Can someone explain what effect having ipv6 in just the MR would have without the MX?  You couldn't route IPv6 to Internet without MX right?  Even if MS and MR lines had 100% support for ipv6, unless it's purely for internal site traffic, what is the benefit without the MX's involvement? ... View more

Does anyone know if the MX is capable of tunneling IPv6 over IPv4?   Related to GIF (Generic tunnel Interface) / NAT passing IP protocol 41?   https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2473 ... View more

Were these release notes ever released?  If so, where can I find them? 🙂   Thanks! ... View more

You do have to install both to get full functionality (I have often joked that SM Agent and SM Profile should be marketed as separate products since much of the documentation often assumes you have both when I typically do not get that experience).  We were Legacy SM customers before the paid version existed, and before the profile was an option existed (or at least we were not aware of it back then). For years we always just installed the agent.  For new laptop builds, it's easy to install the profile and the agent as part of our build process (we don't have DEP currently due to a challenge with our Procurement process).     The challenge is I have 500+ devices that are deployed (no longer at a company office with IT staff) with only the agent and no profile.  Figuring out a way to enroll those devices so they can use the profile is a challenge.  Most of these user laptops don't have access to admin rights so they can't self enroll even if we were to email them the links.     I have long hoped that the agent would gain the ability to self install / enroll the profile.  In the past, I once was able to repackage the profile file into a .pkg file (agents can install pkgs) as a work around, but unsure if it still works (it was also annoying since SM always thought the pkg never finished installing).  I need to recreate this and test if it's even possible with the new Mojave / Catalina challenges.  That would solve so many challenges for managing our Mac devices.    If anyone else has cracked this code, please let me know! ... View more

My support tech had me create a new SM network for testing.  I took a new Mac and installed the agent (1.0.98) then had the tech upgrade that SM network to the 3.0.1 agent to test auto updating.  So far nothing has auto updated and we are looking into potential causes / diagnostics.   Hoping the profile is not a prerequisite since I have so many systems out in the field that had the agent installed way before the profile method existed. ... View more

Even in licensed SM, this is still a huge blocker for us, we have 800+ devices enrolled in licensed SM via the agent that are out in the wild and I want nothing more than to add the profile for added functionality.  Not only does adding profile after a device has the agent create duplicate entries in SM (Support can manually merge these but it's an added step), but there is no way to automate profile enrollment at this time.  Iirc, even if we were to send enrollment links and ask users to enroll, they would need to be local admins to complete the enrollment :(. ... View more

Thanks, I'm just excited there will be notes at all!  Looking forward to it.  Should we expect them in this thread or some other distro method?  I don't want to miss the notes once released.   PS.  I know this thread is all about SM and Catalina, but will the Windows agent also be getting an upgrade or will it still be a 1.0.98 version? ... View more

Are we going to also get change logs / release notes for these Meraki SM Agent updates? Something similar to the other Meraki firmware updates?  Hoping there are some other bug fixes / features in the v 3.0.1 besides "Catalina now Supported"?     ... View more

Interesting, seems kinda crazy that we are going from version 1.0.99 to 3.0.1.  I wonder what happened to 2.0? XD ... View more

That has not been my experience.  Can you show a screenshot for this?  Versioning with Meraki SM has long been a mystery. ... View more

Since when did the Agent have published version numbers?  How can I find out which version of the agent I'm running? ... View more

I'm not entirely opposed, but I'd rather a more agnostic solution (such as a script or executable that could be deployed via whatever means an organization uses) .    Also to clarify, we have the SM agent installed without issue (it's part of our base image deployment).  And we have other tools to push the agent exe/msi installer as needed later.  It's the profile enrollment that is the challenge.    Singe agent enrollment & profile enrollment each have different feature sets, Meraki SM is in some ways, two products in my opinion, something their marketing team does not make super clear in my opinion.  Since the capabilities of profile enrollment vs agent enrollment are entirely different.   https://documentation.meraki.com/SM/Device_Enrollment/Systems_Manager_Agent_and_MDM_Profile_Enrollment ... View more