Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Become a member of the Cisco Meraki Community today
Get answers from our community of experts in record time.
Join nowAbout JamesMutie
JamesMutie
Getting noticed
Member since Mar 25, 2021
May 13 2022
Community Record
36
Posts
2
Kudos
1
Solution
Badges
Mar 18 2022
4:53 AM
@KarstenI Thanks. Any list of compatible 3G or LTE devices ?
... View more
Mar 18 2022
2:41 AM
@DarrenOC @CptnCrnch When I login on the local page. The port section does show up for me to change role. Any extra thing I need to do?. below is the local page.
... View more
Mar 18 2022
1:58 AM
Hello Experts, I would like to convert a Z3 port 4 to be an internet port for my secondary Link. Is this feature available on Z3 or it is only available on Z3C ?
... View more
Oct 31 2021
4:58 AM
On the same , the option for NAT translation , is it available in NAT mode Concentrator?
... View more
Oct 31 2021
4:44 AM
Hello Community, Is it possible to configure concentrator priority for an MX in NAT mode concentrator in AutoVPN domain.
... View more
Oct 31 2021
1:42 AM
@ww 1) meraki does not allow to have same subnets "in vpn" on spokes at 1 organization. This means that when I try to enable vpn mode at the spoke it will automatically refuse sees the spoke is learning the same subnet from the hub ? How about if I make the route more specific ? than the advertised route ? if this works, will I then be black holing the traffic for that Spoke since I have a more specific route?
... View more
Oct 31 2021
1:10 AM
Hello Community, I am designing Meraki solution for several countries which will be under one organization. Each of this countries will have Several MXs and Zs which will form autovpn with Hubs in routed mode located in each country. Am anticipating same subnet problem Inter-country for both Production networks and spokes Though inter-country communication is not required. Am aware Meraki Hubs in same organization will peer automatically. In regard to this I have below questions. 1. Assume I am not doing Site-to-site VPN Translation . How will the traffic flow in country A production hub A going to Spoke A (192.168.31.0/24) which is clashing with Country B Spoke B (192.168.31.0/24) network (Being advertised to Hub A by Hub B) look like? Does meraki have metrics for autovpn routes to make the longer path through an extra hop(HubB) less preferred ? 2. Is it possible for Meraki support to disable Hub to Hub auto peering within the same organization.? 3. Can site to site firewall rules be used to block autovpn traffic to and from the other countries?
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Auto VPN
Oct 27 2021
9:00 PM
@cmr Thanks, Renumbering is changing the IP addresses to different ones right.
... View more
Oct 27 2021
2:12 PM
Since hubs within the same organization peer to each other automatically, will this cause a problem with crushing spoke IP subnets in different networks? Lets say spoke 1 peering with Hub 1 doesn't need to communicate with spoke 2 peering with Hub 2. Spoke 2 has similar IP Subnet like spoke 1. Am suspecting spoke 1 return traffic from hub 1 might be send to hub 2 hence causing a blackhole. Is this case. ? if for example spoke 2 decides to advertise a more specific route to HUB2. I am designing for several Hubs in one organization and each hub has over 30 networks. And there is possibility of similar IP Subnets in some networks
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Auto VPN
Oct 27 2021
1:35 PM
@PhilipDAth If spoke1 wanted to talk to spoke 2, spoke 1 would send traffic to hub1, which would then send it to hub2, and then onto spoke2. Lets say spoke 1 peering with Hub 1 doesn't need to communicate with spoke 2 peering with Hub 2. Spoke 2 has similar networks like spoke 1. Am suspecting spoke 1 return traffic from hub 1 might be send to hub 2 hence causing a blackhole. Is this case. ? I have several Hubs in one organization but am only doing a PoC for a client with just one spoke and one Hub.
... View more
Oct 27 2021
1:11 PM
@PhilipDAth So this means that from hub 1 can reach all routes being learned by hub 2. Does hub 1 automatically advertise the routes it learns from hub 2 to hubs spokes that are not peering with hub 2? what will be the impact on traffic to my spoke 1 peering with hub1, if I have a spoke 2 advertising a specific route to Hub 2 which again hub advertises automatically to HUB 1
... View more
Oct 27 2021
12:59 PM
Yes have checked with both Chrome and Moxilla,
... View more
Oct 27 2021
12:51 PM
@PhilipDAth Thanks . Any idea on the 1st question?
... View more
Oct 27 2021
12:33 PM
Hello Guys, I have two questions. 1. The routes status am learning from the hub via autovpn keep spinning up instead of being green. which is the correct status ? 2. On my Hub route table am seeing routes for the other Hubs although am not doing any site to site VPN with them. why is this the case?
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Auto VPN
Oct 24 2021
11:03 PM
@cmr Thanks. So that means, the Concentrator Interface IP needs to be changed from the floating Public IP to an a private IP reachable by the remote Branch via MPLS?
... View more
Oct 24 2021
1:03 PM
Hello Good People, Is it possible to achieve a design where by , VPN concentrator on NAT mode has a public IP(X.X.X.X) assigned on the internet port. This public IP is floating IP owned by the customer. A branch MX in routed mode has an MPLS link with an ip of 10.10.10.1. If both the branch MX and Concentrator have the same internet breakout on public IP (Y.Y.Y.Y). How will the VPN registry table look like ? will the autovpn peering be through source IPs or interface IPs (Entries on the VPN registry) ?
... View more
Oct 8 2021
4:36 AM
Am struggling to find out which routing protocol I can use for L3 MPLS CE to PE peering on below MX Devices. MX64W-HW, MX100-HW, MX84-HW, Z3. What’s your recommendation for the above MX devices for routing protocol when doing AutoVPN over MPLS.
... View more
Oct 5 2021
6:29 AM
From the vpn concentrator set up documentation says that when setting the local subnets to be accessed by the remote branches we use CIDR notation Does this mean we cant use Variable Length Subnet Masking ?
... View more
May 23 2021
1:00 PM
Welcome @cmr . It is a good feature, you just need to have full access rights to the two orgs.
... View more
May 23 2021
12:42 PM
1 Kudo
@cmr With per device licensing , it is possible to have one order many organizations. All I did was, add the devices and their licenses to one organization , Then under license info>>devices select the device you wanna move and then under >>more actions>>select move to a different organization>>choose the org>>review and submit. Done!!! Thanks a lot the heads uo
... View more
May 23 2021
12:38 PM
@cmr I hacked it finally. When I was adding the order number I forgot to add the license option as well.
... View more
May 23 2021
10:30 AM
I have moved the two organization to per device licensing and added a test device in each. When I check at all products licensed in license info, it shows the expiration date as Jun 22, 2021 which is 30 days from the date have added the devices. Does this mean, My 3 year license will self activate after these 30 days?
... View more
Apr 9 2021
2:31 AM
1 Kudo
We managed to achieve a seamless failover of the implemented solution after Cisco Meraki TAC Engineer disabled auto summary a backend feature not available on dashboard which was causing the havoc. What the engineer said is that the two hubs perform auto summary , and the summary starts being preferred over the static route which is a bit weird and we could not get answer why the summary route has a better AD. If you facing the same problem ,I recommend you open a TAC case and let them disable auto summary feature if you do not use it in your network.
... View more
Mar 25 2021
2:43 AM
@ww The setup for hub to spoke is via autovpn over internet so I only remain with one option of advertising the static routes into autovpn.
... View more
My Accepted Solutions
| Subject | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 2926 | Oct 27 2021 1:11 PM |
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2799 | |
| 1 | 3214 |
© 2025 Cisco Systems, Inc.
