Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
About marhill2
marhill2
Here to help
Member since Nov 13, 2017
Nov 30 2017
Community Record
6
Posts
0
Kudos
1
Solution
Badges
Nov 30 2017
12:08 PM
Gonna try to reply to everyone here haha Phill - Thanks for the detailed alternatives! I'll definitely take a look into those and compare them with the discount I get for being a Cisco employee. Blake - Yes, I have several VM's that have lots of traffic running to them. I wanted to make sure I wasn't bottle necked 🙂 Ubersee - Considering my job is mostly dealing with CLI, I doubt I'll ever stop using it. Unless, I start getting into to ACI. Also most Cisco boxes are complicated to setup when it comes to IPTV from a service provider, at least it was for me when I had AT&T Uverse. My work around was just to include the IPTV boxes into the native VLAN 1 and they worked fine. However, now I use Playstation Vue which all of my TV's go through a separate VLAN (WiFi for my Firesticks and Wired for my NVIDIA Sheild TV). Everything is working perfectly now and I would assume they would work after deploying the MX device, so long as I get the routes to where they need to go. Thanks again for all you guys help. Glad to see my topic was very interesting to you guys and you took the time to write responses that were very helpful! Cheers! Marcus
... View more
Nov 30 2017
6:30 AM
Hi Phillip, Thanks for the quick reply! I am using the 4948 because of the 10Gig SFP ports it has. I have an ESXi server that runs on that link and the 10Gig just makes things much nicer. So probably will keep the 4948 and run static routes to the 4948 from the MX box. The reason I am looking to replace the 2821 is for some odd reason when I try to enable IPv6 I get issues. As soon as I turn on "ipv6 unicast-routing" internet connectivity is lost. I still get an IP from my modem and what not but loose connectivity. Anyways, separate issue that probably shouldn't be addressed here. I am going to research more into the MX devices and see if its going to be a good fit. I love my MR32 Access Point now that I have it working correctly. Its tough getting used to a GUI based platform when you have been in the CLI for so long.
... View more
Nov 29 2017
3:50 PM
Hi, I was thinking of purchasing the MX device as a WAN router to replace my 2821. I know this may sound overkill but I am a Cisco employee and get a discount on Meraki products. My question is, currently I am running EIGRP between my Cisco 2821 and my L3 4948 switch. Would I be able to run some sort of routing protocol between the MX device and the 4948? If not I noticed that it does support static routes. Would that work to allow me to point router to the 3 VLANs on the 4948 switch? Thanks for your help in advance! Marcus
... View more
Nov 19 2017
3:21 PM
Sorry for the late response I went out of town this week and it was fixed as of when I left. No sooner did I get to my destination did my Fiance call and say the internet was down again. When in reality it was just the WiFi. To answer your question right now I have it in access mode and accessing the VLAN I want my wireless clients to be apart of. There shouldn't be any other VLAN traffic on the link. Should I try to put it in trunk and only allow the VLAN I am intending to use across it? Thanks!
... View more
Nov 13 2017
7:27 PM
I have not done any packet captures as it is random and I dont really know what I would be looking for. As far as the VLANs are concerned, yes I am using VLANs and have an SVI on my switch. I think have an access port connected to my Meraki device connecting it to the VLAN.
... View more
Nov 13 2017
1:01 PM
Hi as the title states I have a Meraki MR32 connected to a Cisco 4948 L3 switch that issues my DHCP for clients connected to the Meraki AP in Bridge mode. The problem I am having is some devices will not connect unless I reset the 4948. After further investigation it looks like some devices are registering entries in the ARP table on the 4948 and some are not. This may not be an issue with the Meraki box but was hoping I could get some help or a possible explanation as to why this is happening. Thanks! Marcus EDIT: Thought I would add, the clients that are missing show up in the DHCP binding table but not in the ARP table
... View more
My Accepted Solutions
| Subject | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 16100 | Nov 30 2017 6:30 AM |
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
