This was an issue with the firmware the MR42 originally shipped with. The LLDP negotiation for power didn't work correctly so you had to manually set it on the switch port. This has been working for quite a while though. Are you on a current MR firmware build?    What OS build are you running on the switches? I have a 2530 sitting on my desk running 16.05.0003 and it's negotiating PoE+ correctly with MR42's and 52's.  ... View more

@redsector The fixed switches will be available in October.  ... View more

What's the name of the profile this is coming from? Is it the Meraki enrollment profile?  ... View more

This seems like a bug since valicert.com doesn't have a valid cert. It is a very old root CA that (I think) GoDaddy purchased at one point, but it's not used anymore. Perhaps @Melissa can check with the engineering team on this.  ... View more

The MX84 is rated for 500Mb. Take a look at the MX sizing guide here: https://meraki.cisco.com/lib/pdf/meraki_whitepaper_mx_sizing_guide.pdf ... View more

Last summer I was (unfortunately) one of the first, if not the first, customers to identify the original fan issue with the 225 series. We had placed a large order of them and had about 2/3rd of them in production when we hit almost 50% failure rate. We ended up replacing the entire batch of them.    It will be very frustrating if the batch we just put in production this summer has similar issues and will need replaced. One would think a single blower fan wouldn't be incredibly hard to engineer correctly in 2018.  ... View more

This is the only specialized ceiling mount kit Meraki sells: MA-MNT-CLG-1   While this includes adapters for "recessed" t-rails, it doesn't sound like this will work for your application.  ... View more

This is an awesome achievement! Thanks to @CarolineS for all of your hard work guiding the community to where it is today. Here's to the next 10k! 🚀 ... View more

@jdsilva Interesting - I was not aware of that functionality nor have any of the engineers I've discussed this with been familiar with it. This is the first time I've noticed that sentence in the doc. Thanks for pointing that out. I wonder if this is a recent (past year or two) addition as I've previously had to put L3 switches in front of MX devices to get this working.  ... View more

Your MX will need to be within the /29 block. You can only create NAT rules for the subnet configured on the WAN interface. Typically in this scenario (where there is a /30 uplink subnet and then an additional subnet for static IP's) you'd put a L3 switch in front of the MX.  ... View more

I've found that even on current 10.X firmware versions, if you break the stack ring for any reason while the stack is running, you will need to reboot the stack once the ring is fixed or you'll have issues down the road. At this point I always reboot a stack if anything happens to the stacking ring because of this.  ... View more

The trunk between your MX and MS should have the same config on both sides. Native VLAN 1 and allow all (or allow 1,2,10).  ... View more

@Netwow wrote: yes we have a 10 gig from the provider If you're paying for a 10Gb pipe from your provider, wouldn't you want a firewall that can handle 10Gb then?  ... View more

Unfortunately there are no deployment guides for the vMX yet other than the deployment instructions here: https://documentation.meraki.com/MX-Z/Installation_Guides/vMX100_Setup_Guide_for_Microsoft_Azure & https://documentation.meraki.com/MX-Z/Installation_Guides/vMX100_Setup_Guide_for_Amazon_AWS   As @kevinl mentioned, you can deploy multiple vMX appliances to scale the VPN connections.  ... View more

Ah, I didn't realize this was a PPPoE setup. I think you are right that in this case it would not work for the MX devices to be doing the PPPoE unless your ISP allows multiple connections under the same account (which is very unlikely).    In MX NAT HA with a VIP configured, both of the MX devices are active with their WAN IP's but the VIP is only active on the primary MX. So you will likely need a router/modem in front of the MX devices. It may be possible to put the MX devices in a DMZ from the router's perspective however which would get you close to bridge mode but still have PPPoE working.  ... View more

The MX450 is only rated for 6Gbps currently FWIW.  ... View more

Do you have higher than 1Gb or 10Gb bandwidth from the single provider?  ... View more

How many static IP's does your ISP provide you? In a NAT HA setup with a virtual IP, you actually need 3x public IP's - one for each MX plus the VIP.    Are you able to put your upstream modem in bridge mode so the MX devices can handle NAT? That would be the preferred setup when using NAT HA mode on the MX devices.  ... View more

@AStoddard wrote: @Bilifive From the management port you can change VLANs, enable/disable ports, and change link speed. I don't recall if you can change between trunk/access You cannot edit trunk/access from the local UI.  ... View more

As far as I know, vMX is sized equivalent to the regular MX100 as @AjitKumar suggests. Given then, 250 concurrent client VPN sessions is what you should shoot for as a max.  ... View more

@akan33 wrote: a network device shouldn't be allowing the same segment in two different interfaces right, is that true that the MX allow it?  It's not terribly uncommon for a firewall to have multiple interfaces in a network segment, especially on the WAN side.  ... View more

While I have never tried this, I believe the MX will accept this config. I am curious what you're trying to achieve from this however as it doesn't sound like you'll really gain any availability from this setup.  ... View more