Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
About LionGate
LionGate
Here to help
Member since Dec 18, 2017
Dec 10 2018
Community Record
17
Posts
1
Kudos
1
Solution
Badges
Yes, it's compatible. What I'm uncertain about is whether enabling the Purple web interface will interfere with the operability of the Meraki interface. Intuitively I'd say not but I didn't want to take the risk.
... View more
I'm considering implementing Purple for guest access to the wifi at our auto dealership. I'm concerned the cloud interface will interfere with the Meraki management interface. Am I able to use both interfaces at the same time, i.e. do they integrate? How does this arrangement work? I didn't want to do anything to cause issues with being able to manage my MR33 APs through the Meraki Cloud.
... View more
Apr 12 2018
6:40 PM
They are configured on the core switch with routes created on the MX.
... View more
Apr 12 2018
1:00 PM
I have some routes configured to route my MX to various VLANs on my distribution switch. For the "Next Hop" address I've been using the main gateway IP address on my core switch on all of my routes. What I'm wondering is, should I be using the gateway for the specific VLAN instead? For example, my native VLAN gateway IP is 10.25.62.254 and the gateway for VLAN80 is 10.25.80.254. Presently the Next Hop address for this route is 10.25.62.254, but should the route to VLAN80 use a Next Hop address of 10.25.80.254 instead? Or does this not matter as long as the Next Hop leads us back to my main switch?
... View more
Mar 28 2018
8:01 PM
My MS120 switch has an ip of xx.xx.99.242 and a gateway of xx.xx.99.254. My management VLAN is 99. The VLAN is also set as 99 -- I'm assuming that makes 99 my native VLAN, i.e. all untagged traffic will be on 99? Sorry -- I've revised this question as the original post was not well written.
... View more
Dec 26 2017
10:16 AM
Thanks for your reply. I was wondering if it might just be taking time to propagate. I do not yet have a DC thus am not running AD. I think it will make life a lot simpler when I have AD set up...
... View more
Dec 26 2017
8:33 AM
I have an MX100 and have set it to track clients by IP address. Some clients are resolving to NetBios names but most are not. How do I get names to properly resolve? Why would some resolve but not others?
... View more
Dec 19 2017
2:12 PM
I have one MX and one MR access point. Isn't integration sort of the whole purpose of combining the network? Meraki really needs to fix this. What's the point of an integrated network if you have to de-integrate it to use the best features? Physically these devices are all at the same location and on the same network.
... View more
Dec 19 2017
12:05 PM
Thanks. Regarding tracking by IP, that's my desire. I have already reviewed the article you referenced. I am trying to learn how to properly set up routes on the MX so I can use that. Presently all I have on the MX is one VLAN -- VLAN 1 with IP 10.0.0.0/8. I think I need to revise this to match the /24 definition of VLAN 1 on the 3750, and to add static routes on the MX to route to the other VLANs on the 3750 to make the IP tracking work. I suspect the 3750 is splitting off the IP phone traffic and only filtering everything else. I think you're right that it would probably be best to let the 3750 do the routing. I would like to get the DHCP off of the old Win2003 server we're using for that and onto a newer device, though. The MX seemed a practical choice as I don't have another server to use for this at the moment. I am not pressed to replace the 3750 -- I just like the visibility into the network you get from Meraki devices and thought that would be a natural direction to go as I bring my network up to date a little.
... View more
Dec 19 2017
11:53 AM
Here's my topography: Not sure about Dynamic routing -- we have an MPLS and there are surely a few static routes to various servers here onsite. I'm content to leave the physical topology as is if I can figure out how to enable IP tracking so I can identify my traffic from the MX and also create routes or something so I can tag the ports on the MX to specific VLANs. I only thought it best to revise the design as it was suggested to me that best practices incorporated a design like this: https://documentation.meraki.com/MS/Layer_3_Switching/Layer_3_Switch_Example
... View more
Dec 18 2017
10:27 PM
Hello, everybody. My network core consists of a Cisco 2951 router that belongs to XO Communications connected to a Cisco 3750 that basically serves as my distribution switch and an MX100. I have around 500 devices including IP phones, etc. DHCP is presently served by an old Windows 2003 server. We have an MPLS to another location and the way my network is configured I have two cables from the XO router connected to the 3750 and there are another two cables from the 3750 to the MX, i.e. one inside amd one outside. I can only assume it was put together this way for some reason having to do with the MPLS but I don’t really like the design because I feel the functionality of the MX is limited. For some reason the MX can’t translate the MAC addresses for all attached devices so just returns the MAC of the 3750 in many cases. I’d also like to allow the MX to serve as the DHCP server and ultimately I want to replace the 3750 with a Meraki switch, probably an MS350. Does it make sense for me to reconfigure things so the XO router connects directly to the MX, with the 3750 connected inside of the firewall instead of having the MX basically in a loop off the 3750? This seems to be best practice but I’m not sure how to get there from where I am now. I can post a network diagram and configs if it would help. It seems the first goal should be to revise the physical topology then create routes from the MX to the VLANs on the 3750 so they can also be accessed on the MX. Thoughts?
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Interfaces
-
Layer 3
My Accepted Solutions
| Subject | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 4639 | Apr 12 2018 6:40 PM |
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
