- About GavinMcMenemy
turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
GavinMcMenemy
Getting noticed
Member since Oct 17, 2017
yesterday
Community Record
39
Posts
3
Kudos
0
Solutions
Badges
yesterday
I've had an email acknowledging the issue so hopefully things will start to happen.
... View more
Thursday
I did not know this. And in fact the I had assumed that the person listed here was just my sales contact from back (way back) when we purchased our MRs! Many thanks. He's getting an email from me!!
... View more
Tuesday
Have you asked your neighbours if any of them implemented a WIPS/WIDS? Something like Air Marshall can deauth your network if the admins have blacklisted your SSIDs. It would certainly cause Deauths to be a problem. We've had issues with this on our main site with this in the past. Have you had a walk around with a wireless scanner (get one for your smartphone) to see if you're accidentally using the same SSID as another office? Note: see the AM docs below for an explainer on what I mean https://documentation.meraki.com/MR/Monitoring_and_Reporting/Air_Marshal
... View more
Tuesday
Hi All, Apologies: this is a bit of a rant. I standardised our network with Meraki equipment about a year ago. I replaced aging Dell PC switches and a slew of (rubbish) wireless APs. The network deployed smoothly and the equipment works fine. Simply put we were fans. But recently I've been asking "What am I paying for?" Meraki kit isn't cheap plus you have to license it. One of the sells to management was guaranteed good quality "Customer Service" but I'm not getting that from the support team at this point. We have an unusual problem.. I stayed late to make a trivial change to our corporate network. I had scheduled time with 3rd line support guys from our ISP, we were all well prepped and ready to go. However when we flipped the switch we discovered that our L3 switch was misbehaving. We had to abandon the project, after a few (after) hours of trial and error trying to get around it. I've raised a high priority ticket with support but I've not received more than a cursory email back ( and only couple of times after being chased). It's clear that the support engineer isn't reading the supplied information and isn't engaging with our ticket. I tried to call in but I was kept on hold for 30m and couldn't get through to any one. I do have other work to get on with. I asked my colleagues about their experience and they have all abandoned tickets because support was refusing to engage with them. This has meant a couple of projects have just muddled by and we probably with a sub optimal solutions. For all their faults Dell's enterprise support is all over their tickets and incredibly proactive if we have to speak to them. Same with Microsoft. Is my experience an outlier or has everyone been in this boat? btw. If this is in the wrong forum please move it.
... View more
Tuesday
You're not using a wired connection at the same time are you? We see real issues with Macs that are on wifi and wired at the same time.
... View more
a week ago
Hi, I've been all over the documentation looking for an asnwer to this (simple?) question. I'm interested in seeing what logging our MR and MS devices generate. I go to Network > General > Syslog > Reporting > Syslog server and I see that one of the options is to set the role. One of the roles is "Windows Event Log". What does this do? Does this direct the devices to send to the IP address in Windows Event Log format? (a la WEF?) Apologies if this is daft question but as far as I can tell the docs just tell us we can define the IP and role. It doesn't actually tell me what the device will send.
... View more
a week ago
1 Kudo
Checked in with our guy today. Here's what happened here and it's not really a bug per se. For whatever reason the user's iphone factory resets. On boot it goes through it's normal setup process. The user enters the wrong credentials. This fails check in with SM. But the phone starts. User is now missing the SM setup we'd configured. He doesn't have adinistrative access so he can't make the changes he needs to get the profiles working on his phone. He reboots - the phone is stuck in this weird twilight state. What our guy did was change the associated account in SM from the wrong credentials to the correct one. He then pushes a new profile to the phone. This prompts the use for his password which he enters. At this point all of the pending config tasks execute. His phone is fine now.
... View more
a week ago
Hi Deviant I appreciated the advice and I'm quite happy to discuss the network we're proposing. I don't know what Meraki was like before its Cisco acquisition (we only had APs and never needed assistance) but as we've now standardised our infrastructure around Meraki kit we've needed more assistance from Meraki. But every time we've talked to them we've had to abandon the ticket and muddle through because we get very little interactive pleasant customer service.
... View more
a week ago
We've not had any support on this one. I believe we rebuilt the phone once we got it back into the office. So I am very curious to hear what you get back.
... View more
a week ago
That's interesting. We've had issues with one of our staff iphones which has gone through the same thing. I thought it was just his iphone. I'll ask my colleague what's been done with the phone in question.
... View more
2 weeks ago
If I could perhaps also ask, how did you interconnect to the ISP. Did you assign the switchport access vlan 18 or did you trunk some VLAN's and native vlan 18? The latter. The idea was to trunk all VLANs to the router. This doesn't explain to me why the switch suddenly started advertising the gateway?? TBH: I'm having an issue with Meraki support. The reply I've had back is "You need to understand how the upstream router is going to work." The thing is, I DO understand. The router is going to listen on it's assigned IP address (10.120.18.7) and as I've outlined above it's expecting vlan tags to arrive via a trunk. On the switch port connected to the router, I set the port to be a trunk that accepts all expected VLANs from this network. Or am I missing something? Either way I've now exchanged 2 emails with support where I've sent them pictures of the setup and explained what I was expecting to do. But they're not helping. I don't know if anyone from Meraki support monitors this forum but I'm not getting the support I expect for this quite expensive kit. My colleague has separate issues with SM and essentially gave up trying to get support from Meraki. I hope I'm not getting more of the same treatment. I couldn't get hold of anyone on the phone yesterday. /rant.
... View more
2 weeks ago
Definitely no wireless kit directly attached to the network any more. Although like you I've seen that before. I really do think that the MR was detecting itself or perhaps another unit. It's not happened since I saw the alert I am keeping an eye out though.
... View more
2 weeks ago
So. We had this work scheduled at the weekend. The routing was configured as described. We decided to test this by switching over to the secondary router (it's a hot spare). We allowed switchover to happen and I had a port ready to go to carry the vlans. However no traffic would route to the internet. It took me and the support tech at our ISP a while to figure out the cause but in the Cisco logs we noticed a conflict. The gateway address (10.120.18.7) was a duplicate. Looking at the MAC address the IP that was being advertised was the one for the MS250. We flipped back to the primary and everything reverted back to normal service. This is how I created the first VLAN (Internet - 18). Note that I binned the other VLANS for the purposes of this update. They were all created as outlined in my table above. The routing interface for each was the .1 for the subnet. My ISP sent through a portion of the log which shows this: This is what the CISCO (ISP) router saw. Sep 7 2018 20:59:36.856 BST: %IP-4-DUPADDR: Duplicate address 10.120.18.7 on Vlan18, sourced by e055.3dfb.8d2e I'm completely confused by this. Why would the Switch be advertising that it had the IP Address? Why would this go away when we flipped back to our normal routing arrangement? And also yes, we lost our ability to manage the switch once we flipped over but I am not sure how to keep our internet connection alive during the change. I have raised a ticket with support about this but other than an acknowledgement I've not heard back.
... View more
3 weeks ago
1 Kudo
True. Unless you track it down. I spent some time yesterday wondering around testing the signal strength and I couldn't find anything. I've a suspicion that the router detected itself. It alerted then didn't alert again. in another environment I did find a spoof once which turned out to be an old access point which had the same SSID as the current corp one. Someone had found it in a corner and plugged it in. In that case there was something I definitely could do about it... The information about spoofs that's available in Air Marshall is sparse. It would be good if it could provide everything the aerial found.
... View more
3 weeks ago
ps. I think I put this in the wrong forum. It should really be in Wireless. Sorry about that. pps. I don't think is a spoof but that the AP is detecting itself. I've rebooted the AP and so far no more alerts.
... View more
3 weeks ago
Hi, I have a quick question. We received an alert that Air Marshall has detected a SSID spoof. This SSID was for our Corp network. Looking at the detail in Air Marshall all it tells me is that a spoof was detected by one of our MR 32s. The MAC address is listed as 00:00:00:00:00:00 . Is this actually a spoof? And if it is, how do I know what action the MR32 has taken. I've had a look around the community and the suggestion is to patch the firmware and/or reboot the AP (which I have done). ps. The Air marshall page tells me that the Spoof was only seen 52 minutes ago. I can't find any other evidence that it is still out there.
... View more
4 weeks ago
Our @Adam wrote: When you say both sites are completely Meraki do they have MX's as well or a different firewall? Maybe I wasn't clear in my long post. Internally our LANs are all meraki. It's MS switches and MR access points. Our Routers are managed Cisco. I'm not sure what the firewall above is.
... View more
4 weeks ago
Hi Deviant, I'm actually less worried about the users. We've picked the DHCP range to broadly present the DHCP range (with a different mask ...) that's present already. From reading the documentation we'd need to tag the ports in the USERS stack. Servers though, you've hit one of my concerns. We've budgeted an entire weekend to work out the kinks. I've already placed Servers broadly into the range I expect them to be in so I hope there's not too much work to do there. "The Internet VLAN seems confusing, I assume that that will be the VLAN between ISP and LAN. And when you refer to VLAN's allowed you mean to say VLAN X may Communicate with VLAN Y for example via the Routing Table of the switch." Yes. Sorry I think I put that badly. the "internet" VLAN will contain a segment that we use to route traffic from the LAN to the external managed network. Traffic will flow site-to-site and to the Net. "All you would need is to have an IP in a VLAN on the Distribution MS250 side and also give the ISP an IP to use. Then they must route the relevant subnets to you're IP and you have a default route up to the ISP's router. The key off cause is to get rid of the /20 subnet mask on the end devices first or they wont know how to get to the other VLAN's. You would also need to ensure that you create the IP's for each VLAN to make them routable. Also ensure that you only tag VLAN's to Users and Server switches that are required on those switches. Choose a management VLAN for the switches and ensure on the trunk links that they are untagged." Great that's my thinking. We already have the IP for the router set up. One thing I am not clear on is the configuration of the route. Example: If I am on VLAN 20 (users) and I want to route to the Internet my ISP will configure the necessary interface. But this raises a question for me. Do I make the default gateway for these devices the the one on VLAN 20 (e.g. 10.120.20.254) or set it as a the router address? I assume the former and if I am right about this I'd just set the route to be: VLAN 20 gw (10.120.20.254) -> VLAN 18 Internet gw (10.120.18.x)? I find the Meraki route creation page a bit confusing. "Also ensure that you only tag VLAN's to Users and Server switches that are required on those switches. Choose a management VLAN for the switches and ensure on the trunk links that they are untagged. Make sure you're switches receives DHCP in the management range VLAN and that it is permitted by the ISP's firewall." I'm not sure what you mean there. I was just going to setup a helper address for Users DHCP and hand off to a microsoft server to facilitate the various services we've defined? And a final question re ACL creation. is there a best practise for when to do this? Right at the end or as we go along?
... View more
4 weeks ago
HI All, This might be a length post - apols. In a couple of weeks I plan on re-plumbing our network. This is something I've not had to do in a very long time and I've never done this using Meraki equipment. Our corporate infrastructure consists of 2 sites that are geographically distant. Our routers & firewalls are external and managed. The immediate routers are 2 pairs of Ciscos - I have no access to these or the core networking in this topology. Both sites are completely Meraki. Site 1: A few Meraki APs (MR32 and a MR18) 6x MS 250-48lp - 4 are in a stack and service the user lan. 2x service our Servers and Hyper-V environment. LAN is a single custom network. (10.120.x.x/20) Site 2 (much simpler) 2x MR32 APs 2x MS350-48LPs LAN is a single Class C network (192.168.1.x) There are 2 24/7 SSIDs. We use Meraki to ensure SSID connectivity is the same in both locations. The sub office gains a SSID as part of their deployment. For some of the year we have a sub-office on site who bring their own equipment and we provide infrastructure. For this and other corporate security reasons I want to segment our networks into distinct LANs to serve various pieces of equipment and provide us with a method for providing this sub-office with infrastructure for part of the year. What I am looking for is some advice: am I over-thinking this, are there better ways? What are the gotchas? I'm not clear on how I route some traffic - read-on... Note that, at this point, I cannot buy additional equipment. Table notes: I noticed that routing is stateless so to avoid confusion I've included that VLANs ID, I can't think of a reason why, in our environment packets, should not return to their own VLANs. USERS + SERVERS, PRINTERS should be able to talk. Also needs access to the internet. CS is the WIFI equiv of users so needs same access. PRINTERS is the catch-all for MFDs which are shared. Our MFDs are managed by a secure print service in SERVERS. These do not need access to the Internet but should be accessible from both sites. CS GUEST is a Guest network we use Meraki DHCP for that. It only needs access to the internet. TEST is a proposed separate VLAN for testing purposes. Only needs access to the internet. No traffic on the rest of the LAN. CS + USERS don't need to talk to each other but we're fairly liberal. Our ISP is on board and will facilitate whatever infrastructure we need to build. I've run up a diagram of the proposed network. Hope all is clear.
... View more
08-02-2018
02:47 AM
If Meraki is part of Cisco now then surely the behemoth can assign some resources for this?
... View more
08-02-2018
01:58 AM
Hi Everyone, I'm going to give you a quick update. Last night we installed a new switch into our stack. Here's the thing... To complete this work I had to remove an old Dell Poweredge 6248 that we'd been using to provide connectivity to a couple of desks and this switch was uplinked to the stack. This switch had been hanging off that stack for ages and I'd completely forgotten about it. It's true that we didn't see any performance issues until recently but I'm going out on a limb and blame that switch. Mea Culpa.
... View more
08-01-2018
08:39 AM
It's funny you mention iperf because I've run some tests. iperf appears to show that I'm getting good network speed but the experience is different either side of the LAG. For example. Connecting to host <target host>, port 5201
[ 4] local <target client> port 15898 connected to <target host> port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 108 MBytes 903 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 109 MBytes 912 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 111 MBytes 927 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 110 MBytes 923 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 110 MBytes 922 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 110 MBytes 926 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 111 MBytes 932 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 111 MBytes 931 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 111 MBytes 930 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 111 MBytes 929 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 1.08 GBytes 924 Mbits/sec sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 1.08 GBytes 924 Mbits/sec receiver
iperf Done. I see comparable results on the target server. So I don't know what to make of it all. I've got a ticket open with Meraki and they're recommending that I do an upgrade on the switches. Also I noticed the performance issues more in the morning so I'll run iperf then and see if things are different. The person reporting it is our IT team. If we go to our service desk software it's terrible if we're accessing it from within the user LAN but ok if we use some other route: either directly on the same switch or over WiFi (which also terminates on the distribution switch). I'm not new to networking hence my confusion. If we browse the web the experience is also different. The whole thing is quite confusing. re: aggregate port question. Thanks for confirming my suspicion. I can schedule time for that.
... View more
08-01-2018
03:41 AM
Hi, We have a stack of 3 MS250s which have a 2 port link aggregate to another Ms250. Users -> switch 02. We've noted slow performance across this link. If we patch in a device inside Users and browse to a server on Switch 02 we notice a distinct performance drop compared with connecting directly via switch 02 (plug the laptop in a spare port on that switch). I've concluded that there's something wrong with the aggregate link. Switch 02 can clearly handle it's present load (performance is good from here). I'm also puzzled why this would be the case. It's an aggregated link that's been in place for a number of months now. I'm unsure what the next best steps would be. I can't figure out if there's an easy way to add an additional port on the stack to the aggregated link. The Users stack is made up of 3 MS250s. 2 ports on switch 1 in this stack are dedicated to the aggregated link. Can I add a port from another switch to the aggregate link? I'm thinking it might help to spread the load across the switches in the stack. In addition, I have another switch ready to add to the stack - we have some new users starting soon - I'm keen to be ahead of any bandwidth challenges we could see when these users start. Can anyone offer any advice?
... View more
Labels:
Latest Tags
No tags yet
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 67 | |
| 1 | 154 | |
| 1 | 5332 |
