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 Grumples
Grumples
Here to help
Member since Sep 12, 2019
Nov 9 2022
Community Record
17
Posts
6
Kudos
1
Solution
Badges
Aug 26 2022
10:19 AM
Hello. I would like to take a public IP address, let's just say 8.8.8.8 as an example, and have all of our offices route back to our HQ MX to reach 8.8.8.8. We use Auto-VPN and we are in a Hub-and-spoke model. Each remote offices uses its local Internet as the default gateway and I'd like to keep it that way. But I would like the HQ MX to advertise the route to 8.8.8.8 as a subnet it can handle so that the remote offices will funnel that traffic to the HQ Internet connection. My HQ MX has a public IP address assigned to its Internet port and sits behind a border device. All of my LAN ports are private IP addresses, not routable. So I don't know what to make the Next Hop of the route in order to get the traffic to 8.8.8.8 out the WAN interface. It's no problem at our HQ site, as the HQ's Internet connection is where I need the traffic to go. But I can't figure out how to setup a route that is advertised to the remote offices because all I can do is have the HQ MX route the traffic deeper into the HQ network. I've also tried thinking about setting up routes at each remote office, but I have the same issue in that I don't know how to setup a Next Hop back to my HQ network. Any ideas if this is possible without taking default route away from my remote office MX's? Thanks.
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Auto VPN
Aug 11 2022
5:40 AM
In Security Center, we've gotten a few of these events: SERVER-OTHER Exim unauthenticated remote code execution attempt Rule ID1-53376
... View more
Aug 11 2022
5:24 AM
Anybody else having new problems today? We added the Allow rule for 1:60381 to our Threat Protection page to clear up the issues, and that rule is still there today. But...about 2 hours ago, we started having all sorts or problems again. We were unable to visit some webpages. We had back-end processes on servers that communicate with Web APIs that no longer work. Thinking of how we had bizarre problems yesterday, I set our IPS mode to DETECTION and all of our problems went away a few minutes later. So clearly the IPS in the MX100 was dropping traffic. But I haven't been able to determine anything about the IPS rule. When I search our Events list for all IPS items, I get an empty list returns. It seems crazy to me that we have no events for IPS, not even a Rule Update event. Anyone else out there having new problems with the IPS today?
... View more
Jan 25 2021
7:24 AM
@GreenberetThat is it, thank you. I made a poor as$-umption by seeing "appliances" in the URL and assuming this request would be at the appliance level, not the entire organization.
... View more
Jan 25 2021
5:26 AM
I've been making use of the Organization Security Events in Dashboard API v0. This is the same information presented in the Dashboard under: Organization -> Security Center -> MX Events. I'm having an issue with this script and thought, while this can of worms is open, why not migrate to API v1. The problem is that I cannot seem to find an equivalent to the Security Events in v1. I can find Network-level events, same as in v0, but nothing under Organization for security events. I thought maybe security events were lumped into the network-level events, but that doesn't seem to be the case, either. Am I missing it? I've browsed and searched through Postman for "security" and not finding a match. Thanks in advance for taking the time to read this.
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Dashboard API
Sep 18 2020
11:07 AM
Makes sense that adding an appliance upstream from the MX would solve my content filtering problem. I dislike adding equipment and putting yet another device inbetween us an our ISP. But it might be the only way. Thanks.
... View more
Sep 18 2020
10:19 AM
1 Kudo
I think I have the answer to my own question now that I read this: https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/Content_Filtering_and_Threat_Protection/Content_Filtering_and_Threat_Protection_over_Full-tunnel_Site-to-site_VPN This bolded sentence says it all: Since the Z1 and Z3 do not support content filtering, traffic from both the Z1 or Z3 local subnet will not be filtered.
... View more
Sep 18 2020
10:11 AM
We have an HQ site with an MX100. We are using a number of Content Filtering blocked website categories. Today, one of our users at the HQ site complained about a website that was blocked by Meraki. He sent a screenshot that proves Meraki blocked it. Another of our workers, at home using a Z3 gateway, was able to bring up that very same website. The Z3 gateway doesn't have built-in Content Filtering, but we do have the Z3 on full-tunnel. What I mean is, on the Site-to-Site VPN settings, the HQ MX100 is the default route. I had assumed that putting the Z3 in full tunnel mode would mean that the Content Filtering and Threat Protection capabilities of the MX100 at our HQ site would be leveraged to protect the remote worker on the Z3 gateway. Did I make a faulty assumption? Thanks for anyone that can help me understand how both Content Filtering and Threat Protection apply in this case.
... View more
Jun 23 2020
5:19 AM
@Jerome_EVAGroupYour memory is good, indeed. I setup dummy VLAN 1000 and now my laptop is connected. I hope Meraki considers this a flaw or bug that will be corrected. But, the main thing is, this works and is a solution I can replicate on each Z3. Thanks!
... View more
Jun 23 2020
5:05 AM
1 Kudo
We've been doing this for years to fulfill a requirement by the HR Department. Our MX is sending logs to a Syslog server. The Syslogs contain unique wording for when a client is connected and disconnected from the VPN: logtime message 2020-06-21 14:43:26 1592765006.928610814 MY_MX100 events client_vpn_connect user id 'employeeA' local ip 192.168.10.8 connected from 70.187.200.74 2020-06-21 15:16:16 1592766976.058749887 MY_MX100 events client_vpn_disconnect user id 'employeeA' local ip 192.168.10.8 connected from 70.187.200.74 If you can write a script or program to parse that out for you, you can get the username, the local IP, the remote IP and the timestamp. We put all these VPN events into a SQL table to make reporting simple.
... View more
Jun 23 2020
4:39 AM
Hello all. I'm trialing some Z3 appliances. My Z3 has a default VLAN (192.168.50.1) and VLAN2 for voice (172.16.50.1). When I first setup the Z3, I didn't have the voice VLAN created. And when I setup a wireless SSID with RADIUS authentication, it worked great. But since adding the 2nd VLAN, my laptop will not connect to this same SSID. I was poking around my RADIUS server, and I found System Events like this: A RADIUS message was received from the invalid RADIUS client IP address 172.16.50.1. So, for reasons that I haven't been able to determine, the RADIUS requests from the Z3 are going to my RADIUS server with a source IP = 172.16.50.1 (Voice VLAN) when they should be going out with source IP = 192.168.50.1. On my SSID, the VLAN Assignment = Default (1). I can't think what other setting that I need to look for to correct this. But yet I feel like I'm missing something really simple. Anyone else have experience with RADIUS and multiple VLAN on the Z3? Thanks, much.
... View more
Apr 26 2020
9:12 AM
@ConnorLThank you for the reply. I opened a Support Case.
... View more
Apr 25 2020
10:48 AM
I have an automated task that should have rebooted 3 of our MX64 appliances last night. The API was unable to perform the reboot it seems. I didn't check the logs from my automated script, but I did go into the Dashboard to manually restart the devices. I received an error when doing so: Malformed request I've tried maybe 6 different MX64 and MX67 appliances from the dashboard, all with the same error and they do not reboot. If you are curious why we restart the MX at all, it is because the Cellular modem in the USB port disappears from the list of interfaces. Using the API, an automated script determines the problem and if it is after-hours, reboots the MX. Upon reboot, the USB modem is visible once again. The problem with rebooting MX occurs for devices with and without a USB modem and an MX67C with the internal cell modem. My search for "malformed request" in the community had a lot of hits because of the word "request", but I didn't come across "malformed request". So I don't know what to do. thanks.
... View more
Sep 13 2019
6:07 AM
1 Kudo
Looks as though things are back to normal this morning.
... View more
Sep 12 2019
6:42 AM
1 Kudo
That's good to know. I probably should have started with a ticket, then again, the community post lets us all know there's something going on. Thanks for the update.
... View more
Sep 12 2019
5:43 AM
I should add, I have one MX-only network where the office wasn't yet open. I rebooted the MX, but the client detail problem didn't go away. I can't reboot the other MX devices right now, as the offices are open for business.
... View more
Sep 12 2019
5:42 AM
2 Kudos
Anybody else getting this error when trying to view the details on a client: "Sorry, we couldn't find that client. Please go back and try again." This seems to occur on any converged network containing an MX or any MX-only network. I have one switch-only network and one wireless-only network and I can view client details on those networks. I know there was an outage last night, between 23:01 and 23:11 EDT. I can't say my problem started at that time, but was happening first thing this morning. I cleared cache in my browser, tried a different computer, but the problem follows me around. I'm on shard N18. Thanks, everyone.
... View more
My Accepted Solutions
| Subject | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 2216 | Sep 18 2020 10:19 AM |
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 6775 | |
| 1 | 2216 | |
| 1 | 4025 | |
| 1 | 6525 | |
| 1 | 6728 |
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
