I have yes thanks that does look ideal! - Unfortunately, it adds another £280.00 a month on top of the stuff I mentioned before to make a Zone redundant HA solution based on vMX compared to a VPN gateway which has this built in.   vMX would be my preference but it doesn't look viable in this scenario. Appreciate all the advice   ... View more

Thanks! I think this is probably where we'll end up or stick with a VPN gateway and deal with the lack of dynamic routing ... View more

Thank you for this. I do understand the benefits and would like to try the VMx route although the failover capability within Azure does seem limited compared to an Azure VPN. I see that the approach is using Azure functions to change user defined routes for failover rather than something more dynamic   Cost is certainly the biggest factor. We are talking 2 x licenses for vMX plus the running cost of two virtual machines, disks etc, compared with deploying a gateway. It would be much preferable if a dynamic routing protocol was supported from the MX on a site-to-site VPN   Thanks for all the advice         ... View more

Thank you all for the responses. I have considered xMX but am a bit put off by the additional cost and complexity of configuring a HA vmx setup compared to the native solution of an Azure VPN.    Happy to be persuaded otherwise tho if there is a valid argument there! ... View more

I'd be interested in an update on this too. We have a customer wanting to use IKEv2 for connections to Azure yet the only way to achieve this with their Meraki kit is to install a beta firmware which seems unbelievable!      ... View more