Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Register or Sign in
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
About stgonzo
stgonzo
Getting noticed
Member since Jun 11, 2021
2 hours ago
Community Record
22
Posts
5
Kudos
1
Solution
Badges
Friday
3 Kudos
This is quite an old post but the issue is now resolved. The pings started working suddenly with no changes mades, but after 2-3 months the pings failed again. The solution was to advertise the IP address of the vMX from the VPN page, had no issues for 4/5 months now
... View more
Friday
Hi Bryce, I've set a few of the up for some customers I work with, on the most recent ones I've normally added an NSG for the vMX subnet and allowed inbound traffic on UDP 500 and 4500 for client VPN or 443 (or selected custom port) for AnyConnect. To be honest most of the recent deployments have used AnyConnect, so I'm not sure if there has been any changes which require additional configuration for Client VPN, but a quick thing to try anyway. You may also want to add a NSG rule to allow ICMP in for testing PINGs. A simple way to check if this has worked is to check the Event Log for the vMX for Client VPN or AnyConnect entries
... View more
Jan 29 2024
1:31 AM
Has anyone found that the MA-ANT-C1-B or any other external antenna will work with an MX67C?
... View more
Dec 16 2023
1:27 AM
Hello, I recently deployed a second vMX in Azure which uses BGP for routing for HA. Everything is working fine from a user’s point of view, we have disabled one vMX at a time , and user traffic is working fine over both vMX appliances, the only issue is we can’t ping the second vMX appliance for monitoring purposes. The original vMX doesn’t have the same issue, vMX2 is using some of the same azure resources and others are copied. Ping tests vMX2 to any hub or spoke site MX fails Any hub or spoke site MX to vMX2 succeeds. vMX2 to a device in a hub or spoke site fails A device in a hub or spoke site to vMX2 fails vMX2 to 8.8.8.8 succeeds A packet capture on vMX2 when pinging from a device in a hub site, shows vMX2 receiving the request and then responding to it, but the reply doesn’t make it back to the hub vMX2. A packet capture on a device in a hub site when ping from vMX2 shows ping requests from and ping replies to vMX2, but they do not reach back to vMX2 Any ideas? I have an open support ticket for this issue.
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Azure
-
Hybrid Cloud
-
Virtual firewall
Aug 25 2023
3:47 PM
The customer were moving to a new building and wanted to carry on using the MR42s they had.
... View more
Aug 7 2023
6:30 AM
1 Kudo
I have an MX85 that seems to crash every 2-3 weeks, utilisation is okay and it rarely hits 50%, support advised that there is a known issue with Snort on some devices and my options are to disable AMP completely, or they could put the device on legacy snort while waiting for a permanent fix. The customer decided to go with the legacy snort options so we will see how that goes. This has happened on at least 2 versions of firmware, currently it is on 18.107.2. Apparently, the reason for the crash is Snort is constantly generating logs which fill up the MX memory and cause the device to crash, a hard reset will wipe the logs and the devices will be okay until the logs are filled up again. This a bit different to your case as they are different MXs and I'm not sure how much the number of users has any affect on your device, but it would be interesting to know if disabling AMP has fully resolved your issue.
... View more
Jun 29 2023
12:26 PM
@PhilipDAth Do you have any links to guides or resources on how to do this? Thanks in advance
... View more
Jun 22 2023
11:19 AM
1 Kudo
Can confirm I got this to work on NPS now, hopefully it won't be too long before a firmware version over 30.1 is Stable
... View more
Do you have an updated link or a downloaded version, this one doesn't seem to work anymore. Thanks
... View more
May 24 2023
1:03 PM
I switched the vMX to Routed Mode, this got the Client VPN on the vMX working as desired but, caused an issue with the onsite MX where it lost connectivity to Azure subnets through the Auto-VPN, this is because the routed MX can only be configured with a single LAN, so it was only allowing the default LAN and Client VPN pool to be shared over the VPN. I could partially fix this by setting the vMX as the IPv4 default route, but then this caused issues with non-Meraki VPNs, it would also cause excessive Azure egress traffic which would have associated costs. After a long call to support going through various things, I have set the device back to Passthrough mode now. Apart from not being able to use full-tunnel for VPN clients, everything else seems to work on the MX and vMX. Looking through posts in various forums it sounds like another device would be needed to do the NAT for internet access.
... View more
May 24 2023
3:10 AM
Hi everyone, Just wondering if anyone has done this before, and how much reconfiguring may have to be done in Meraki and Azure if any? I have a customer that wants to access ACL restricted resources on public clouds, so they need to use full-tunnel on the Client VPN now instead of split-tunnel and set the vMX public IP as trusted. There doesn't seem to be much information on this as it's only recently this could be done without Meraki support. Thanks
... View more
Dec 14 2022
2:18 PM
Hi, I have a network that is currently running on a single VLAN which I am required to implement separate VLANS on. The site has an MX100, 3 MS120s, and a few MR44 access points, we have some on-prem servers and storage on this site (connected to a Cisco SG300 switch), DHCP is currently provided by an on-prem domain controller. The plan is to create 5/6 new VLANs these are – Client, Corp Wi-FI, Guest Wi-Fi, Server, Management, Transit (if required), DHCP needs to be provided by the on -prem domain controller My question is, as we are using layer 2 switches (MS120s) , what is the recommended way to implement this? I have carried out the same task successfully on some of our other networks where we use used MS350 switches, there I set up layer 3 interfaces on the switches, a static route and used a transit VLAN, but it seems like I will have to do things a bit differently on this network with the MS120s. Equipment on site - MX100 MS 120s (x3) MR 44 (x5) Cisco SG300 switch (these are connected to the servers and storage but hoping to replace with Meraki switches in the future) Thanks
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Interfaces
-
Layer 2
Nov 1 2022
4:52 PM
Thanks, I checked this after seeing one of you previous posts/replies. On this one, both sides set to Auto/Auto.
... View more
Oct 28 2022
1:50 PM
We have an issue with packet loss on an MPLS connection, this is a network which moved to a new office where the parent company’s MPLS connection is used, the old office the ISP connection used a primary and secondary leased line, no issues. On the new site, users have been complaining of slow files transfers and MS Teams calls breaking up (only seems to break up for the users in the office, the people on the other end have no issue). Some days users have no issues with MS Teams calls. We set up some monitoring to various devices on the network and see a daily pattern of packet drops during certain times each weekday, doesn’t fully tie up with the office starting and finishing times. MX WAN usage never goes over the 40% of the maximum available, we have tried Uplink configuration at 500Mbps (ISP link speed) and 1 Gbps (max), also tried with AMP off. Firmware is on 16.16 We have logged a couple of tickets with Meraki, they have had a look at various settings and run packet captures, they say that the MX100 doesn’t look like it is dropping packets and the issue is more likely to be on an upstream hop. Reporting back to the ISP, they say they can’t see any issues and speeds are fine. We have raised this with the parent company, and they are putting it down to double NAT, we suspect there is some sort of policy applied on our connection, but don’t seem to be getting anywhere with the Parent company or ISP about this, MPLS firewall is co-managed by both. We are trying to get another ISP connection installed but this may be some time off, just looking for ideas to move forward with this
... View more
Sep 30 2022
9:45 AM
Thanks @GIdenJoe , I had that no 5GHz issue on an MR42 a couple of months ago
... View more
Sep 29 2022
4:05 AM
Hi alemabrahao, This needs to be done from the Local Status page on MR APs, see the screen shot below The following links describe the process https://documentation.meraki.com/MR/WiFi_Basics_and_Best_Practices/Conducting_Site_Surveys_with_MR_Access_Points https://meraki.cisco.com/blog/tag/site-survey/
... View more
Sep 29 2022
3:44 AM
Hi, we normally carry out site surveys with Meraki MR APs, but we are now looking into getting an AP for this purpose with Wi-Fi 6E capability, can the CW9162 be set to site-survey mode like the MR APs i.e. through the local status page? Thank you
... View more
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Other
Dec 24 2021
4:37 AM
We have a vMX deployed in Azure, which is currently used to connect 6 site-to-site VPNs. There is a plan to use the same vMX for VPN Client connections as well once AnyConnect is on a GA firmware. I have been looking into this, and I will try this scenario on a Free Trial soon when I recieve it. For now can anyone help with the 2 questions I have? 1) Are there any known issues with using the same Azure vMX for Client and Site-to-site VPNs? 2) What is the recommended way for DHCP address assignment to the clients, I don't seem to have anything on the DHCP page on the Merkai Dashboard? Many thanks
... View more
My Accepted Solutions
| Subject | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 41 | Friday |
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | 41 | |
| 1 | 5027 | |
| 1 | 4555 |
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
