The Ruckus AP being on 8 isn't great:   there are only three non-overlapping channels (generally 1, 6 & 11) and 8 impinges on both 6 & 11. 🙄 ... View more

They may or may not be interfering, depending on what channels they have adopted and the Tx power adopted - but certainly, in it's default configuration,the MR AP will be taking the visibility of that Ruckus AP (and any other WiFi transmitters) into account in determining its own settings. ... View more

This would be the place to start with this: https://documentation.meraki.com/MV/Video_Analytics/MV_Sense_Custom_Computer_Vision Then look into Cogniac for developing a custom model for your use case. ... View more

No question that @Gary_Geihsler1 's solution would work, but you did ask for 'the best way' and I suspect he'd agree with me that vMX (with simpler setup, failover & loadbalancing, policy and performance based routing etc) is much better than a non-Meraki VPN tunnel to ANOther IPSec terminator running in your cloud platform. ... View more

Good points made by @alemabrahao ...    When an AP has multiple antennas, for modern wifi these are most often used for transmitting more data to the same client device simultaneously (the concept of spatial streams) - it's a bit like connecting multiple wires, for a wired connection - you can send more data at the same time.   As I mentioned before, this helps increase the connected data rate, so you send what you need to send in less time, leaving more airtime for others.   Note that, in order to take advantage of each spatial stream, the client device also needs the corresponding number of antennas.   You'll find that higher end laptops and tablets will likely support more spatial streams than a smartphone, for example - and this is one reason why they can connect at higher data rates.   Bear in mind that, if you 'speed up' the wifi for some users, who are capable of higher data rates, not only do you improve their experience, but there's more airtime left for everyone else - their user experience improves too. ... View more

Nope - vMX is what you need! ... View more

Data rates don't change just with the quantity of connected clients;   rates are determined by the signal quality.   What will change is the amount of time each client gets access to on the selected channel.   Imagine you're in a meeting with two other people - you each speak at a particular rate.   But because there's only three of you, you can all get to speak reasonably often.   Now imagine there are ten of you in the same room.   When you can speak, you still speak at the same rate, but you don't get to speak so often, so your overall contribution to the conversation (your aggregate traffic over time) drops.  This is partly why faster data rates are better - if you can say what you need to say more quickly (at a higher connection rate) there's more time left for others to speak.   It's one reason why it's good to avoid very low minimum connecttion rates in your wifi setup (the old 802.11b rates, for example) Incidentally - imagine your meeting room is an aircraft hangar and you're each standing in one corner - you all have to speak loudly and slowly in order to be understood   (hence low data rates when your far from your AP - hence your meetings taking a very long time!) ... View more

What's the objection to deploying vMX?   It really is the best way to do this, if you're an MX SD-WAN user. ... View more

What @PhilipDAth said...    you likely will not get this working how you would desire using non-Meraki VPN.   If you purchase VMX (particularly if you purchase two, for resilience) it will be miles simpler, more resilient and provide you policy and performance routing too. https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/MX_Installation_Guides/vMX_Setup_Guide_for_Microsoft_Azure  https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/Deployment_Guides/vMX_and_Azure_Route_Server https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/Networks_and_Routing/Border_Gateway_Protocol_(BGP) https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/Firewall_and_Traffic_Shaping/SD-WAN_and_Traffic_Shaping     ... View more

Dashboard won't let you delete any Network with a device in.   I'm surprised the Inventory wasn't up-to-date pretty immediately.   Some stuff in Dashboard takes a while to percolate through, but not so much device locations and the Inventory. ... View more

I'm not sure there's too much advantage is there, in creating another endpoint that effectively says the same thing as "Invalid network for topology" ? ... View more

If you're running MR firmware 29, consider seeing how the network performs with client balancing disabled in the relevant RF profile(s);   the way that clients implement 802.11v in particular varies quite widely and can cause issues.   I'd also check you're on the latest version of 29 too - currently 29.6.1 (RC)  ... View more

Yeah - even at my first pass I thought - this looks like your machine basically can't talk to the Meraki API, for fairly basic networking / firewalling reasons...   But the recommendation is now to call the API megaproxy (via 'API') rather than indvidual shards - as they can move around. ... View more

If it's a problem, raise a case with Support. ... View more

I wonder if you have a Network of type 'combined', based upon another (previous? cloned?) setup, which was originally created including a switch.   If so, Dashboard retains this memory (both configs and firmware definitions) for switches - and would re-apply them to any switches added at a later date.   Keeping this memory up-to-date ensures any switches you might add in future get the latest firmware by default. ... View more

@Gsintes is correct - you have ordered the wrong type of license.   If you contact the Cisco reseller you purchased them through, you should be able to RMA ('return') the Systems Manager licences.  You will need to order MR Enterprise licences, as suggested  (notice these are what was used previously to license your Access Points in August 2018 and November 2017). You could order longer durations than the one year indicated;   they are lower cost per year that way:   3, 5, 7 or 10 years are available. ... View more

It appears you're specifying the destination shard at Meraki (NNNN). Did you try the standard, non-specific destination (which would simply be API)?   curl -L --request GET \ --url https://api.meraki.com/api/v1/organizations \ --header 'Content-Type: application/json' \ --header 'Accept: application/json' \ --header 'X-Cisco-Meraki-API-Key: <key>' ... View more

As I'm UK-based, I'm not familiar with those unfortunately, but they look pretty standard to the untrained eye.  If anyone more local has extra info / advice, I'm sure they'll shout up! ... View more

I would check your MX is running the latest firmware 18.107.2 first, but concur with @JonathanSwitch that, if you still have issues, raise a case with Meraki Support.   The 50 users thing will relate to 'smaller' MX models. ... View more

I would try to understand your customer's approach to IT and internal skill and available time levels too.  The cheapest things to buy that will tick the required boxes will probably not be Meraki, but they are unlikely to be fully supported and easy to manage for the duration of their lifetime.   The total cost of ownership of Meraki solutions, for people who have little time and/or expertise to put into managing their network gear, tends to make it extremely attractive, once more. ... View more

I think this is the key endpoint that you'll need:   https://developer.cisco.com/meraki/api-v1/#!update-network-appliance-vlan ... View more

As @sungod has suggested - a switch is definitely a requirement for the Topology feature, so maybe iterate through your discovered Networks to remove any that have no MS ... View more