Hi Phillip   Really thank you.  With this document, i can check that the re-design proposed is supported by meraki.   Thanks for you all. ... View more

Hi phillip   I have 1 internet, 1 mpls and 1 LTE, but using a router with this feature. And preseales team, didnt make a budget of MX(C) model or LTE Usb Doongle.   thats why i need meraki MX support a 3rd ethernet wan uplink 😞 ... View more

 Hi cptcrunch   thanks. the problem is i dont have MX(C) model, and my 3rd wan uplink, is needed if 2 first wan uplink fails. its a bakcup, but i cant use a doongle or a MX(C) model. by the way, this underlay is LTE, but using a router with this feature. And comercial team, think uses more than 2 wan uplink. ... View more

Hi ww   thanks. Indeed, now i have a 3rd "wan" conections by a LAN and i am establishing the active route with a static route and the opticon "while host X responds to ping". And the autovpn (the real 2 wan uplinks), remains other routes as standby waiting happens the conditions in the static route. As can you see, in the active route i'm not doing a VPN, only a simple MPLS(thats my underlay), and this design is nos SDWAN, and the commercial team, insist in keep call it as SDWAN.   maybe you know, if meraki support recognize a design like this this, as a functional in PBR? (i know thar i cant use this, like application routing)  ... View more