Hey team, I'm looking into this and trying to understand where it is all coming from.    Please allow me some time to find out more.  Just for my confirmation, I see a lot of "it dropped down to..." , so are you observing a change from the previous attainable speeds to the current cap of 750? Are you actually able to reach 750 on the MX85 or is it only up to 500?    Did you notice at which point the effective throughput may have changed?   Many thanks! Giac   ... View more

Hey awesome people of the Community,   Thank you for the healthy discussions in this thread. I'm sorry so many of you have been encountering these issues and I can see that there's quite a bit of impact for your end users as well.  We seem to have quite a few different things in the pot here: - Firmware related changes in behaviour. - The "Excessive frame loss" event, which has replaced the old and not-very-informative "Unknown reasons". - Inconsistencies with Client Balancing being enabled. - Maybe some end client driver related events.   Wireless issues can be quite lengthy at times as they require a lot of live data capturing in order to intercept the problem when it happens. I would recommend to have monitor mode packet captures whenever is possible, and at times the results of a site survey can also assist in understanding the environmental circumstances better. I know not all of your working arrangements may allow this, but if you can assist Support with the data it can certainly go a long way to help.    I would recommend to continue to work with Support on the matter, as it sounds like some problems may be software related and we can keep track of the impact and others may still need to be investigated more thoroughly to get to a more appropriate root cause.    I'll keep an eye out here, please do continue to update about the various instances you are encountering and how you are progressing with the Support team.    Many thanks everyone! Giac     ... View more

Hey @joopv ,   Just wanted to circle back here that I got further information on your questions. Regarding the IP addresses you can ping, you can use 158.115.141.145 and 216.157.133.187, but please make sure you don't end up using them in monitoring systems or whatnot, as we can move them around or take them out depending on needs.  In other words, you can use them for the purpose of carrying out ping tests for this matter only.    Regarding the API, that's a bit more complicated, because you are only allowed to reach out to a server where you have API credentials. I would also always recommend to use api.meraki.com for your calls .   Please bear with us as we are working on tooling to provide you to help verify which networks are in scope and which not. We should have news for you soon.   Many thanks! Giac ... View more

Hey Igli, My recommendation is still to check your upstream firewall (not your Meraki device), to ensure that the new ranges are allowed. In my experience most firewalls allow outbound flows, so unless you have specific restrictions or you require inbound traffic as well, you are probably not in need to take any action, but I would nevertheless recommend a review of those firewall rules.    Hope this helps! Giac ... View more

Hey awesome people, Speaking of raising stuff with Support, I'd recommend grabbing browser console logs and HAR files for issues with this new page, and attach them to the case, so we can process stuff quickly and efficiently! 😁   Thank you! Giac ... View more

Hey @Testarossa , These are not changes that you would need to make on your Meraki MX, but rather on an upstream firewall (if you have any), that could potentially restrict access to those IP address ranges.   Hope this helps! Giac ... View more

Hey @joopv ,  I completely understand and can only apologise for the disruption. Unfortunately, at the moment, the only recommendation I can give is to continue to work with Support and we can help verify and scope down.    I'm unsure why you would not have received the initial notification in February; I am aware of a few instances where they have been intercepted by email filters and marked as marketing, so that may be an angle to explore.   We have taken all the feedback onboard and continue to discuss internally.    I also asked about the two questions. My personal take (please take it with a pinch of salt until I have confirmation) : I believe that some of the addresses in the range may be pingable, but I cannot confirm which ones.  I would not expect API calls to be accepted until the go live.   Many thanks! Giac     ... View more

Hey @EJN , Thank you for bringing this up. I had a bit of a poke around today and I do suspect this may have been an addition for the Early access of the new UI as @MyHomeNWLab mentioned.    I suspect it may be unexpected for users without multiple organisations associated to their email address to see it, although the page is still evolving and I think it does provide some at a glance information that can be useful, so I'm not sure if there's any plan to change its nature in the future.    Thank you for raising it with Support, I'm sure we'll get to the bottom of it! 😉 Giac ... View more

Hey @Brayden , You can find the whole list of supported SFPs in our documentation here.    As far as I can see, it does include 10GB MMF SFPs.   Hope this helps! Giac ... View more

Hey team, Thank you for bringing this up. We have been working internally to send updated messaging that will hopefully help clarify better the situation. Nodes that are offline but still claimed in a network were also scoped in, so BrandonS is very correct that you may encounter some false positives.    My recommendation at this stage is to check the upstream firewall rules where you can. If you are unsure of which ones you need to address, raise a case to Support via Dashboard please (so we can keep the telephone lines clear for emergencies) and we can assist in identifying the affected notes.    @athan1234 , the Help > Firewall info page should be updated with the new IP addresses. I'm not sure what feature you are referring to, but there is effectively no change in functionality or expectations on how communication to Cloud works, you would just need to ensure that if there is an ACL capable third party device upstream that may have restrictions implemented, that the new range is included in the rule for device to Cloud connectivity.    Hope this helps team, but please don't hesitate to @ me if you have any further doubt. Giac ... View more

Hey team, We are seeing some of these pop up, and are currently investigating.  The file seems to be a recent O365 update, and we are trying to understand if this is a false positive.   Please bear with us! Giac ... View more

Hey team,   I have done a little bit of digging to see if I could provide you with a more accurate answer. Unfortunately, at this time I don't have much more to share aside from vMX-L still being in the works.  I am attempting to get some kind of estimate, but as we reprioritise work very dynamically I may not be able to get one; for the time being, though, Philip's suggestion is definitely an excellent recommendation.    I'll circle back if I have some news in the future! Giac ... View more

Wow @PhilipDAth , that's almost as high as me. And I live on the thing! 🤣   I do hope it's for happy reasons though! 😜 Giac   ... View more

Hey @George_UC ,   It sounds quite a bizarre problem. Could send a screenshot of the Timeline view as well please? I'll let the Community chime in here to see if anybody encountered something similar in the meantime.   Giac ... View more

Thank you @DarrenOC ! I'm aware of that issue on 16, it takes various forms, so I don't feel comfortable in saying "yeah, just do this" without having a look at the network. Support can force schedule this though, so don't hesitate to get in touch if you are hitting any snag.   Re the MSs, that does sound a bit bizarre, I don't think I've encountered it so far, it would have been interesting to snatch out of band logs to see if there was anything bizarre. One thing that I will call out though, is that when you have stacks of switches there is a timer that gets triggered when you initiate firmware upgrades, that's designed to give enough time to each switch to upgrade before they restart, so it doesn't break the stack. It may be possible that all switches downloaded the upgrade promptly and were just sitting there waiting for the timer to expire.    That last one, out of curiosity, does it happen on older models or even on current ones?   Thanks! Giac ... View more

Hey @DarrenOC @cmr ,   Thank you for asking!  To answer the first question, the firmware upgrades were effectively not happening during the window of the outage. @DarrenOC , could I ask what kind of bizarre behaviours have you observed?   @cmr re your question, it is possible that the unit will upgrade normally, since it would not have had an opportunity to do so before. I would still recommend to get in touch, as there may be inconsistencies on the Dashboard side though, irrespective of what is on the device.    Let me know how you both get on! Giac ... View more

Hey George!   The Error code there, corresponds to the 802.11 code for Association (in this case); you can find a full list here . Now, unfortunately that is not a very insightful situation, as error code 30 corresponds to "Association request rejected temporarily; try again later"; there can be many different reasons for this, so I'd like to ask a few further questions: - Did you try with an SSID on Open without any form of authentication? This would rule out completely issues with the authentication part.  - Do you have more than one AP? If you do, does the issue occur on all of them or just this one?  - Are the clients completely unable to associate or is it happening intermittently? - Does anything happen before the issue presents itself? For example, do all the clients get disassociated and then are unable to reassociate? - Does the problem occur on both 2.4 and 5GHz? Could you try to to set the SSID to just one of the two bands to see which of the two is impacted? - What model of AP are you using? If it is a Wifi6 AP, did you try to disable the 802.11ax beacons from the radio profile? - Are you able to reproduce it at will? If you are, it may be worth opening a case with Support as well, so we can cast an eye on the backend logs too for anything going wrong.   Many thanks! Giac ... View more

Hey Jamie,   Echoing what super knowledgeable ww mentioned, this is likely to do with the regulatory domain. Each country has a specific maximum power that it allows on its soil, for example for Europe you are likely looking at 20/23dBm (depending if you are on 2.4 or 5 GHz)  maximum ( source ).    If we assume we have a brand new MR46 broadcasting on channel 136 (5GHz), we can look at the datasheet  , see that the antenna gain for the 5GHz radio is at 6dBi, factor in 3 dB for beamforming and we can then reverse the EIRP formula:   Maximum transmit power = 23 dBm (maximum EIRP) - 6 dBi (antenna gain) - 3 dB (beamforming) + 0 dB (pretending for a second we don't live in the real world where there is cable loss)    Which results in 14 dBm of maximum transmit power achievable in Europe on the 5GHz range.    Dashboard would still allow you to target the highest transmit power possible (30), but it will then do all the calculations and work its magic for you to ensure you remain compliant to the legal regulations for wireless transmission.    Hope this helps! Giac     ... View more

Hey team,   Thought I'd chime in here as well.  @Crocker , critical auth is available on different versions based on the platform. If you have an MS390, I believe that you would need to be running 15.X. Assuming you are not though, I checked our internal info; I can't see any specific fix on 14.33.1 for Critical auth, but we did introduce a couple of fixes on 14.33, which you mentioned you are already on.  I'd follow KRobert's advice, grab a couple of packet captures, if possible get the out of band logs as well, so we can check if there's anything fishy happening whilst you attempt the authentication, and open a support case via Dashboard.    The pcaps should theoretically indicate what is happening with both the RADIUS authentication and the VLAN in which subsequent messages are put in. It may be a good idea to grab a pcap also on the port where the traffic is destined to, so we can also confirm if the switch is... switching 🙂    Let us know how you get on! Giac ... View more

Hey Ihommedl,    Did you try accessing the page from a different connection? For example on your mobile phone?    Do you see any errors on the browser console? If you do, could you share a screenshot please?   Many thanks! Giac   ... View more

Hey Blake,   Are you still observing this at the moment? I cannot see any ongoing maintenance and I can load organizations in the shard.   Many thanks! Giac ... View more

Hey team,   For those still encountering VPN issues with the Windows client, I would recommend always checking the VPN Adapter settings, as described in this KB . Microsoft has a terrible habit of resetting those checkboxes almost every Patch Tuesday, although if you are leveraging GPOs in your Active Directory environment to push the settings you may be OK.   Just to avoid any shattered dreams, please remember that the use of Anyconnect requires you to have a valid license (as per this KB).  If you don't have a license yet, please get in touch with your partner of choice and your Cisco Meraki sales representative and they'll be happy to assist.  😁   Have a great day! Giac     ... View more

Hey @BHC_RESORTS ,  Does it happen for the same network? For example on network A you can at times submit and at times not?    I've also asked before if it is possible to provide browser console logs so we can investigate further, as there may be something not loading properly on the page, but it's difficult to identify with just the screenshot of the case form page.   Many thanks! Giac ... View more

Hey folks,   Just spotted this one; can I confirm if you still have issues seeing the report? I just managed to find the doc (Inventory and Lead times report) and it seems to be there and accessible in a PDF format.    Many thanks! Giac ... View more

Hi @BHC_RESORTS , Thank you so much for sharing, and I'm really sorry to hear about all these mix ups. I have identified the relevant cases and will follow up with you through there.   Many thanks! Giac ... View more