Meraki

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 20 2020

I have a MR18 that is randomly rebooting. I am planning to replace it with one of my MR33s and get a MR36 to cover where the MR33 was.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 20 2020

This is my network at home. MX65, MS220-8P two MR33s and one MR18. Orange cables are primary links, one from the Arris cable modem, and one from the cellular modem. Yellow cables are switches (APs are counted as a type of switch), and blue are data. Future upgrades are to swap out the Netgear cellular modem for a MG21, and the MR18 for a Mr36.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 20 2020

Nice picture! I use the same color scheme on my network installations.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 7 2020

You can try pinging from the dashboard from anywhere. It caused the MX to ping the device on the local lan. That makes sure the MX can actually see the Windows 10 boxes. This is just a debugging step.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 7 2020

Are all machines on the on the same subnet? Also, can you ping the windows 10 machines from Dashboard (Security & SD Wan\Appliance Status\Tools) then enter an IP address of a Windows 10 machine and press the ping button.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 7 2020

To get the alerts, make sure that under Network-wide/Alerts that both Malware is blocked and Malware is downloaded are checked, and that there is a valid email address in Default recipients

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 6 2020

After changing the Threat Protection settings, did you make sure that the MX had updated it's settings? Sometimes it takes a few minutes for the setting to apply, especially firewall and security rules.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 6 2020

You could download Advanced IP Scanner (https://www.advanced-ip-scanner.com/), then run it on a PC connected to the VPN. You would set the range to scan as 192.168.78.0/24. It will then scan that network and you should see all the machines on that subnet.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 5 2020

I entered notepad.pw in Chrome on my phone. The website popped up and my security log on my MX shows that a suspicious .pw query was blocked. If the DNS query was blocked, why could I get to the site?

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 3 2020

Before I replaced my Sonicwall firewall with a MX65, I had it setup to get an IPV6 /60 subnet from Charter. My MS220-8P and MR33 picked up the correct subnet and IPV6 addresses. They also passed on Router Announcements to clients who also got IPV6 addresses on the correct subnet. So while there may be more work on the complete product line, the big push is most likely re-architecting the MX to support a new more complex IP protocol, and the work they have done making sure the Meraki site, dashboard and backend support IPV6.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 1 2020

micah-cmedics The main strength of Meraki is that they are cloud managed from the start. They did not take a local managed device, slap a dongle on it and make a the same dated interface in the cloud. The second strength of Meraki is the Dashboard. All devices, all clients. The Dashboard benefits goes on and on. The third strength of Meraki is zero touch deployment. Configure the device once you get Claim key. The device lands is some distance city, or state, or country and gets mounted and powered up and is working in minutes. And there it is, in the Dashboard. The 4th strength of Meraki is the extras, the API, Insight and Systems Manager. So while an individual piece of Meraki hardware may be missing a feature, the overall benefit is still tremendous compared to competitors.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 1 2020

smccloud1, No. In the IPv6 @ Meraki they did not mention what the exciting news was, just that there would be some, if schedules go as planned. Given the shift to working at home due to Covid19, I would be surprised if schedules don't slip. They also stated there could be beta testing over the next couple of months, so the news could be a formal announcement of a beta plan. We have 30 days to find out

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 1 2020

In their February IPV6 update, Meraki said that if they stay on schedule, there will be "exiting" news in April. Let's hope they are staying on schedule!

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 1 2020

micah-cmedics, This board is for Community based support for Meraki, not a general product board. Please refrain from trying to sell competing products here.

DHAnderson · ‎Apr 1 2020

smccloud1, Please keep in mind that the specs for a MX64 is a maximum of 50 concurrent VPN users and a total of 100mbps VPN throughput. - Dave

DHAnderson · ‎Mar 17 2020

nikiwaibel I agree with your sentiment. But for a VPN to work over IPV6, the MX would need to have have IPV6 address management, subnet management, routing management and perhaps even 6 to 4 and 4 to 6 if your internal network is IPV4 only. The next update from Meraki on IPV6 will come in April. Perhaps there will be an Alpha or Beta then.

DHAnderson · ‎Mar 14 2020

I do not see a way to do this at this time.

DHAnderson · ‎Mar 14 2020

Meraki Go equipment have a management page like the Meraki systems have. While this article is for an access point, it should work for a GX https://documentation.meraki.com/Go/Meraki_Go_-_How_to_Assign_a_Static_IP_to_an_Access_Point

DHAnderson · ‎Mar 9 2020

When the time comes, I would be interested in beta testing IPV6 for MX or other hardware. I have Charter as an ISP and when I was using a Soniclwall firewall I had four IPV6 subnets. The MR33 was able to get an IPV6 address from the Sonic wall, and devices in the WiFi also could get IPV6 addresses. - Dave

DHAnderson · ‎Mar 4 2020

My personal preference is to keeps things simple, until you can't. Planning a current network design based future maybes (not hard requirements) can increase cost, complication and reliability, without any direct benifit today. So my suggestion would be to set up the simplest design first, and plug the two WAN ports into the MX. Later, when you eventually (hopefully) get a warm spare, a more complex configuration is required. Just be sure you do not move your single point of failure from a firewall to a switch.

DHAnderson · ‎Mar 4 2020

When the MS250's uplink was connected to a Cisco switch, I needed to specify a native VLAN for MS250's interface for traffic to flow. I was assuming the Cisco router would behave in the same way, so when the MS250's uplink was connected to the router, it would need the native VLAN defined. Sadly traffic wouldn't flow. When I removed the native VLAN from the MS250's uplink port and connect it to the Cisco router, everything started working.

DHAnderson · ‎Feb 25 2020

This morning I got a chance to try changing the Meraki uplink port from a trunk to an Access port, but that did not solve the problem. Traffic still does not flow from the Meraki to the Cisco router. The Cisco router has this configuration for interface 0: ! interface GigabitEthernet0/0/1.120 description ** VLAN 120 ** encapsulation dot1Q 120 ip address 192.168.120.1 255.255.255.0 ip helper-address 192.168.0.3 ! interface GigabitEthernet0/0/1.121 description ** VLAN 121 ** encapsulation dot1Q 121 ip address 192.168.121.1 255.255.255.0 ip pim sparse-mode ip igmp version 3 ! Is the issue I am facing that there is no dot1q native vlan specified for the interface?

DHAnderson · ‎Feb 17 2020

There are 2 VLANs, one for voice and another for data. If I configure the uplink port as an access port, do I set the set data as the VLAN, and the Voice as the voice LAN?

DHAnderson · ‎Feb 17 2020

I am falling back from a configuration were I was going to use a Meraki MS250 switch to replace a Cisco router. There is a Cisco switch plugged into the Cisco router. If the MS250 is plugged into the Cisco switch, the MS250 can communicate to the Meraki cloud and everywhere else without any issue. If I plug the uplink of the MS250 directly into the Cisco router, no traffic flows. The configuration of the router does not have any mac address rules, but is not providing a native VLAN on the interface descriptions. I had a case where a MX84 would not pass traffic to a 3rd party switch until the 3rd party switch was reprogrammed to provide a native VLAN. I am wondering if I am facing the same issue. I have a dump of the configuration of the Cisco router, but I do not have management access to the switch. I thought I would bounce this off the community before asking to change the router configuration.

DHAnderson · ‎Jan 21 2020

I looked at Air Marshal and there were 0 spoofs and 0 Rouge SSIDs. I went through all the Other SSIDs and did not see any matching the guest. I also looked at all Air Marshal events in the event log and there were no events. I have tested Air Marshal in the past and I am confident of it's operation. So, since all my other clients were on 25.13, I took the advice to downgrade to that.

About DHAnderson

DHAnderson

Dave Anderson

Community Record

Badges