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 JinSoo_Park
About JinSoo_Park
JinSoo_Park
Just browsing
Member since Nov 13, 2024
Online
Community Record
4
Posts
0
Kudos
0
Solutions
24m ago
We have two MX units and two MS switches. The MS switches are connected using LAG, and STP is running in RSTP mode. Each MX has its own unique physical IP addresses plus one VIP (total of three IPs). Since the LAN ports remained active, I now believe that this prevented proper failover behavior. I will run another test by disconnecting the LAN uplink or powering off the primary MX to validate this. Thank you for your helpful guidance.
... View more
25m ago
After removing the WAN cables, the spare MX did become the master after about 1–2 minutes. However, even though the master role switched successfully, the network still remained unreachable. I waited an additional 15–20 minutes, but traffic never passed through the new master. This makes me suspect that the active LAN link on the primary MX prevented a proper failover, even though the role changed in the dashboard. I will test again soon with the LAN link removed or by powering off the primary MX. Thank you for the explanation
... View more
26m ago
I made a mistake in my initial description — I did not disable the WAN ports from the Web UI. I physically disconnected both WAN1 and WAN2 cables on the primary MX. Since the LAN interface was still active, could that be the reason the failover did not occur? It seems the spare continued receiving VRRP heartbeats over the LAN, so it did not take over. I will try again by also disconnecting the LAN interface, or by powering off the primary MX entirely. Thank you for your clarification.
... View more
2 hours ago
Hello everyone, I’m currently experiencing an issue with a warm spare (HA) configuration using two MX95 appliances. Environment Setup MX1 (Primary) WAN1 → ISP A WAN2 → ISP B MX2 (Spare) WAN1 → ISP A WAN2 → ISP B Warm spare configured using virtual uplink IPs Both WAN circuits are directly connected to an upstream ISP switch Issue Description When I manually disable both WAN1 and WAN2 on MX1, I expect MX2 to take over and become the active appliance. However, when this failover occurs: The entire network becomes unreachable. No internet access No LAN access No dashboard connectivity from the MX2 side It appears the MX2 does not properly take over routing even though warm spare is enabled This behavior does not seem normal, and I'm trying to understand why the failover results in a complete outage. What I have verified Both MX appliances have correct WAN IPs and virtual IPs configured Warm spare status shows Primary / Spare (Ready) normally ISP switch provides the same WAN VLAN for both MX units Failover should be seamless, but instead the entire site goes offline Question Has anyone experienced a similar issue where disabling WAN interfaces on the primary MX causes both units to lose connectivity? Is there something additional that needs to be configured on the ISP side (e.g., ARP, MAC restrictions, port security, etc.) to allow proper failover using virtual uplink IPs? Any insight would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance.
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Firewall
© 2025 Cisco Systems, Inc.
