Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Register or Sign in
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
About JonathanClark
Community Record
12
Posts
2
Kudos
0
Solutions
Badges
2 weeks ago
Did you add vlan 20 on the trunk between mx and core switch? -The trunk link between the Core switch (Catalyst-M) C9300X-12Y is tagged on Management Vlan 5 with allowed VLANs 1-1000 Did you remove the static route for vlan20 from the mx to the coreswitch? Yes, this was a pre-requisite otherwise I was not able to add the Subnet onto the MX Did you remove the vlan 20 svi from the switch? Yes, I removed this. Core switch has one route on it 0.0.0.0/0 next hop of the MXs transit IP address.
... View more
2 weeks ago
Thank you for your response! I followed these steps exactly today and for some reason I couldn't ping any device that picked up an IP address from the MX on VLAN20. L3 Switch had default route to the MX transit VLAN IP. But no dice. The switches that were downstream of the L3 switch, on the management vlan which is also configured on the MX. Could ping the VLAN 20 gateway and work perfectly fine. But not a client on VLAN20... I double checked to make sure no ACLs, No Firewall rules were causing an issue and nothing. I must be missing something. Do I need a static route on the MX somewhere to point traffic back to these devices? I can't configure a static route to a subnet thats residing on the MX of course so I'm not really to sure what I am missing.
... View more
2 weeks ago
Hi All, This may come as a silly question... Is it possible to have a Subnet on the MX while having all other Subnets on the Layer 3 switch? For example: I have VLAN10, 20 & 30 on the Layer 3 switch. I have VLAN 5 (Management) and VLAN 6 (Transit VLAN as per documentation). I have set the static routes up and all works fine. I would like to move VLAN 20 back onto the MX purely for the sake of keeping the firewall rules tidy. The Layer 3 ACLs on the switch do not support GPOs and I would need to place about 60 rules in the list. Or I could just have one neat rule on the MX. What challenges will I face if I move the VLAN onto the MX? Will traffic still be routable or am I missing a key detail here.
... View more
May 23 2024
7:39 AM
2 Kudos
Thank you very much for this. I see that when you do this, you'll see the static routes appear in the Configure->S2S VPN page. So the process is actually super straightforward. A slight lack of experience there on my behalf.
... View more
May 22 2024
6:58 AM
Thank you for this, I've read up about this since the post. But I wasn't sure how the subnets would be advertised to the connecting site. Normally you'd just see the Subnet and Tagged Vlan and select Enabled in Configure -> Site-to-Site VPN. Because I don't have a lab environment to test this, I was unsure how to test and share the routes over VPN.
... View more
May 22 2024
6:18 AM
Good Day All, I trust you are doing well. I am slightly rusty on this topic and have some questions around handling inter-Vlan routing via L3 switches instead of the MX appliance, and the impact that will have on S2S VPNs. I would like to shift the routing load off of the MX appliances by moving the routing and ACLs into the distribution later. But the site has a S2S Meraki Auto-VPN presence and is sharing subnets over the tunnel. I'm unfamiliar with the effect or additional steps I would need to take to not negatively impact the deployment. I'm not sure if this approach is even feasible with branches using S2S connections. Any advice or direction would be greatly appreciated.
... View more
Apr 26 2024
3:41 AM
Good Day fellow Meraki Engineers! I have an interesting question I was hoping you could shed light on for me. At the launch of the MS130 series, I came across a thread mentioning that these switches are hardware ready to support Adaptive policy in coming firmware versions. This was around the time of launch. Has anyone come across talks/notices or any roadmap as to when this may be implemented? Currently it only seems to be available on MS390 and C9300 switches. It would be interesting to know if we could still expect this feature to come soon as I feel it could hold a very unique value set for the lower-mid tier line of the MS portfolio. Thanking you all in advance.
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Other
Mar 11 2024
1:56 AM
Thank you for the suggestion rhbirkelund, Won't the AP still send out beacons (for meshing etc) even though the SSIDs are switched off? I'm looking for a solution that will completely disable the antennas until needed.
... View more
Mar 8 2024
7:39 AM
Hi RaphaelL, are you able to share your methods of achieving this result? Is this through the Meraki Python library or how are you achieving this result?
... View more
Mar 8 2024
6:21 AM
Thank you, I have reviewed these and it seems that others are having the same issue. I can't even get it to reply with the null expression. The network I'm testing on has multiple custom profiles, so data should be returned.
... View more
Mar 8 2024
6:02 AM
Hi All, I'm busy working on an API script to turn on/off transmission power of Access Points. We do this during new deployments when its time to migrate over to the new Meraki set up. Prior to the migration, we want them off to not interfere with the current networks in place. The following command which is on Meraki's Documentation: https://developer.cisco.com/meraki/api-v1/get-network-wireless-rf-profiles/ I keep getting a 500 Internal Server error with this call. meraki.exceptions.APIError: wireless, getNetworkWirelessRfProfiles - 500 Internal Server Error, <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtm Has anyone else had this issue? I've made sure I'm getting the network ID correctly and have tested it with a bunch of other functions. Just this one is not working. Any help? Thank you!
... View more
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 703 |
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
