Is the 3550 maybe using a L3 routed port config? Meraki switches don't support routed ports today and instead you'd define a L3 interface on the switch and then place the switch port into said VLAN.   When you created the first VLAN on the MS425 it would have required a next hop IP which would in turn create a default route out from the switch. Is that next hop reachable? And, does the next hop know how to get back to the Meraki switch VLAN(s)? ... View more

We don't offer nor test/certify any antennas besides the ones the MX67C come with. That said they are removable and are RP-SMA connectors. So, with a compatible connector and as short of a cable as possible it might work. You would have to test it yourself. ... View more

In that case I'd recommend you open a Support case ... View more

Did you review the LAN port mapping to ensure the config still aligns properly? The LAN port numbering is different between a MX64 and MX85.   https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/Other_Topics/MX_Cold_Swap_Replacing_an_Existing_MX_with_a_Different_MX#Port_Mapping_for_different_MX_models  ... View more

The document covering what @GIdenJoe mentioned above https://documentation.meraki.com/MR/Radio_Settings/MR_Regulatory_Domains ... View more

I think this is now addressed in 18.107.6    "Corrected an issue that resulted in AutoVPN tunnels briefly dropping and re-establishing after configuration or WAN connectivity change if 1) the MX was configured in high availability (HA) mode and 2) both AutoVPN peers were running MX 18" ... View more

Appears to be a UI issue with the new "Design System" view of dashboard. I don't use that so my menu formatting is different/classic style. I'd recommend tossing a case into Support to report it. ... View more

Anytime you're out of compliance/over subscribed it should invoke a 30 day grace period. Again, I'd talk through it with your Meraki Account Team first. ... View more

I'm not seeing the behavior you mention in bullet item 1.   As for the text case that seems like a pretty trivial issue to call out. But feel free to click the Give your feedback button in the lower right corner and submit that if you like. ... View more

I would definitely have a talk with your Meraki rep about the options. But perhaps you could buy 1 more SM license, apply that first (you'd temporarily be out of compliance), convert to PDL, then apply the larger SM license? ... View more

Is this question about converting a Catalyst switch to Meraki or just recreating a similar config on a Meraki switch that you have or had on a Catalyst switch?   If it's the latter then it's important to understand the key difference with a cloud managed Meraki switch vs. a Catalyst or other non cloud managed switch. A Meraki switch requires a management IP to communicate with dashboard. Think of it like a simple client with a unique IP that talks to dashboard. This mgmt IP can be on a native or tagged VLAN.   A Meraki switch can also have layer 3 IPs for local VLANs if it's performing routing or DHCP relay functions. Layer 2 VLANs don't require any special config on a Meraki switch like a VLAN database or anything. A trunk port on a Meraki switch assumes it can carry any VLAN 1-4094. ... View more

The first thing to do/try is update to the latest MS stable firmware version. That along with the reboot might clear the issue.   You might also want to review the use cases for each of the STP guard modes https://documentation.meraki.com/MS/Port_and_VLAN_Configuration/Configuring_Spanning_Tree_on_Meraki_Switches_(MS)#Configuring_STP_Guard_on_a_Switch_Port. Root guard and Loop guard aren't recommended on ports for end devices like APs and phones. ... View more

radio 0 = 2.4GHz radio 1 = 5GHz radio 2 = 6GHz  ... View more

Yes it requires 18.2 and it shouldn't even show unless a MX is running 18.2. Known issue and being worked on. ... View more

Has all the cabling been swapped, transceivers swapped, what is the carrier handoff device? While the provider has verified their link there's no denying you're having many uplink failover events. But that might be a secondary issue.   What still needs to be addressed here is how are you measuring throughput?   Prior to the slow down a month ago what firewall was in use? The MX105 appears to be a new deployment. And was the MX105 working ok for some period of time? ... View more

The dashboard throughput test is a download test not upload. ... View more

A 2 gig SPF? It appears you have a 10G bps transceiver in WAN 1 and a 1 Gbps transceiver in WAN 2 (physical port 4). And a 10 Gbps transceiver on LAN port 9.   How are you measuring throughput? From what source to what destination? Using what tool or website?   I just ran three speed tests using the MX tools page and got more than 1 Gbps each time. Even outside of these tests watching ongoing usage I'm regularly seeing 300-600 Mbps.     I also see in the event log almost everyday you have primary WAN link transitions between WAN 1 & 2 which you cause me to investigate the health of those links/carriers. ... View more

I already brought it up with Marketing & PM this morning. Waiting on a reply. ... View more

As a test have you tried/can you try manually assigning the Allow list policy and report back if that changes anything? https://documentation.meraki.com/General_Administration/Cross-Platform_Content/Blocking_and_Allowing_Clients#Using_the_Clients_List   Also, do you have other SSIDs? Can the client connect to those? Or create a temp test SSID and try to connect.   And you mentioned policy by device type was at one point configured. On this SSID if you toggle policy back on without clicking save does it show device type policies like this? If it does maybe try deleting it (click the x) then choose disabled, then save the page.   ... View more

OP didn't mention having a switch. The DHCP/ARP page is a switch page/feature. ... View more

Are the SSIDs configured for assign policy by device type? https://documentation.meraki.com/MR/Group_Policies_and_Block_Lists/Applying_Policies_by_Device_Type     ... View more