Our MX appliances are reporting the same thing at all of our sites as well. Looks like Tuesday has a Monday hangover at Meraki. Fortunately, everything seems to be working regardless of the error. ... View more

Thanks @KarstenI.   Not so much expecting. Hoping, yes. 😁   Looks like it will only work if we remove all VLANs from the MX, which isn't practical for us. I supposeiI could use static routes on the 2811s, but we all know how much fun that is to manage...   Thanks! ... View more

Thanks @BrandonS. I appreciate the info. That confirms what I suspected as far as how the MX would handle the trunk and the VLANs.   No worries on the VPLS stuff. Up until a few months ago I had never even heard of it. The learning curve has been rather interesting, but thanks to several fine folks out here on the forums I think I have a good understanding of how to get it to work correctly. I hope...  😬   Twitch         ... View more

@lpopejoy   😂🤣    Could you imagine? Rock Your Depends Day at the office. Heaven help us...     ... View more

@Bruce   Good info. Thanks for the reply. All of our MR74s have a wired connection, which explains why they are not seeing neighbors except for the APs that we have setup specifically as bridges.   Still, it makes me wonder if we powered the MR74s with PoE injectors and allowed them to make a mesh, would the scanners behave better? Scanning of barcodes is the primary function of the wireless on the shop floors. It's critical to operations as time is scanned off as the piece progresses through the various stages of fabrication. In other words, there really isn't much user data traffic that would normally be seen from laptops, for example. Some folks have cell phones on the wireless, but that is not mission critical.   All that to say, I wonder if the benefits of having a mesh in our case would outweigh the benefits of having a wired network connection to each AP? The roaming would be more seamless for the scanners, and the perception of an improvement in network performance may outweigh the wired benefits.    It may be worth a test, at least.   Thanks for your post. You have me thinking, which hurts most days, but I try to do it anyway.   Twitch ... View more

Great idea! Polo shirts, t-shirts, sweatshirts, and hoodies.   An "Off the Stack" t-shirt design would be pretty cool, perhaps with some catchy network slang or lingo. The gnomes could make an appearance, of course.      ... View more

@Aztec_NinjaI know that feeling! We all need some Meraki-branded Depends if this is going to keep happening. ... View more

@DHAnderson  Oh man, that's hilarious. RIP to your wiener. What a way to go...   🤣🤣🤣 ... View more

Same here - we never lost functionality in terms of user connectivity or connectivity between sites, there was just a ton of emails saying that nothing was reachable and everything was going down all at once at all sites. It was clearly enough to create an "Oh Sh*t" moment, and caused me to start remembering all of the changes I made earlier in the day.   You know the moment: "Dammit. Did I cause this?????" While sprinting away from that half-made cup of coffee back to your computer at full speed...     ... View more

Hey @RodrigoC - Thanks very much for the update. We appreciate everything you guys are doing to figure-out what's going on. ... View more

Our site-to-site VPNs have remained operational. They still show up/up and green. I haven't heard anything to the contrary in terms of remote site connectivity.     ... View more

Thanks, everyone. Good to know it's not just our network.   Other than the alerts, All is Quiet on the Western Front in terms of user complaints.         ... View more

That's interesting, @cmr @INSCOL . I see the same sort of thing in our shops. We also have employees who roam the shop with handheld scanners.   I recently installed some new APs in one shop, and I have noticed while testing connectivity that the scanner remains connected to the first AP it associated with at the end of the shop, and it remains connected to that AP despite passing two others as I walk away from the original. Even if I stop and stand in front of another access point, the association does not change, but the connection speed sure takes a nosedive. I can verify the AP association by using ap.meraki.com which shows me which AP the scanner is using. In fact, the only way I get the association to change is by turning WiFi off, then back on. At that point, the device will associate with the closest AP.   The scanners we are using are old and sensitive to fluctuations in the connection, which is why I would like the devices to always connect automatically to the closest AP as they roam around the shop instead of remaining connected to one that is 300' away.   We have one SSID and one subnet in the shop. APs are set to Bridge Mode.   I did read this document: https://documentation.meraki.com/MR/WiFi_Basics_and_Best_Practices/Seamless_Roaming_with_MR_Access_Points   This morning I set the channel settings to be the same for all radios on the 2.5 and 5 GHz channels. However, after doing so, I do not see any mesh neighbors listed yet, which makes me wonder if they're too far apart, or if having them all on one side of the shop instead of staggered on opposite walls prevents the neighbor relationship from forming. I'm sure steel columns everywhere doesn't help, either.   The strange thing is that I can walk around with a laptop or my phone and use speedtest.net and get excellent speed along the entirety of the shop using wireless, but I still have to turn WiFi off, then back on to get the association to change to use the nearest AP.     ... View more

We have a similar setup using MR74 (gateways) and MR30H (repeaters) APs, also in a factory-type environment - welding machines connect to the Ethernet ports of the repeaters. Our connections have been bomber-solid with this setup, fortunately.   Could your issue be related at all to line-of-sight? Is there equipment that could be interfering, such as overhead cranes carrying loads or other equipment getting in-between the gateway and repeater?   We are a steel fabrication shop that fabricates steel for skyscrapers and other large structures. We sometimes have wireless issues if the shop if fabricating a very large piece that gets in the way of an AP or somehow hinders the signal.   One thing we also do is limit connections to the repeaters to only the devices that are connected to them via the switchports by using the Tag feature in the dashboard. Could user traffic be interfering somehow with the traffic coming from the meters?   Have you had a chance to look at the wireless bridge document at this link:   https://documentation.meraki.com/MR/WiFi_Basics_and_Best_Practices/Extending_the_LAN_with_a_Wireless_Mesh_Link   Hope something here helps.     ... View more

Hey @Greyston - let me tell you what I did here at our shop.   We have Lincoln Electric welders that we wanted to get a network connection to. Our environment is also dirty and not technology-friendly (I often joke that this is the place where technology comes to die, but that's a post for another day). The welders are mounted to automated welding machines and moved back-and-forth on tracks with the machine, making the Ethernet connection prone to failure and very difficult to run. A wireless bridge was the answer for us.   We run MR74 access points for wireless network access. For the bridge device, we purchased MR30H access points that have a 4-port Ethernet switch on the bottom. These are attached to the welders in various creative ways, and they ride back on and forth with the machine.The welders are connected to the MR30H access point via Cat 6 cables, and we set-up a wireless bridge between the MR30H and a nearby MR74 AP, which transfers the bridge traffic to the wired LAN. To power the MR30H APs, some of the welders had available electric outlets, for others we used PoE Injectors. So far, this solution has worked flawlessly. Currently, we have about 10 of these wireless bridges running in our shops at several locations.   To keep end-user devices from connecting to the wireless bridge, we used the Tag function and separated the traffic into "Bridge" and "Production." This way, end-user devices will connect directly to the MR74s using the Production tag, and only the welders will be sending traffic across the Bridge. There are some nuances in the setup that are laid-out in the documentation below.   MR30H:  https://meraki.cisco.com/product/wi-fi/indoor-access-points/mr30h/   MR74:  https://meraki.cisco.com/product/wi-fi/outdoor-access-points/mr74/   Wireless Bridge Setup:  https://documentation.meraki.com/MR/WiFi_Basics_and_Best_Practices/Extending_the_LAN_with_a_Wireless_Mesh_Link     Hope this helps. Let me know if you have any questions or need more info.   Twitch ... View more

Hey @cmr - I believe the jack at one end may have had some oxidation on it. It was on an exterior wall of a construction trailer inside the plant and it looked like it wasn't exactly in a dry location. After snipping both ends off and re-terminating, the cable worked fine for the switch.   Still weird that it worked fine for the AP but would not get link for the switch.   I'll chalk it up to things in IT that defy explanation.   Thanks everyone for the replies!!   Twitch ... View more

Hey RouterGuy - vanilla config. The link between the two switches is a trunk with native VLAN 1 on both sides. No other VLANs. Nothing special configured on either switch at this point. Out-of-the-box and plugged-in, literally. I've just never seen an issue like this with a cable that works fine for another device, but not the one you're trying to get connected.   Also, both switches are MS210-24's, so no legacy equipment involved. ... View more

I was finally able to get a seat in ECMS1, and the seat in ECMS2 will follow shortly thereafter. I'm looking forward to it very much!! Don't give up trying if you're still waiting for a seat. It's taken me about a year, but finally, I have a Golden Ticket. 🤣   Also, I found this on the Cisco Learning Network. Apparently the ECMS1 and ECMS2 courses are available for a fee. If I'm late to the game here and everyone already knows about this, I apologize. It's new to me, so I figured I would share just-in-case:     ECMS1:  https://learningnetworkstore.cisco.com/on-demand-e-learning/engineering-cisco-meraki-solutions-part-1-ecms1-v2-0-elt-ecms1-v2-025267   ECMS2:  https://learningnetworkstore.cisco.com/on-demand-e-learning/engineering-cisco-meraki-solutions-part-2-ecms2-v2-0-elt-ecms2-v2-025268   The prices aren't "break the bank" either, which is great.   Cheers!   Twitch   ... View more

Hey @Bruce - so is it safe to say that I can use a private IP address, say 172.16.1.x /24, on the WAN ports of the remote site MXs and they will still be able to reach the Dashboard via our data center MX Internet connection, and that NAT will then translate that private IP to a public IP which gives the remote MXs Dashboard connectivity?   Reason I ask is that our MXs at all sites currently have a public IP assigned to their WAN ports with direct internet access. Once the VPLS is live, the remote MX's traffic will travel through two designated primary sites to access the Internet, and will be using private IPs instead of public IPs.   We're hoping to drop the internet service at all remote sites and only need to maintain active internet connections at our two primary sites.   Thanks for your help!   Twitch ... View more

@cmr Aha! I see. So basically, I can conceptualize VPLS as a bunch of routers plugged in to a single central switch, with all of the routers having an IP in the same subnet, all sharing the same VLAN ID? That ain't so bad, then, is it?    Great call on spacing the IPs out. We currently have one MX at each site, and I am pushing hard to get rid of that single point of failure, especially here at the DC. The network is a work in progress.    I really, really appreciate the help and advice. Thanks!!    Twitch ... View more

Thanks @Bruce @cmr.   Would it be correct to say, then, at least from a high-level view, that I can assign each site a new private IP range assigned to the MX as the VPLS interface, place that interface in its own VLAN, route the private range with OSPF, and as long as each site knows a route to the internal networks located at each site, the VPLS will simply pass the traffic inter-site, much like frame relay did "back in the day?"   We don't want to change the IP range assigned to the internal networks, hence my desire to add another subnet just for the VPLS and rely on INTER-VLAN routing to pass the traffic.    The remote sites will come through our office for Internet access, which is a 1 Gbps link. The VPLS links right now will be 100 Mbps to start with.    At our office, I can either extend the demarc directly to our MX100, using one of the LAN ports (port 8, for example), bypassing the switches, or I can connect to a switch first, then connect from the switch to the MX. Are there advantages for one over the other? I'd prefer to go straight to the MX.   The WAN port on our MX will stay as it is because it's our (and the remote sites once the VPLS is in running) Internet connection, hence my desire to use an MX LAN port.    At the remote sites, based on what you guys have said, I can use the WAN port to connect the VPLS since all of their traffic will come back through our office anyway.   Does that setup make sense?   I have a clearer picture in my head now. At least I think I do...    Thanks again!    Twitch ... View more