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 athan1234
About athan1234
athan1234
A model citizen
Member since Dec 21, 2021
a week ago
Community Record
208
Posts
3
Kudos
2
Solutions
Badges
I was reading the document you sent me, which is why I opened this ticket. I have some doubts and need to clarify my questions. The management will be through Meraki Cloud Management
... View more
Hi everyone, I’m currently working on a migration project for one of my customers, transitioning their network from a Cisco 3750 stack to a Meraki 9300M CS 16.8 environment. The current setup includes 3 Cisco 3750 switches in a stack, with 12 port-channels configured in "mode on" for EtherChannel. In the Meraki environment, I have configured link aggregation accordingly. I have a couple of questions: Compatibility of "mode on": On the 3750s, all EtherChannels are configured using channel-group <X> mode on. On the Meraki side, I have configured link aggregation. Is it correct to use Meraki aggregation with "mode on" on the Cisco 3750 side, or is there a better recommended configuration? Cross-stack port-channels: On the 3750 stack, several port-channels are configured using interfaces from different physical switches. For example: Port-channel 1: - Gi2/0/13 (Switch 2) - Gi3/0/13 (Switch 3) Port-channel 3: - Gi2/0/1 (Switch 2) - Gi3/0/1 (Switch 3) Port-channel 13: - Gi1/0/11 (Switch 1) - Gi2/0/11 (Switch 2) - Gi3/0/11 (Switch 3) Port-channel 15: - Gi1/0/5 (Switch 1) - Gi2/0/17 (Switch 2) - Gi3/0/17 (Switch 3) In the new Meraki 9300M setup, it appears that cross-switch (cross-stack) aggregation is not supported in the same way. Is it required that all member interfaces of a port-channel be on the same physical Meraki switch? For example, in the Meraki setup, I believe it would need to be restructured like this: Port-channel 1: Current (3750): Gi2/0/13 + Gi3/0/13 New (Meraki): Gi2/0/13 + Gi2/0/25 (if available) Port-channel 3: Current (3750): Gi2/0/1 + Gi3/0/1 New (Meraki): Gi2/0/1 + Gi2/0/26 I would appreciate any confirmation or recommendations on how to best approach this in the Meraki environment.
... View more
Jul 17 2025
5:03 AM
It seems to be blank, but I believe that even if you change the password, it always appears blank and you can’t see the password in this new version. I just believe that — I’m not sure so I tested connecting using the admin serial number without a password — nothing happened
... View more
Jul 17 2025
4:34 AM
Another question: What is the password required to set up the port on the local status page of the 9300-M? I'm currently testing using the admin serial password left blank. I always have doubts about this—if these devices were previously joined to the customer's cloud, does that mean the password is the same as the one used there? Also, I'm noticing that the interface looks different now. The password is no longer visible. I believe that in past years, it used to be possible to see it.
... View more
Jul 17 2025
4:17 AM
Hi everyone, Could someone please explain to me why, when I'm on the Local Status page, only one of the switches shows "Member: Yes" in the stack, while the rest show "No"? However, when I check the Dashboard, all three switches show both Stack Ports 1 and 2 as green. Thank you!
... View more
Thanks! So I can update to version MR 30.7.1 — is that correct?
... View more
Hi, Can I upgrade from version MR 25.9 to MR 31.1.7.1 (released June 10, 2025)? I have the following models: MR33, MR42, and MR52. If I upgrade to the latest version, will I encounter any issues with these models (MR33, MR42, MR52)?
... View more
May 9 2025
4:30 AM
yes, I know that Meraki allows all traffic. The problem is that the provider's router is not in bridge mode. If you look, the communication goes through a private IP (the default gateway router). It's possible that the provider doesn't have port forwarding configured and is not allowing . .
... View more
May 9 2025
4:18 AM
Okay, but could you confirm if it is possible to change the setup in Meraki so that the router is in NAT mode? Also, how can I know if the Meraki router is blocking UDP port 500 for the IPsec tunnel
... View more
May 9 2025
3:12 AM
Hi again, Is it possible to configure the Meraki in "like indicator" mode? I would like to perform the initial setup with a FortiGate device. However, I can't find the "Non-Meraki peer" option—only the IPSec VPN option is visible. My concern is that the Meraki device receives a private IP address on its WAN interface, and I suspect there might be an issue on the provider's side with UDP port 500. It's quite difficult to contact the provider to either set the router to bridge mode or to forward port 500 to the private IP. Current setup: Public IP: 81.x.x.x.x Hostname: 56.red-81--tde.net WAN 1 Settings: Type: IPv4 Dynamic Status: Active IP Address: 192.168.1.37 Gateway: 192.168.1.1 DNS: 80.x.x.x, 80.x.x.x IPv6: Auto (Stateless), Not Active Given this, I’d like to know if I can configure the FortiGate with a dynamic and specify a set local ID, and still get the VPN tunnel to work.
... View more
Apr 4 2025
2:22 PM
So what is your idea, how can I do it? The VPN is a tunnel and first I should establish the IPsec tunnel on the Meraki, or maybe I am wrong and I must check the FortiGate. Any idea for doing it? If on the customer side, they do a tracert or ping against public IP on the other side, the FortiGate receives the reply, but I can't see any traffic on port 4500 and 500 UDP. On the other hand, I can see traffic for other public IPs, but I can't see it for that specific IP
... View more
Apr 4 2025
2:19 PM
Hi, thanks for your reply. I did the packet capture on both sides - the host with public IP and the other side - and I did not have any traffic
... View more
Apr 4 2025
12:15 AM
If I do the packet capture on the customer side, I don't get anything
... View more
Apr 3 2025
11:48 PM
've spent two weekends trying to resolve this issue, so I want to give you some context. The goal is to establish an IPsec tunnel between two Meraki devices. One Meraki is located at our headquarters, and the other is at a client's site. The purpose of this tunnel is for monitoring. The issue seems to be on the infrastructure at our HQ. There are two FortiGate firewalls—one handling LAN traffic and the other WAN. The WAN firewall uses VDOMs and has multiple NATs configured. I suspect the IPsec VPN isn't coming up due to something related to the provider's router—maybe it's not operating in transparent mode? Any ideas? Meraki’s event logs don’t show any helpful troubleshooting information.
... View more
Dec 10 2024
7:17 AM
@alemabrahao thanks for your reply So, if I understand this correctly, the Client VPN subnet is just the IP range that will be assigned to a client when they connect through this VPN. Is that correct?
... View more
Dec 10 2024
5:16 AM
Hi, I have a question regarding the client VPN. An external provider wants to access the central VoIP system. My initial idea was to check where the network is configured in the voice VLAN to assign the IP address, but it doesn’t My question is: what IP should I assign in this case?
... View more
Oct 4 2024
1:42 PM
So let me undestand Now is set up like this : If i understand weel i need to set up like this:
... View more
Oct 4 2024
9:31 AM
The issue is with vlan 1, and vlan 2 is working fine. I believe the issue is with a native vlan 1
... View more
Oct 4 2024
7:44 AM
Hello to all of you. When my customer tried to connect to SSID_corp, he was unable to obtain an IP. Perhaps the reason is for the vlan 1 which has IP address 192.168.5.2.12, is in vlan 1 he gest APIPA IP 169 .The MX is configured to pass to the Mraki switch as follows: maybe it ies better to put the port like drop untuget traffic? or change the vlan 1 for other SW AP On the other hand, the PC connected to the vlan 1 works well. I guess the problem is for vlan native 1
... View more
My Accepted Solutions
| Subject | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 2239 | Jul 26 2023 8:28 AM | |
| 5817 | Oct 11 2022 8:37 AM |
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 1671 | |
| 1 | 6704 |
© 2025 Cisco Systems, Inc.
