@OS-Cubed The MR42 as well as others can absolutely be quoted in CCW and shipped, you just have to know how to do it. Talk to your CAM or the Meraki AM that aligns with the deal for the secret sauce. ... View more

@cmr  Exactly!   FYI: My understanding is MX67/68 are supporting AnyConnect on the Closed Beta (unless that has changed without my knowledge) but why not the MX64 without any indication either way when the firmware goes GA from Cisco Meraki.   Honestly, I'm starting to muse that Meraki Community staff are perfectly happy to let important questions go unanswered. Nobody from Meraki appears to rush to answer anything in any sort of useful detail on this and/or many other fronts. All it takes is someone to say "MX64 is not currently supported on the AnyConnect beta but will be supported when support goes GA" OR "MX64 is not currently supported on the AnyConnect beta and will not be supported when support goes GA". iIf the latter, however, they had better have a good reason why the community was not made aware of this considering the device has not had an end-of-support date let alone an end-of-sale date announced. ... View more

@cmr No, the Remote Worker incentive/promotion applies to the entire MX family promoting it as a remote worker solution which would obviously include client VPN on the MX64 for a small office. Not much of a remote worker solution for end-customers wanting reliable client VPN option using AnyConnect on an MX64 device that hasn't even reached end-of-sale yet because Meraki isn't giving any clarity on what MX devices will support AnyConnect when/if the firmware ever goes GA. If the intent was never to support the MX64 which has yet to reach end-of-sale then they should have been upfront on that rather important detail.   It's frustrating that Meraki can't communicate effectively on this topic especially since they have put the word out there AnyConnect is coming. That said, if it was never intended for the MX64 they should have said so so we didn't sell the devices with the expectation AnyConnect support would be coming. ... View more

Will MX64 & MX65 also support AnyConnect VPN? Meraki has a current Remote Worker promotion on the entire MX family. Not much of a remote worker/VPN solution when/if the MX64 doesn't support AnyConnect when the firmware finally (if Meraki ever get their act together) goes GA is it? If it was never intended to be available for certain MX models then Meraki should have mentioned so on spec sheets and/or roadmaps so partners would have known to not be selling MX64 or MX65 with the expectation it would support AnyConnect at some point. ... View more

@Meraki-PM-Team Why would you move your updates on IPv6 to IPv6 @ Meraki when you have a suitable and active forum right here? To make matters worse, you appear to be stifling conversation around your glacial paced IPv6 progress (have yet to see evidence of any) in that IPv6 @ Meraki DOES NOT appear to have replies enabled. 😞     ... View more

Trusting the September “Update” isn’t simply another delay. Anything less than a detailed roadmap to IPv6 will be simply insulting at this point. ... View more

@SoaringHope wrote: I have just purchased 2 Skyus-DS modems to use with Meraki MX, and they both just say "connecting" when plugged in to the Meraki.   When I plug them into my laptop, they work perfectly.   The carrier is AT&T and I am located in the Baltimore area.   Is there any way to troubleshoot and correct the issue? Inseego has a fantastic support department. Also being that Inseego Skyus DS is "Meraki Certified" they (Meraki) may be of assistance but I would contact Inseego first.     ... View more

@Daghan wrote: I run part of Meraki Product Management that includes MX.   We agree (PM / Eng teams) with everyone on this list that we need IPv6 and we need it yesterday!    There is nothing sinister about the delay. It isn't a hardware limitation, nor a Cisco ploy to drive a wedge between Meraki and Enterprise Networking products. In fact, we have engineers working on IPv6 right now and we are in the process of formulating an accurate roadmap. I believe we are within 3-6 months window for being able to articulate what IPv6 features will be available when.    What is taking us this long?   When I launched MX with 2 engineers 8 years ago, we were the little engine that could. One strategy we adopted was to "fit the use-case", not to build generic features. Well, in some instances, we overfitted some of those use-cases that created technical debt. We had no clue that we had to worry about it. If someone came to me in 2011 and said you'll sell 1M MX in the next 8 years, I would have asked which psychedelic drug there were on.   But it happened!  We are energetically trying to redo some of our earlier decisions (network objects, n uplinks, no-nat, full support for BGP...are some highlights from our infinitely long to-do list).   None of the above is an excuse, but I wanted to shine the light of transparency on our thought process.    To remain a strong (we are in fact 14K customers strong) SD-WAN provider, we have to put IPv6 behind us... and we will.   Thanks, Daghan. @Daghan @tnight    In Nov. of 2018 you said and I quote "I believe we are within 3-6 months window for being able to articulate what IPv6 features will be available when." yet a full 10 months later Meraki continues to remain silent and frustrate an ever growing number of us. It's one thing that that Meraki is handling this IPv6 thing poorly in the first place but then to completely ignore their commitment to do better and articulate their plan is simply unacceptable.     ... View more

@MerakiDave wrote: Hey team, thanks for raising the concern and the comments. Not to be Captain Obvious or anything, but Meraki Support does take hold time very seriously and these statistics are carefully tracked over various time frames. We even have large call queue display boards as a constant and immediate reminder that nobody likes to be on hold. It sounds like the original issue has been worked out, I've never heard of a typical wait time over 30 minutes. Also Blake that's bound to happen from time to time where we just cannot understand a thick accent that well. Don't be shy about asking for the case to be re-queued to the next available Support Engineer, or just tell them you'll have to call back when time permits and call back into the support # and the next available NSE picks up. Those things happen and neither side takes it personally. 🙂 @MerakiDave Not to be Captain Obvious but shouldn't agents with thick accents that are difficult to understand be relegated to e-mail support only? I too have called in and had to say pardon, can you please speak more clearly, not mumble, etc. over and over again on various calls. I hate being put in the position of having to say so. The premium Meraki charges for their licensing should provide for support agents we can actually reach in a timely fashion and when we do finally reach one they should be easily understood. ... View more

@sttaylo2 wrote: Hi Phil,   Meraki support do take the hold time of customers very seriously.   We have been making adjustments to the call queuing we use which was causing some customers to be kept on hold longer than we had intended.   This has since been resolved and we are closely monitoring the hold times of users across the world to ensure this behaviour has been resolved.     @sttaylo2 If Meraki takes hold times seriously please explain to me why my colleague just sat on the phone for over 45 minutes while he waited to speak to Meraki support on behalf of one of our MSP clients? 45 minutes on hold to speak with someone suggest to me Meraki is NOT taking wait times seriously at all during US business hours no less.     ... View more

@CarolineS wrote: We love this suggestion. We don't want to segment the technical discussions unnecessarily, but for partner-specific business-y things, we'd be very open to creating a partner-only forum here on the community.   @BrandonS  - we'll be following up with you! (and don't start something on WebEx teams! We can do it here! That way, any kudos can count towards your MOTM scores and badges and the community team's engagement goals ;)) What has come of this? I would like access. ... View more

Wow @MeredithW . Fingers crossed! 😉 ... View more

@DHAnderson wrote: Unfortunately, it sounds like the issue is the design of the MX that is the complicating factor.    The good news is that in the April Quarterly, they did not directly answer a question about IPV6, but they did say that they are working on it. @DHAnderson That is certainly nothing new! It's the same statement Meraki have made during the last umpteen Quarterly's. Meraki's senior management acknowledge they have done a poor job communicating to the community about IPv6 yet do nothing to resolve it.  @Daghan promised a roadmap months ago yet nothing, just more of the same silence. ... View more

Great posts! Any idea what Avalara Product Code Meraki licenses would be then? I've gone with SM020400 - Mandatory maintenance agreements related to the sale of tangible personal property. ... View more

@ScubaSteve wrote: Oh but don't worry.... they are focused on putting things like WAN health which should be a part of the native license into Meraki Insight. What the heck is going on Meraki!    Honestly, I cannot fight for you guys anymore. We have really sucky reporting features. Sure I can see an overview but I can't choose between date and times. No IPv6 capabilities. All of Meraki Insight which shouldn't be a separate nickel and dime package, Poor log keeping (Why can't we save these logs, reports etc on the internal drives with the ones that have them?). No native Meraki VPN Client, No ikev2, the password on the VPN is unencrypted. My gosh. Even the firmware updates are dismal. In order to use anything useful they force you on the Betas.   It just frustrates me after spending 30k + that this is what we get. Don't get me wrong.. the idea behind it is awesome. I see the potential. But its so hard to sit back and watch it take the wrong directions all the freaking time.   I am starting to think Meraki needs some serious restructuring done. This is not the way to run a company that touts itself as enterprise ready. @ScubaSteve the man you want to say this to is @tnight, he's the guy at the top of the Meraki org. chart. @Daghan is on the MX team that commited to regular updates but none provided since popping up his head. I completely agree the Insight functionality SHOULD be part of the MX Enterprise License or MX Advanced Security License at minimum if they are looking for incremental revenue on the product and should not be a nickle and dime add-on as you say. At this point I'm not sure why Meraki even has this community when all they are willing to comment on is the light and fluffy stuff but not post anything in the way of value re IPv6 and when they do comment its with lip service and non-answers for the most part. I just don't get how according to @Daghan in his one and only response they were 3 to 6 months from having a road map 3 months ago, is that his way of saying they hadn't started on a road map yet for a standard that has long been ratified and actively being deployed in the wild by vendors (Meraki excluded of course)? ... View more

@Daghan wrote: I run part of Meraki Product Management that includes MX.   We agree (PM / Eng teams) with everyone on this list that we need IPv6 and we need it yesterday!    There is nothing sinister about the delay. It isn't a hardware limitation, nor a Cisco ploy to drive a wedge between Meraki and Enterprise Networking products. In fact, we have engineers working on IPv6 right now and we are in the process of formulating an accurate roadmap. I believe we are within 3-6 months window for being able to articulate what IPv6 features will be available when.    What is taking us this long?   When I launched MX with 2 engineers 8 years ago, we were the little engine that could. One strategy we adopted was to "fit the use-case", not to build generic features. Well, in some instances, we overfitted some of those use-cases that created technical debt. We had no clue that we had to worry about it. If someone came to me in 2011 and said you'll sell 1M MX in the next 8 years, I would have asked which psychedelic drug there were on.   But it happened!  We are energetically trying to redo some of our earlier decisions (network objects, n uplinks, no-nat, full support for BGP...are some highlights from our infinitely long to-do list).   None of the above is an excuse, but I wanted to shine the light of transparency on our thought process.    To remain a strong (we are in fact 14K customers strong) SD-WAN provider, we have to put IPv6 behind us... and we will.   Thanks, Daghan. @Daghan @tnight Update please, you promised timely updates yet there have been none. Again, none of this IPV6 stuff should come as a surprise to Meraki, therefore, why isn't Meraki with the resources of Cisco behind them further along than this? If at this point you still don't have a roadmap someone quite simply isn't doing their job. Meraki is a premium product not keeping pace with vendors at a fraction of the cost on the IPV6 front. ... View more

@cmw wrote: Man, I'm feeling pretty silly right now.  I have supported v4-only client networks with Meraki gear and thought so highly of it that I ordered one for my office.  It arrived this afternoon, I plugged it in, got to setting up and then couldn't find the v6 config options.  I thought I was just missing them somehow.  And then I found my way here.  And now I'm sad.   It's very much my own fault for making an assumption.  I sheepishly admit that.  I assumed that something I consider fundamental (IPv6 support) to a piece of networking gear like this (MX68W) was just a given. So much so I didn't double check.  I'm a little blown away over it.  I checked my calendar.  Yup, 2018.  It's not 2005.   I think the Meraki product line is awesome and I was so excited to have it in my own network but this is a deal-breaker for me.  I'm really not happy about it but this will have to go back in the box and sent away.   Seriously bummed...   cmw @cmw RMA the hardware and licences, you have 30 days to do so. ... View more

Meraki Team,   Are you hearing any of this? Comments and updates please, acknowledging comments and keeping the community updated on this stuff is not rocket science.   Again, why are we 3 to 6 months out from a roadmap still? None of this makes sense considering IPv6 specifications have been out for so long. ... View more

@Daghan wrote: I run part of Meraki Product Management that includes MX.   We agree (PM / Eng teams) with everyone on this list that we need IPv6 and we need it yesterday!    There is nothing sinister about the delay. It isn't a hardware limitation, nor a Cisco ploy to drive a wedge between Meraki and Enterprise Networking products. In fact, we have engineers working on IPv6 right now and we are in the process of formulating an accurate roadmap. I believe we are within 3-6 months window for being able to articulate what IPv6 features will be available when.    What is taking us this long?   When I launched MX with 2 engineers 8 years ago, we were the little engine that could. One strategy we adopted was to "fit the use-case", not to build generic features. Well, in some instances, we overfitted some of those use-cases that created technical debt. We had no clue that we had to worry about it. If someone came to me in 2011 and said you'll sell 1M MX in the next 8 years, I would have asked which psychedelic drug there were on.   But it happened!  We are energetically trying to redo some of our earlier decisions (network objects, n uplinks, no-nat, full support for BGP...are some highlights from our infinitely long to-do list).   None of the above is an excuse, but I wanted to shine the light of transparency on our thought process.    To remain a strong (we are in fact 14K customers strong) SD-WAN provider, we have to put IPv6 behind us... and we will.   Thanks, Daghan. @Daghan  Thank you for this. I would have hoped that having seen this thread you would have been a little more concrete than this. Despite being a step in the right direction this response too comes across as more of the same non-answer answers to a certain degree and I find 3-6 months to have a roadmap you can communicate more than concerning. Again, IPv6 has been ratified for some time, should you not already be well ahead of this by this time? If not, then Meraki has failed horribly at delivering on the critical support of a STANDARD not a nice to have FEATURE everyone at Meraki seems to treat IPv6 as.   We are well past these sorts of vague and long past due responses. Please make this right and provide concrete details and timelines you surely have by now, how could you not?     ... View more

Not my intent to be disrespectful in suggesting this but this requires drastic measures at this point. Perhaps it's time to Contact Todd Nightingale is SVP, General Manager at Cisco Meraki since everyone below him in the Meraki organization has  ignored our cries for transparency on IPv6 or provided useless responses on the matter.   He has a profile on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/todd-nightingale-a106b510/ He is also on Twitter here: https://twitter.com/tnight?lang=en   Why introduce the new MX products supporting LTE when some carriers and ISP are only supporting IPv6 this late in the game? Meraki needs to focus their resources on fixing this IPv6 predicament NOT releasing new products.     ... View more

@RickJames wrote: Well this thread makes me want to just cry. I just spent crazy amounts of money on this stuff only to learn ipv6 over vpn doesn't work so now i have a 10 thousand dollar utm that can't even provide a vpn? What the ...   Seriously meraki fix this like yesterday please. I can't even begin to explain my amazement by this whole situation. I feel like a complete moron for buying this thing. The AP's work fine but this is completely unacceptable for a device in this price range. I need to be able to provide a vpn through my utm. All I can say is i am not spending another penny on a meraki product until i see this resolved.   If you purchased it less than 30 days ago request an RMA but be sure to tell them why you are doing so. ... View more

@Matt-Ignite wrote: These look really good!   As someone who's had no end of trouble trying to get a USB modem working with the MX64 devices (and ended up giving up because it just won't work here), having an integrated LTE modem is a real benefit.    The downside is obviously the cost - the MX67C is twice the price of the MX64 by the looks of things. I'd pay a bit more for integrated LTE, but an extra $1000 is a tough sell to a customer when a USB dongle is only $50.   On the official Documentation page for the new devices (https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/MX_Overviews_and_Specifications/MX67_and_MX68_Overview_and_Specifications), there's mention of being able to set a custom APN via the dashboard UI. I don't support there's any chance of getting this added to the MX64 devices as well? That would be a huge help when dealing with 4G failover.   Cheers, Matt The MX67C in addition to having integrated LTE also has 2x firewall throughput so additional cost is reasonably justified. If still too steep for you/your customer have you tried the Inseego Skyus LTE device? It is "Meraki Certified" and the only device we deploy now because they have been rock solid for our clients that have purchased them. ... View more

IPv6 needed ... View more