Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
About Network_user55
Community Record
6
Posts
4
Kudos
1
Solution
Badges
Sep 23 2021
11:27 PM
2 Kudos
@cmr @PhilipDAth Thanks for the feedbacks. The solution was different though and I will summarize here in case someone else has the same problem. When upgrading to version MX 15.41 or higher the DHCP requests from the MX to the switches are not sent from its MAC address anymore. It now sends all requests from its virtual MAC address and the switches only accepted DHCP requests from the MAC addresses of the physical MX. The settings to whitelist the virtual mac address on the switches can be found here: Switch -> DHCP servers & ARP. To find the virtual MAC of the MX, do the following conversion: The first 3 octets of the VRRP LAN are always the same (cc:03:d9). The last three are the last 3 octets of the MAC address of the primary MX’s interface. on the LAN side, it would be the MAC address listed in the dashboard. on the WAN side, it would be the MAC address plus whatever the uplink offset is. if your primary MX’s MAC address is 11:22:33:44:55:66, then the VRRP Virtual MAC would be cc:03:d9:44:55:66. When we whitelisted these virtual MACs the upgrade went fine and the switches did not get disconnected.
... View more
Aug 17 2021
9:12 PM
@cmr thank you, I will suggest this. The ports are set to trunk mode already but it`s worth a try.
... View more
Aug 17 2021
12:52 AM
@cmr thanks. The current setup is like the former: In the stack there are three switches. Two of them are connected to the MX`s in the following manner: 1) SW1 -> MX 1 and MX 2. Both are in a forwarding state. 2) SW2 -> MX1 and MX 2. Both are in a blocking state. So the suggestion would be to disconnect each link on (SW2 -> MX1 and MX2) ? Wouldnt that cause a lack of HA in the setup? Also, why would that cause an issue after the upgrade but not before the upgrade? Thanks again!
... View more
Aug 16 2021
9:27 PM
2 Kudos
Thanks for the reply @cmr . Will try to answer the questions here as good as I can. Switch models: MS225-24P/LP, MS225-48P/LP. Interconnections: I have added a screenshot of the topology. Rather basic I would say. The switches in the middle are connected through stacking. The MX has two outgoing connections, one to one of the switches in the stack and another to another switch in the stack. Management traffic: The LAN IPs on the switches are assigned by DHCP. Not sure what you mean about routing in this case. Management traffic between the MX and the switches are on the same network. License on MX: Advanced security - expires in 2024. MXs and dual connections: See answer above regarding interconnections. You mean the idea is to cut one of the two connections? That is, even though they are going to separate switches? Thanks again!
... View more
Aug 16 2021
9:16 PM
Thanks. Didnt really see much last time at the local status page but will try again. Currently we are using stacked switches with two ports connected from the MX. That is, one connection to one switch in the stack and another connection to another switch in the stack
... View more
Aug 15 2021
10:24 PM
Hello, We have a crucial issue with the Meraki MX upgrades which causes all of our switches in the network to disconnect from the network and no user can connect to the network anymore. It has happened three times now. The MX is still online and operative and rolling back to the version we came from solves the problem. But we cannot upgrade the MX anymore due to this issue. I am writing here to see if anyone else has had the issue as we are not getting any significant help from Meraki support. The exact same issue is for all of our Meraki locations so during the last automatic software update from Meraki all networks were down the following morning. I do not have any debugging messages to send as the info from the dashboard are usually limited and Meraki support didnt really see much either. I know this is sort of a longshot due to the lack of info I send here, but maybe someone has any idea after all. Hopefully someone has experienced the same issue. We are currently at version 15.37.
... View more
My Accepted Solutions
| Subject | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 3444 | Sep 23 2021 11:27 PM |
My Top Kudoed Posts
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
