I'm surprised Europe was able to hold on this long .. in North America we ran out back in 2012 officially. ... View more

We dropped Meraki about a year ago because of some bugs that seemed like they were never going to get fixed and for me the major issue is lack of IPv6.  How does Meraki expect us to be taken seriously with our customers when they are asking for IPv6 and we couldn’t give them a straight answer?  I voted with my wallet and moved to FortiNet - not to start a debate on Cisco vs X but FortiNet supports IPv6 and has a much richer feature set at a lower price point....  ... View more

The only way Cisco and Meraki will take note of this is by "voting with your wallet" I'm sorry to say.  I'm just in the process of ripping out a lab system that was purchased with the intent of purchasing a large amount of Meraki.  Since then I've changed our plans for rollout from Meraki to another system (doesn't matter who as that's not the point).   I had this exact conversation about 4 months ago with a very large Meraki customer and they are frustrated.  They have talked to their sales rep along with a regional manager and were re-assured IPv6 is a priority.  Much the same as my conversation, the question came up as to why this is even a question in 2018 ... much shock set in when myself and this other company realized that development might take a couple of years before Meraki releases anything.  If that's not true then that would mean development is well underway and more could be shared but what I understand is another few months from now just to get a timeline and resources scheduled to *begin* looking at this.     Well, to be blunt .. it's at least a FEW years too late.  One could even argue it's 10 years too late as that's how long I've been deploying IPv6 into service provider and enterprise networks.   The large customer I referenced is going to start converting 10,000 units at a time ... the sad thing that I know will happen is that nobody will notice until *after* that customer has migrated away as that's exactly what will happen for me. ... View more

"A lot of the mess is trying to force IPv6 into a NATed IPv4 world of today.  v6 is old (first draft was back in '98), but only just received standardization last year, and there are still issues that IPv6 only networks don't address or have agreed upon solutions for -- many of which probably apply heavily to Meraki networks, like multi-homing and source address selection."   I'm a huge proponent of IPv6 and massively disappointed that Meraki isn't willing to adopt it a few years ago when I strongly feel they should have at a minimum.   Unsure what the "mess" is about though .. I see it deployed at scale in various networks every day.  By deployed, I mean in a dual stack specifically which allows for a transition path fairly easily when the day, in theory, comes to shutdown IPv4.  I'm not a fan of anything other than dual-stack ... all the transition technologies come with a certain degree of pain.   Also, with regards to standardization I'm not sure what you are referring to with regarding last year.  It's been a ratified and adopted standard for many years now - I first started deploying IPv6 into enterprise and service provider networks back in 2008 ... 10 years ago.   Just some two cents on your post ...   Paul ... View more

yes that's correct .. but those may be "interesting options" for the original poster to consider is all I was saying ..  ... View more

Generally they make a lot of the "genuine" SFP's anyways for Cisco so that makes sense 😉 ... View more

If you go into the port configuration on a switch there are options there that might interest you ..    Monitor -> Switch Ports -> Port X -> STP Guard   Paul   ... View more

I have a lot of Apple devices in my home lab - happy to compare settings if you are still having problems ... ... View more

Not to be "that guy" but you mention Ubiquiti equipment and "enterprise equipment" and their gear is far from what I would consider Enterprise.  I have seen a lot of it deployed and there are lots of folks who like it but it's not the most robust kind of gear.   The first thing that comes to mind is whether or not the M5's are reachable from the Internet on a public IP?  If they are, please firewall them as Ubiquiti have historically had lots of security related issues with getting hacked.  I don't recall if the M5 specifically has had issues like that but there was a "virus" floating around for a while that targeted their gear and would cause all kinds of weird stuff like you described to occur.  A firmware upgrade would remove the "virus" as part of the upgrade.   A bit of a long short but wanted to mention it    Paul ... View more

Thanks .. yeah MX64 in my lab at moment ....  ... View more

So about the MR26 firmware ... I just bought some MR42E access points.  After going through support channels and asking questions I come to find out that they can only run on MR26 firmware but yet in the portal, in your literature and anywhere else there is no mention of this firmware version even existing (from a new customer perspective).  Then I come to find out that I can't even read about it as it's brand new beta code etc .... this seems to be a recurring theme with Meraki I'm quickly learning.  I also purchased Insights and to run it I have to run the latest Beta code on MX gateway to even use it.   The lack of transparency here is staggering and gives the impression that Meraki is happy to get the revenue and not happy to share anything up front about it's code... I have to say, before looking to roll out Meraki across an entire country, that this has me quite concerned. ... View more

They had better not drop support for Mac ... I'll be more than upset if they do.  I have seen the same problems though as this thread is mentioning .... unfortunate. ... View more

Have played around with it ... definitely very much in beta (as it states on the web interface).  The one thing that I didn't like is that you have to run latest Beta code on MX to even enable the feature - there is no mention of that anywhere and Meraki doesn't consider that to be a major issue after talking to them... I disagree.   The thing that I do really like though is, for example, with Netflix monitoring.  It actually got it right as to where the Netflix traffic was coming from.  I use this example because (like Youtube and others) the content is fed from many different sources and a lot of times it will be on-net caches with your ISP. In my scenarios it got the exact servers that are on-net and the upstream catalog servers on Amazon 100% correct.  In digging into this a bit more, I was curious how it could possibly get this information correct but then realized it was really looking at the traffic type and matching by the reverse DNS of the connected servers ... pretty simple but effective 😉   Amazon, Office365 and others seem to be accurate so far.... the web interface though takes a long time to load up once you have 10-15 monitored applications. ... View more

In our case we have quite a number of customers that host their own SSL-VPN (hence the web question) and we host DNS for them (which has been more reliable than other solutions for them).  thanks again. ... View more

Ah I see what you mean ... I work on the ISP side of things primarily so think like an ISP 😉    How would that work for web though .... use the dynamic hostname as a CNAME for inbound web traffic?  Thanks  ... View more

Well there is clearly benefits to doing eBGP to upstream provider.  Load a loopback address on the Meraki MX with two upstream connections and you have an "always reachable" destination for inbound traffic that may be forwarded to things like mail servers etc. ... View more

Sure, SNMP traps can be beneficial for sure ... assuming they can be reliably delivered and something "smart" in place to filter through them depending on how they are setup.   There is though clearly some missing abilities with Meraki in this regard and I just need to figure out (as you mention) whether or not it's a major deal for our specific needs.     Thanks 😉 ... View more

Thank you for the response .... this is unfortunate as I can see Meraki as a great MSP style solution but without the ability to properly alert (in my opinion) and combined with no IPv6 support this is a growing concern for me.  Thanks again. ... View more

Thank you .. unfortunately I figured this might be the answer.  I have been reading around over there and was hoping to avoid building something or "re-inventing" things. ... View more

Question though ... will it support eBGP for upstream to provider with only taking default routes from those ISP's?  I completely understand it's not going to handle full tables from a couple of upstreams 🙂   Or, same upstream ISP connected through private AS for purposes of load balancing connections?   Thanks, Paul ... View more

Thanks ... that's what I was hoping to avoid 🙂  I'm trying to build out some "cheat sheets" for the sales side ... think I'll ping our Meraki rep to see what they have as well ...  ... View more

Thank you ... and that makes a lot of sense 🙂  What about other feature parity ... is there a doc somewhere that explains what features are available on which switches?  I'd rather not re-invent stuff from a pre-sales perspective to know how switches are positioned for customer needs ... thanks again. ... View more