Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Register or Sign in
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
About SAM-Al
Community Record
16
Posts
0
Kudos
0
Solutions
Badges
Oct 4 2019
11:02 AM
Hi All, Any advice about good Cisco ISE training?? I'm looking for a good training to learn Cisco ISE in details and how to integrate it with Meraki... Please advise Thanks Sam
... View more
Jun 18 2019
2:48 AM
Hi guys, Would you please advise about Meraki best practice for the management vlan? In my test network I have pair of MXs followed by pair of aggregation switches which feed couple of access switches and WAPs... All my vlans are configured in the aggregation switches where the intervlan routing happens....the current management vlan for the WAPs and the switches is Vlan 1 which is same as the MX gateway that facing the aggregation switches. Any idea about the best practice that I should follow? I know above can cause issue for especially I'm planning to use RADIUS server one will sit in house and back up one in Azure. Please let me know Thanks
... View more
Jun 6 2019
8:50 AM
That helps Philip, i think having a pair of them is a good idea. Thanks again
... View more
Jun 6 2019
12:43 AM
Thanks for help Philip, Actually same here, I'm familiar with AWS more than Azure, I'm looking for 300+ tunnels, do you think the vMX can support that? If not, do recommend any alternative solution??
... View more
Jun 5 2019
8:14 AM
Hi All,,,, our company has main AD and some VMs in Azure, I was thinking about using virtual MX there to connect to all our sites via AutoVPN, what is the best practice to do that? and is there any limitation with virtual Meraki MX like the mode, number for VPN tunnels ..etc?
... View more
Jun 3 2019
6:18 PM
Oh, got the idea Philip, thanks for help. One of the ends that I need to VPN with is VPC at AWS (there is non-Meraki virtual Firewall sit there), what do you think is the best practice in case I can't install vMX100 concentrator mode there?
... View more
Jun 3 2019
4:02 PM
That sounds good idea Philip, so you mean is to have 2 firewalls (or Z and non-meraki firewall), where the meraki firewall is facing the public interface to connect to the meraki sites over AutoVPN and act like a router to the non-meraki firewall. do you think that might cause a double NAT issue ?
... View more
Jun 3 2019
1:21 AM
Thanks Philip, on my side I'm planning to use warm spare MXs with Dual ISP at each,, but unfortunately I can't control the other side firewall brand. The vIP is working for each ISP individually, correct ? I mean ISP1 will have vIP between the active MX and the standby one public IPs, same for ISP2,, so in case the other side firewall dosen't support DNS VPN, and i ask the client to point their firewall VPN to the vIP of ISP1, my concern is that they will loose the tunnel in case ISP1 fails because the standby MX ISP1 won't kick in until both ISP1/ISP2 at the active MX fail, correct? If so, that will leave the solution of creating two tunnels one to vIP of ISP1 and one to vIP of ISP2.
... View more
Jun 2 2019
2:56 AM
Hi All,,, We have multiple sites (HUBs) where we have Meraki network campus design (HA MXs, Core MS, access MS), each MX has dual ISP(ISP1 and ISP2), there are many clients will be connected to us via non-meraki firewalls (sonicwalls, Barracuda), what is the best practice for site to site VPN to avoid the single point of failure in this case? Is DNS the solution? I mean is there any way to use one public IP for both ISPs or is the DNS the only solution here? Any ideas ??
... View more
May 31 2019
11:31 PM
Thanks Ali, Actually this is the same plan that I’m planning to use for MS425 (using it as a core/distribution),, but do you think that will limit some of the MX features?
... View more
May 31 2019
8:05 PM
Thanks for the info Philip, I think for now we are going with MS210 due to limit budget, another reason there will be no big load on the switches, I mean no big bandwidth usage. I like the idea of creating multiple stacks because of the reason that you mentioned below, that makes sense, I will go with it.
... View more
May 31 2019
1:40 PM
Honestly i have more questions haha,, I will start new topics or subjects about them and I will mark this one as resolved. From your experience, have you noticed any limitation from the MX side when configuring all the Vlans at the MS425 instead of having them at the MX... for example AD and RADIUS integrations? My understanding that the AD will be integrated with the MX, but the MX won't have the Vlans, is that considered a limitation here?
... View more
May 31 2019
1:03 PM
That makes sense Ali, I'm not sure why I keep thinking that this port will act as layer 3 if i don't check the box for enabling Vlans per port haha (like regular standard router),, thanks for the explanation Ali, I appreciate it.
... View more
May 31 2019
9:37 AM
Thanks for help Ali, this is exactly what I need, so my understanding now that the link between the MXs and the MS425 will be via VLAN1 although it will be considered as close to L3, so the default route or the static route between these two layers will be carried via Vlan1 which is already configured without enabling the option below ( i mean without checking the box in the option below), correct?? I would prefer to configure a direct L2 connection between the MXs as well by choosing different Vlan (example Vlan 1000), but I need to go with the design that you sent to reduce the load from the MXs by having all the Vlans and the ACL between them configured in MS425... is that what you mean??
... View more
May 31 2019
9:16 AM
Oh, i see what you mean, my mind was going with real L3, i don't know why haha.. thanks again
... View more
May 31 2019
2:06 AM
Hi All, I'm planing to set up meraki network campus design in our company (NAT mode), and I'm wondering if you can help with some ideas, here is what i'm planing to use 1. 2 MXs like MX100 or MX250 (Warm spare) 2. 2 MS 425 aggregations switches (stacked) 3. 6 MS 210 access switches (stacked) My idea is to configure all the Vlans in MS425 plus the ACL and static route via Vlan1 to the MXs so it's going to be L3 link between MS425 and the MXs, and L2 link between the MS425 and the MS210.. My question here, how is the warm spare going to work in this case if there is no L2 links (VRRP) between the 2 MXs?? my understanding that the warm spare need L2 links direct or indirect between the MXs... Can you please share your ideas ?
... View more
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
