I know they are wanting to do more integrations between platforms which is good in theory, but they had better test the heck out of it first. I have been using all of the "standard" Meraki equipment and really like it. Almost every company has had a device/software with an issue -  the key is do they learn from it. ... View more

Examples are always good. ... View more

We finally replaced the stack of 4 MS390s with 2 MS425 as the core and 2 MS355s for the servers (each pair as a stack)  - No problems since - crossing my fingers. Traffic issues and other strange happenings have gone away. ... View more

Same here. We are getting the MS355s as well. The MS390s might be fine in a distribution cabinet with only access ports but I don't have any confidence in them. The rest of the Meraki line - great. ... View more

We now have MS425 in place for our distribution stack. All other IDFs connect to the MS425, We have RSTP running on all Cisco 2960x switches (MST is supposed to work but only if ALL are running MST). We still have the MS390 stack in place but they now only have servers (access ports) and AP trunks configured. This has been working for about a month (fingers crossed). The MS425 seems to be able to handle RSTP better than the MS390s.   If I could start over with Meraki as the final solution, I would put in Meraki APs first, then Meraki MS in the IDFs, and THEN replace the core. ... View more

We tried MST as well and as soon as one switch was up on MST the other switches would cause it to stop forwarding traffic. We did try shutting down the entire network, bring up a switch at a time configuring MST. We brought up a second switch and were able to convert to MST. We brought up a THIRD switch and before we could configure it, the other two switches went down. It seems the only way to get MST configured on a large network would be to bring up a switch at a time - convert it - shut it down and then move to the next switch.   Not sure we are going to try that as this location has 19 IDFs and if it didn't work...   We have the following on our Cisco 2960x switches spanning-tree mode rapid-pvst spanning-tree loopguard default spanning-tree portfast edge default spanning-tree portfast edge bpduguard default no spanning-tree optimize bpdu transmission spanning-tree extend system-id spanning-tree backbonefast   What should we set our Meraki Trunks to?   Options are - Disabled - Root guard - BPDU Guard - Loop Guard   I'm asking because I have been in networking for 30 years but never had to really address spanning tree as we have been 100% standard Cisco and the core always won the contest for root spanning-tree vlan 1-4094 priority 61440 ... View more

Do Not buy these things. We are having major issues with a stack of 4 MS390 connecting to Cisco 2960x switches. They will just stop routing traffic. CDP neighbor on the 2960x sees the MS390 stack and the MS390s see the 2960x but they will not route traffic. From 2960x can't even ping the gateway. If you have a working switch and unplug it - good luck getting it to talk again.    We have another location - pure Meraki (no MS390s) and do not have any issues - APs no issue no matter whether in a standard Cisco switch or in a Meraki switch.   Have over 1/2 dozen Meraki engineers looking at this without any resolution. Over 1/2 dozen Cisco TAC engineers looking at our problems without resolution.   Suggested configuring spanning mode MST but that is causing more issues. If you could take off the Meraki OS and run as a standard 9200 stack it would probably work. ... View more

I opened a case with Meraki. What was happening was I was not getting the blue button that says FINISH EDITING. If I created a rule the button was not showing up. Working with TAC we found that if I went to the page and then refreshed the page the button showed up but for new sites with new rules I was having an issue.   After trying Firefox I did not have the same issue. Chrome was not always giving me the button. could have been my security settings.   So - be sure you get the FINISH EDITING button - and then click on save.   I am going to try again with objects. Otherwise too many IP addresses to have to type in. ... View more

Word of warning! I am setting up a new SD-WAN using the MX appliances. I enabled the groups and thought this was great. I get to save lots of typing and make it more readable.   Well then I have several MX appliances setup with just IP addresses and a couple with groups. Everything was working fine - until I deleted an object under Organization --> Network Objects. I then went to the firewall on a MX I was setting up. I have made a number of rules and saved without issues - until I tried to replace one object with the newly created one. When I went to add another route and came back to the firewall rules - they were all gone and back to the allow all rule.   I checked other MX appliances I was setting up - the ones with IP addresses used in configuration were fine. the ones with objects were not.   So enable objects carefully! ... View more

Thanks for the reply and yes BETA makes me a tad nervous. ... View more

I am trying to make them as secure as possible. I agree that they could easily be kept "inside" the network but a management goal is to remove all devices that Cisco stops providing software updates for. I am hoping that removing all functionality other than voice requirements and putting them on the other side of a firewall will to convince management they are "safe" for a few more years - at least until we move to SIP or replace with much less expensive routers. I don't think many people are trying to hack in through  B1 lines anymore and we need them for 911.   I would like to hear from others that are keeping 2900 routers to help build my case so I can move to Meraki sooner.   Thanks for the response.  ... View more