In a scenario like that be sure to always allow DHCP traffic towards the DHCP server as client asking for DHCP informs or simply renewing their lease will send using unicast directly to the DHCP server. Of course if this fails they will ultimately retry using broadcast DHCP discover but that's at the very end of the lease and not recommended to let it come that far. ... View more

I also first learned Cisco through netacad. So I do know it’s hard to miss features which are common.  However you need to wrap your head around the whole cloudmgmt. Think of the management ip of a meraki switch as being purely out of band like a management Port of a switch living on it’s own VRF. And you can’t plug that mgmt Port into the switch itself. And that is why each stackmember has it’s own mgmt Ip which has nothing to do with the upstream transit VLAN.   I prefer using a separate VLAN directly terminated upstream.  But in your case you could change your /30 into a /29 and put both stackmembers mgmt in the same subnet as the stack IP. ... View more

Hey, I haven't read your explanation entirely but I get the main point.   You basically have two options in this kind of design. 1) You have a totally separate VLAN on the upstream router that only serves for the management of all your Meraki devices lan devices like switches and access points.  And then you have your transit VLAN between the router and your core switch.  In this case you will have a default gateway on the management of all your devices which is the router.  And you will also have a 0.0.0.0 route defined on your coreswitch pointing to the transit VLAN router IP as next hop. 2) You can have only 1 interface on the router which is the transit VLAN.  In this case your subnet used in the transit VLAN must be large enough to accomodate the routers IP, the core stack IP and all the management IP's of the core stack members.  Then all switches and access points downstream of the CORE will have another management VLAN where they are in and they point to the CORE as default gateway. ... View more

Yeah but I mean downwards pointing antenna. Normally we do staggered when it's open so there is some distance between the AP's.  But if the aisles diminish the signal enough it's not a real requirement. But as said before, try simulating the AP at the correct height with the antenna pointing down and see if the signal reaches all the way to the end of the aisle. If that doesn't work but the aisles weaken the signal enough, you could try in the middle pointing down and if that is not enough try 1/3 closer to the wall and then use the AP's in the open area for roaming. That's one of the big plusses of having software like ekahau, you can try all 3 scenario's and see which is best. ... View more

I see you have Ekahau and that the ceiling height is much higher than the 5 meter originally given. I'd encourage you to first experiment with the MA-ANT-25 pointing straight down at 1/3rd of an aisle and see if it covers the entire aisle or not.  I do recommend using the offset feature to subtract some 5 dB from your "measured" value. Then you could do a staggered pattern in your aisles 1/3rd, 2/3rds. ... View more

If your ceiling is only 70 meters long and putting that AP in the middle will create a 35m radius that needs coverage. If the aisle itself is obstacle free you would have no problem reaching both ends using simple MA-ANT-20 antennas. Using the MA-ANT25 on hight ceiling is also a viable option but 5 meters is not really that high.  In that case you'd be better off hanging it on the wall pointing down the aisle however you need an actual wall and then you'd have the entire 70 meters to cover.  And the MA-ANT25 is IMO a little too wide and too little gain to do this.  In that case the MA-ANT27 would have been better since that one has higher gain and narrower beam. The reason to discourage the antennas in different directions has to do with the fact that you would get strange results.  The Meraki AP has 2 radio's, one for 2.4 and one for 5.  So theoretically you could have a 2.4 cell in one direction and 5 in another but that does not make sense.  Also trying to extend your cell by cross connection your antennes will have weird results since the AP will try to to spatial multiplexing or ratio combining to your wifi client.  However if both antennas are pointed in different direction that will yield in possible destructive signales instead of constructive. So if it's only one aisle. Stick to the center and use omni's pointed vertically.  Make sure the antennas have complete clearance.  If you have multiple aisles then you'd normally stagger the AP's, so one at 1/3rd of the way in one row, and the next row one at 2/3rds. That depends on the situation though. ... View more

Nope, that connection is wrong. You have radio's that expect two spatially diverse antenna's to do 2x2. By connecting the antennas that way you basically create two independent 1x1's and this will cause problems. Connect one antenna to both 5GHz ports and the other to both 2.4GHz ports. ... View more

I got it mixed up: It's when your route comes from another source than BGP and is preferred over the BGP route it only displays the preferred route source (like VPN peer). ... View more

The routing table view will only show the RIB. So only the selected path will be in there, not the alternate paths. It will however display internal BGP as route source. So there is no show ip bgp/ show bgp ipv4 unicast equivalent. And there will be some weird IP address as hop between hub and spoke beginning with 6.something.  I believe this subnet is created inside the AutoVPN tunnels to allow BGP messages to flow between all BGP speakers. ... View more