Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
About Captain
Community Record
34
Posts
4
Kudos
0
Solutions
Badges
Tuesday
All switch uplinks are the same: vlan 1 as native + all vlan allowed. All other switches are Meraki. They are in secondary cabinets, each switch get one uplink from SW01 and another uplink from SW02. this is for redundancy if one core switch dies... the root switch is SW01 = 0 then SW02 = 8192 and all the rest with default bridge priority 32768. I have opened a case with Meraki support. At the moment they can't find anything odd with the configuration. just confirm that the VRRP packet are behaving strange. My comment (not support): A packet capture shows all VRP packets have bad checksum.
... View more
Tuesday
Hi Ryan, It is very simple... Each MX has only one Lan port enabled. 1st MX Lan 5 port to SW01 port 47 2nd MX Lan 5 port to SW02 port 47 SW01 Port 48 <> SW02 Port 48 Regards,
... View more
Tuesday
All mx and switches trunk ports have rstp enabled - YES --- is not a real link but signifies a virtual IP for LAN (there's another for WAN but as this is not a problem now i did not draw it).
... View more
Tuesday
Dear Forum, The two MXs are connected as in the attached network diagram (Pic. 1). However, the 2nd backup mx fails to sync = HA light constantly blinking in orange + power light is while steady. both MXs are online in dashboard. As a result, both MXs appear as Master on the dashboard. If i power off SW02 and move the 2nd lan trunk port to SW01 (Pic. 2) = it still fails. There are no ports disabled due to spanning tree. Tried rebooting all devices but it didn't help. Last time I had this issue I opened a ticket with the support. They said that the switch failed to pass VRRP traffic due to a spanning tree topology change. Checked couple of times and there are no ports blocked due spantree. Any idea what it can be? Thanks in advance! Picture 1 Picture 2
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Other
Aug 28 2024
6:17 AM
The problem is that it is installed in an environment where someone might unplug our device and connect his device and get DHCP. I'd like only for authorized devices to be able to pull dhcp.
... View more
Aug 28 2024
3:41 AM
This is disappointing. Are there any plans for adding this security feature to the security appliance device?
... View more
Aug 28 2024
1:28 AM
Dear Experts, I am looking into allowing DHCP only to certain devices by their OUI to match my needs. Though my NIC OUI is FC:34:97:xx:xx:xx with the following DHCP configuration below I am still getting DHCP. There's no other DHCP server on the network, but the MX. How can I get it working? Is there a way to apply for an OUI range for example 00:00:01 to 00:00:02 Kind Regards, C.
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Other
Aug 21 2024
8:54 AM
Hi RaphaeIL, Thanks a lot for your quick response! We actually do have the Radius servers on the same premise as the clients are. When we tried at the beginning to forward all traffic from the access points directly to the radius servers on premise it didn't work. I figured out that as the access points are "reporting" everything to the Meraki Cloud it has to flow through the Meraki Cloud, and then from there back to the site (and it worked fine so far). Apparently, it can be done without Meraki Cloud as a proxy, and now I'd like to understand how to actually have ut corrected. If I change the radius servers ip addresses to point to the servers private ip addresses, then the traffic will never need to traverse through WAN to reach over back again to the local network. But then how does the access points will be able to reach the radius servers lan? Both the radius servers and the APs are on different management networks. For instance, let's say that the access points are on network 192.168.128.0/24 - VLAN X. and the radius servers are on network 10.1.1.0/24 - VLAN Y. both of the vlans are defined on the MX addressing and vlans and have gateways. Adding routing rules / group policies to allow intervlan routing? Where? How? Nowadays Private IPs in inside lan Best Regards,
... View more
Aug 21 2024
7:21 AM
Hi, We have a "special" setup for one of our sites which have its clients (PCs) connecting through the wifi using radius authentication. The radius server is physically located at the same site with the clients that try to authenticate. The traffic flow for all auth requests goes like: Client (PC) -> AP -> MX -> WWW -> Meraki Cloud -> Meraki Cloud-> MX -> Radius server We are concerned about security as some of the packets (UDP 1812) might be intercepted somewhere in between the Meraki Cloud to MX and EAP packets are not encrypted. I would like to know: 1. The radius packets sent to Meraki Cloud and back to MX are encrypted? It makes sense that all the traffic that is being sent between MX <> Meraki Cloud is encapsulated and encrypted But I don't know for sure and maybe as these are UDP1812 they are excluded from being included in the encapsulation? My question is - is this setup secure or not? 2. Is it possible not to send the packets from APs -> Meraki Cloud just for them to reach back to the inside LAN where the Radius server is? RADIUS Proxy for WPA2-Enterprise SSIDs - Cisco Meraki Documentation Regards,
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Other
Jul 26 2024
2:03 AM
Dear Fellowship, I would like to ask for your help achieving this with the given hardware. The goal is to allow mDNS traffic bi-directional between the two vlans 128 and 123 and in vlan 123 to only a specific server = 192.168.123.99. The network is built with MS120 switches and a MX67 router. How can i allow traffic from one vlan to another? Regards, Ale.
... View more
Jun 5 2024
11:34 PM
Dear, Do Meraki Switches Support NetBIOS and BACnet Protocols over L2? Regards,
... View more
I used chatgpt for the same question before posting here and had a similar reply as posted by pulkit. However, after experimenting noticed that if i do not add the native vlan in allowed tagged then it will not forward traffic. that is why i have posted here my question.
... View more
Dear All, When setting vlans on a switch port in trunk mode do i need as well to include the native vlan on the allowed vlans? Cheers!
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Layer 2
Jul 12 2023
1:53 AM
Can you think of a good reason there's no an option to alert for a port going to blocking state due to a loop / spanning tree issue?
... View more
May 11 2023
1:17 AM
Hi, Trying to achieve the following flow: LAN Users -> get access to www through WAN1 AnyConnect clients -> get access through WAN2 And without changing the primary uplink from WAN1 to WAN2 nor doing load balancing. WAN1 is behind a firewall which is blocking IPsec protocols. There's no way to ask the provider to change that. but it is the ISP circuit with the higher bandwidth therefore the preferred one to route all lan users traffic to reach www. WAN2 has no firewall and IPsec tunnels can be established, but has less bandwidth which is not suitable using to route users through it to reach www. The only way I managed to get the AnyConnect working is when I change the primary uplink and set it as WAN2. How can I achieve this? Thanks in advance...
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Other
Sep 20 2022
3:10 AM
Tried option 15 but it had no effect.
... View more
Sep 19 2022
11:25 PM
Hi, When working with a wired connection sometimes I see that the network adapter (windows 10) changes its name according to which network it is connected to - marked in red on the picture below. How can I create a network using the MX and broadcast a different desirable text to appear in there? My guess is by using some DHCP option but now sure which one? Best Regards, Ale.
... View more
Do I need to have both bands 2.4GHz and 5GHz enabled for WiFi 6 to work properly. Please note that my question is regarding WiFi 6 and not WiFi 6E. If i have an area which I have disabled 2.4GHz due congestion and left only with 5GHz enabled then * Would I be able to use WiFi 6 at all? * Any cons (affecting wifi6...) due of 2.4GHz is disabled? * How can I check if a client is connected using WiFi6? Thanks in advance for all helpers!
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
RF Spectrum
Many thanks, that was it!
... View more
Hi, Added it and getting the same message: updateDeviceManagementInterface() takes 2 positional arguments but 3 were given Process finished with exit code 0
... View more
Dear Members, Trying to update an access point device management interface by using the function import meraki dashboard = meraki.DashboardAPI(api_key="my_api_key") payload = {"wan1": { "usingStaticIp": False, "vlan": "100" } result = dashboard.devices.updateDeviceManagementInterface(serial_key, payload) print(result) The result is the following output: updateDeviceManagementInterface() takes 2 positional arguments but 3 were given Process finished with exit code 0 When running the function below result = dashboard.devices.getDeviceManagementInterface(serial_key) print("Device Management Interface:") print(result) The result is the following output: Device Management Interface: {'wan1': {'usingStaticIp': False, 'vlan': None}} It looks like I am using the correct structure but it doesn't work. This are the arguments that the function expects: Can you please help me find and correct it? Best Regards,
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Interference
Aug 16 2020
6:30 AM
Dear forum, One of our clients manages all his connections in one place so he doesn't need different solutions for different sites. (makes sense to me) the software he is using is called Forticlient VPN. Does anyone knows if it is possible to configure Forticlient VPN in manner to connect to a client to a site that uses MX64? I have couple of users there all working well when VPN client is configured in Windows built in mechanism. However I was unable to find how to copnfigure the Forticleint VPN nor find info on the web. If it is possible at all - then main issue seems to be that I have no clue how the advanced settings should be set. - see below screenshot of advanced settings.
... View more
Oct 7 2019
7:34 AM
1 Kudo
Sorry no need to reply... I had something wrong configured on my end and now your solution is working!
... View more
Oct 7 2019
7:20 AM
1 Kudo
Hi, I've created a policy group and tested. Is it correct the rule "*" I've applied which is intended to block all URLs except google.com? When testing and connecting with an iphone to the SSID with vlan 532: 1. i can't see any clients affected by the group policy... it shows 0 2. The connected client is able reach any URL so basically it doesn't work. If I go to clients I can see the client is connected to vlan 532: Any idea what's wrong?
... View more
My Top Kudoed Posts
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
