Hi! First time posting! We have been managing an organization for the last year and basically did a full infrastructure change to Meraki. So we are quite fresh with some things, here is the deal: We have currently a little less than 100 sites (networks) but we are planning on growing larger during the next few years. However, the current IP plan we have will change since right now there is no segmentation. So to make it better we are adding VLANs to all sites, these include for example phones and cctv cameras, regardless if they actually have phones or cctv cameras in the site just to keep a standard configuration and flexibility and hopefully take advantage of the templates. After reading the documentation and some other community posts, I understand that the addressing gets assigned randomly and uniquely from the selected subnet. We want to assign each site a /16 network and then hand out each VLAN a /24 from that /16 network. We don't really care with this scenario that Site 1 gets for example 10.89.0.0/16 and Site 2 10.1.0.0/16 which would be the random unique /16 from a 10.0.0.0/8. However, and here comes the question, is it at all possible to keep a VLAN order so that it gets further split into the VLANs, but always on the same way for all sites. For example, this is what we want: Organization: 10.0.0.0/8 Site 1: Random /16: 10.89.0.0 VLAN 1 (ie clients): 10.89.1.0/24 VLAN 2 (ie phones): 10.89.2.0/24 . . . VLAN X: 10.89.X.0/24 Site 2: Random /16: 10.1.0.0/16 VLAN 1 (ie clients): 10.1.1.0/24 VLAN 2 (ie phones): 10.1.2.0/24 . . . VLAN X: 10.1.X.0/24 And so on...Then we know exactly what something is by IP. The reason for this is because we run a hub and spoke scenario with Auto VPN Site-to-Site. Other than that, all firewall rules will be configured to limit inter-VLAN communication and the template will handle those by name without problems so all sites have the same rules. All other settings on each site are basically the same as well: SSIDs, Access policies, authentication methods, etc., that is why we are considering templates instead of independent network creation. Is this something possible? Or is there another way you recommend doing this? I guess maybe with API it could be mass configured, but we have no experience with API so that would set us back a bit. Sorry for the wall of text, just trying to make it as clear as possible. Thanks a lot in advance!
... View more