I opened a case specifically asking for details on this issue with support and this is the response I received. "... After reviewing it with the internal team, currently we do not support the custom DHCP options on the C9300 series switches and currently there is no ETA on whether when this would be available. At this stage, this would be a feature request and would recommend to leave a "Make a wish" feature request as inputs coming from the customer directly would make a difference. ..."   The fact that these DHCP options have had the rug pulled in Meraki newer switches is shortsighted and creating many problems for us and the customers we support.   I've already had to pivot to alternatives where we planned to use these newer switches as core switches in networks where traditionally we'd place a MS425. Now with them end-of-sale and no feasible alternatives, it's another notch against the Meraki line. It's honestly making it hard as an integrator to stand behind this product line - between the MS130 UDLD woes we're facing and now ditching have the DHCP server options that have been on the RFC 2132 spec for decades now.  ... View more

@GIdenJoe is correct. You need to consider the packer per second load on the firewall. I've had to move a customer that was using an MX250 for all the L3 SVI and DHCP to their MS410-32 because of CPU overload. Firewalls don't operate as inter-vlan routers well. You need to know the PPS processing power of the Fortigate in order to make an educated decision. A MS425-16 as a PPS forwarding rate of 357.14 Mpps - roughly 21 Gbps at 8 bytes per packet between L3 interfaces. In contrast, an MX250 only has a PPS forwarding rate of 95.23 Mpps - roughly 5.5 Gbps at 8 bytes per packet between L3 interfaces.  This doesn't take into account all the extra work the process needs to do firewall processing and anti-virus and threat protection processing primarily. A switch does not need to perform these additionally tasks and has more dedicated CPU time to perform extra duties such as DHCP. ... View more

It may assist others to fully explain the differences.   The Meraki ACL rules refers to IP addresses and subnets using CIDR notation. It allows you to only block or allow traffic between networks - not just a single switch. It's good for example of "securing camera traffic" or "protecting guest subnets from cross network communication to other LAN clients".   The Catalyst ACL is using a wildcard format that is like a reversed subnet mask.  It allows you to apply the list to access to virtual routing, ports, SVI interfaces, VLANs, and mgmt services on a single switch.   As @KarstenI mentioned, the ACL will be applied to every switch - not just one. It also has a single purpose of blocking or allowing traffic. You need to see what the Catalyst ACL is protecting and see if it's still relevant. You can translate the wildcard rules to CIDR notation to put them in Meraki. (you can easily google "wildcard subnet calculator" to find an online tool to convert them), but you want to ensure you understand the entire network impact this will have. Once installed, all the switches will get the ACL traffic rules.  Ref: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3750/software/release/12-1_14_ea1/configuration/guide/3750scg/swacl.pdf Ref: https://documentation.meraki.com/MS/Other_Topics/Switch_ACL_Operation ... View more

Need this as well. Please add this feature soon. ... View more

+1 for scheduling reports from the dashboard   @D4N13L You may want to put in a feature request on the reports page. It used to be called Make a Wish from what I've heard and seems like it's an area on this community - https://community.meraki.com/t5/Make-a-Wish-Feature-Requests/bd-p/go-make-a-wish ... View more