connections, configured that connection as a Trunk and then plugged a brand new fiber cable into it and nothing happens apart from a solid green light comes on on the port to say there is a connection on that port but the Meraki switch doesn't connect to the internet and the Fiber to Ethernet converter in the server room says that there is no link. At the moment the switch is running absolutely fine with Ethernet Port 48 configured as a trunk and then have that plugged into the old Ethernet to Fiber converter and done it that way. It would be nice to get the SFP adapter working though so we've got 1 less point of failure over there.
... View more
Jan 15 2018
1:28 AM
Happy to report everything is now running happily. A few issues with a couple of firewalls, both the Windows and the Kaspersky firewalls we have and a couple of static routes needed putting in but everything is now working fine. I tried a VOIP phone from home and it would register but as soon as i tried to log into the VOIP phone, it struggled to do anything but that's something i'll investigate another time. Reading up, it's looking like the best setup for us, with the home users and the small branch office with ADSL is to setup Z1s and Z3s instead of MXs. With about 5 of the Z series that we'll roll out to people, covering between 5-10 clients, is it worth having anything other than an MX64 in our server room here?
... View more
Jan 12 2018
2:05 AM
On the ASA, there is a static route - Inside - 100.100.100.0 255.255.255.0 10.14.130.149 On the Layer3 Core switch, when doing a 'show ip route', i get 100.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets S 100.100.100.0 [1/0] via 10.14.130.149 When doing a tracert from my computer to 100.100.100.1, i get: 10.14.130.250 - Core Switch 10.14.130.149 - Office MX 100.100.100.1 - Home MX When doing a tracert from my computer to 100.100.100.2, i get: 10.14.130.250 10.14.130.149 Times out. When doing a tracert from the Meraki dashboard on the home MX to 10.14.130.1, which is the office DNS. It jumps to 192.168.0.1 as the first hop and then times out. Not sure if that's right or if it should jump straight from 100.100.100.1 to 10.14.130.149 for the first hop? I've checked all security and firewall settings on the home router and everything is turned off, i've also put the meraki switch in a DMZ as well and didn't change anything.
... View more
- « Previous
- Next »
My Accepted Solutions
| Subject | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 2547 | Jan 29 2025 3:52 AM | |
| 1909 | Dec 4 2024 4:40 AM | |
| 2723 | Oct 22 2024 2:51 AM |
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | 997 | |
| 4 | 1362 | |
| 2 | 3289 | |
| 2 | 2841 | |
| 2 | 2853 |
© 2025 Cisco Systems, Inc.
