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 RobinsonRoca
RobinsonRoca
Getting noticed
Member since May 4, 2018
08-22-2022
Community Record
31
Posts
38
Kudos
0
Solutions
Badges
07-22-2022
12:44 PM
Agreed, I was thinking the exact same thing, I was just hoping that someone else out there may have tried it before I put skin in the game.
... View more
07-22-2022
08:40 AM
I have a few of these QSFPs, and was wondering if I could stack MS355 Switches using the MA-QSFP-100G-SR4 SFPs. I opened the Stacking and accessories data sheet, found here: https://documentation.meraki.com/General_Administration/Cross-Platform_Content/SFP_and_Stacking_Accessories and it shows the MA-QSFP-100G-SR4 is only compatible with the MS450, but that would be on the Front side ports. What about using the MA-QSFP-100G-SR4 in the 100G Stacking ports on the back of the MS355? I want to physically stack a set of switches on 2 differnt floors using the MA-QSFP-100G-SR4 SFP, using the back side Physical Stacking ports. The back ports at 100G, the QSFP is a standard 100G QSFP. Why would this not work? Anyone try this yet?
... View more
07-07-2022
07:02 AM
The problem is, there are so little complaints on this topic, they won't likely fix it. Since there are several work arounds, no one seems to complain. I did come across this a few more times since I made the original post, I just changed the ADC configuration to work with the switching. Cisco is about the big customers, the big clients (the whales), the little people like us get heard, but simply pat on our heads and asked to move along.
... View more
04-12-2022
08:41 PM
More an more lately, across multiple Clients I support, I am seeing issues with devices connected to Meraki Switches running L3. Most cases, I'm noticing that devices can't communicate beyond the L3 interface on the core switch. They can ping things on the same vlan, even their default gateways, but not beyond. Reboots of the device, the Meraki switch or even the local firewall don't work, but if I readdress the device to a different IP, it works fine. When I go back to the original IP the problem returns. There's no duplicate IP. I can confirm the ARP table reflects only 1 MAC with the IP (no duplicate IPs, and of course when I readdress, the original IP is no longer pingable. This all started appearing a few months ago. I have a ticket open with Meraki support, but they are stumped too.
... View more
04-04-2022
06:41 PM
1 Kudo
But my question is this, and I’m not so sure why so many don’t understand this… If I have Virtual Workstations (AVD), or for that matter, have severs I want to create NATs for, why is the firewall not capable of being configured like any other Meraki MX firewall? Meraki can’t seem to answer that question. I have built Cisco FTD firewalls in Azure, and they form VPN tunnels, and can be used in routed mode to allow full blown NAT, I have used other vendor firewalls to do the same, all in Azure. Why is it specifically, that the Meraki firewall HAS to be used as a single arm concentrator, and if you want it in routed mode, then it’s a “work around” to get “some” NATing functionality. I need Meraki staff to step in on this conversation, believe you me, I will be at Cisco live, and the Meraki desk, and looking for the BU owner to get a real answer…
... View more
04-04-2022
06:29 PM
Thanks alemabrahao, I know very well how to build the vMX in Azure, I don't need the doc. That's not my problem. My problem, is why would Meraki build an appliance with such a handicap?
... View more
04-04-2022
02:38 PM
Can anyone PLEASE explain to me why the vMX only operates in Concentrator mode ❓ I know that it can be converted to NAT mode through the Meraki support backend, but that provides a "Limited NAT Mode". It basically overload NATs to the inside. This is a virtual appliance, a piece of software that can be given as much compute and memory power as needed, why couldn't the Meraki programmers create a full fledged MX firewall, instead of this basterdized piece of virtual hardware. Someone has got to give me a good answer for this, lol and don't say hardware limitations. 🤣
... View more
03-24-2022
07:11 AM
1 Kudo
FYI, the issue I was facing turned out not to be Meraki, or MTU or routing at all. I resolved my issue with this: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/release-health/windows-message-center#2772 Take action: Out-of-band update to address a Windows Server issue
... View more
02-09-2022
08:47 AM
3 Kudos
I just re-read this...I was pretty angry.....I'm glad I can think back on this and laugh about it, but it really was upsetting to have to go back and rebuild the box, exactly one year later..
... View more
01-05-2022
12:17 PM
I'm running a full catalyst switching stack, with Meraki MX interconnecting each location using the Autovpn, ever since implementing the Meraki's with Auto VPN my RDP connections are having connection issues. I perfomed wiresharks and the packets is the wireshark look to be at 1240 to 1400 in size. I'm tempted to manaully redice the MTU on my test devices to see if it makes a difference, but at least per wireshark MTU shouldn't be a problem. I'll update soon.
... View more
12-29-2021
08:14 AM
Does anyone know what hashing algorithm for load balancing Meraki is using when LACP is enabled? src-mac, dst-mac, src-dst-mac, XOR I'm having a strange interaction between a stack of meraki switches, and a fortinet firewall. The Firewall is using src-dst-ip, but I want to match the firewall to the switch.
... View more
12-08-2021
11:23 AM
True, but keep in mind, it is not always an IT professional at the wheels. Implementation engineers drop, set and forget. When a customer accidentally makes a change, and there is no parachute for them, their accident becomes a bigger outage. All we're talking about is a simple revert option, something that maybe triggers the local switch(es) to revert it's config to get back online. Honestly, this concept is rudimentary, and almost surprises me that it doesn't exist already.
... View more
12-08-2021
11:17 AM
2 Kudos
Right, for people like you and I, but MSPs sell Meraki on the Basis of "Ease of Use", when you point a customer at APIs to make backups and restores, the pretty "ease of use" shine starts to get dull. Meraki needs to add this, so those ease of use customers have an easy fall back for basic changes, and of course the customer can reach out to the MSP for bigger more complex rollbacks.
... View more
12-08-2021
10:19 AM
OH, and before you ask, yes, I "made a wish / provided feedback"
... View more
12-08-2021
10:17 AM
Admittedly I am a Meraki fan, but I am also let down by them often. Meraki needs a way to restore configurations to last known good, or to complelty restore a config after a catastrophic mistake. For example, if a user deletes a stack (by accident), all the layer 3 configurations are lost. There is no easy way to restore it. Unless of course you are an API expert and have your config saved in API format. Other than that it's a manual process. With a Cisco catalyst I can take a backup of a config to restore in case something goes wrong, Nexus has a roll back feature. Why is there no such option on a Hardware as a service platform like Meraki? There should be a break in case of emergency or Undo button. I know what everyone is going to say, if you make a mistake you're going to lose access to the dashboard, and in some cases that could be true, in others its not. In my example above you would not lose access to the dashboard because the management (control plane) of the switches (if following best practice) is getting their network access through a Layer 2 Trunk to the firewall and the firewall is providing an IP to the switches. So although I lose the Layer 3 config of the stack, the switches would still be reachable.
... View more
10-25-2021
10:09 AM
5 Kudos
I saw this post and thought I would offer assistance. In the past you had to use Cisco's AIR-CHNL-ADAPTER brackets and mount the Meraki Adapters to it. Meraki has its own clips that work like the AIR-CHNL-ADAPTER brackets, but look like the normal adapters that are shipped with APs. The difference is the clips are deeper. I know it's hard to describe but this part number: MA-MNT-CLG-1 includes a pair of deep drop ceiling clips for channel rail as well as spare T-Rail adapter clips which supports both recessed T-Rail and flush T-Rail. The deep drop ceiling clip works well with "Armstrong Silhouette" and similar ceiling grids which are found in newer building designs, its basically a channel rail (not a T-Rail). This kit is compatible with all Meraki MR access points and MV21 & MV71 security cameras. Everyone knows the T-Rail here's a good picture of it: Meraki APs Come with an adapter for this by default. but If you want to mount on the channel rails pictured above, you will want to order MA-MNT-CLG-1 separately when ordering your APs. Good luck out there all!!! HTH!
... View more
10-11-2021
03:54 PM
2 Kudos
This is an old post, but I did want to mention, that whether an SFP is supported or not there is no way (at least is seems) to see what SFP is plugged into a port, if the port is aggregated. Once you aggregate the port you lose the ability to see the SFP details. The only way I can see it, is if I unbundle the ports in the agg group, then look at the port details (thats not cool or kosher)
... View more
05-25-2021
04:41 AM
Hi Tore, no doubt the the vMX-100 license works on vMX-M. The issue is that I was not allowed to renew the vMX-100 license, I had to go with the vMX-M license because I only had a month left on it. If it expired I would have been left out in the cold with a vMX-100 unlicensed. I was forced to go to vMX-x, and had to replace the box. Meraki literally EoL a piece of software right from under me. Meraki will continue to support the vMX-100 box, but that's for customers who had 5 and 10 year licensing. Us poor year to year saps are forced to replace the box because the vMX-X licensing doesn't work on the vMX-100 installs we already had. I sense some Meraki sneakyness....
... View more
03-04-2021
08:26 PM
5 Kudos
So I just discovered this the hard way too. Meraki communication here was horrid. I would have hoped that maybe a dashboard banner or something to warn users of this change. On top of this I have to build a whole new appliance to make this work. I am beyond livid. Lastly, documentation on migrating from VMX100 to VMX-M is non existent. Support sent me this: https://documentation.meraki.com/Meraki_Internal/Draft_Articles/vMX100_to_vMX_S%2F%2FM%2F%2FL%2F%2FXL_Transition_FAQ Its not even a public facing document, can't be opened, don't bother clicking... I'm not a happy user of Azure, and having to go back in there and build yet another appliance because Meraki decided to change their pricing model makes me throw up in my mouth!!!!! I am absolutely disgusted that I have to literally replace a virtual machine, its freaking software!!!! UPGRADE IT IN SOFTWARE, don't give me more work!!!!!! LIVID IS NOT EVEN A WORD TO DESCRIBE HOW I FEEL AT THIS VERY MOMENT!
... View more
02-05-2021
12:39 PM
1 Kudo
I was reading through the Change Logs again, and something caught my eye: 12.28 Change log says, "MS390 upgrades from MS 12.27 or earlier will trigger a full system reload" 12.29 Change log says, "MS390 upgrades from MS 12.28 or later will result in minimal impact to client traffic" Why would an upgrade NOT cause a full system reload? What are they doing from 12.28 to 12.29 that an upgrade would not fully reload a switch? This is very interesting, it sounds as if they are in deed running the Meraki control plane in some sort of KVM on the switch. I wish Meraki would be a bit more transparent here. They know they messed up, why not just be transparent about it, and help us who are stuck with these switches be more in the know.
... View more
02-04-2021
02:18 PM
2 Kudos
Sadly, Meraki hasn't done much communication with us on this topic except through release notes on the beta releases. I think this is "Kind of a big deal"
... View more
01-19-2021
12:44 PM
3 Kudos
I'm on 12.30, With the track record so far I saw no real improvements based on the release notes on ver 14.12. The known issues section is relatively the same.
... View more
01-19-2021
12:18 PM
2 Kudos
I installed these as a core switch for just a few VLANs, customer specifically wanted these. I literally had issues since day 1. My support ticket has been open for 3 months. Power stacking doesn't work. I pulled the power on 1 switch and that switch turned off (no power stacking at all) Then when I powered it back up, it didn't come back online for 25 minutes. Supposedly support fixed it with a backend change, but I sure as hell won't test it. The dashboard can't pickup and netbios names, and match the name to the IP. SNMP doesn't work, and of course as we all know LLDP no workie either. The Release notes are abysmal. This switch can't do things that a $300 netgear switch can do, or even a low end Cisco Small Business switch. This is really sad, and I hope to god my customer doesn't need any of these features. I'm so very disappointed in this product and that Meraki/Cisco would release an extremely flawed product. Lastly the communication on these issues has been nil from what I've seen. I'm just so very disappointed.
... View more
07-21-2020
05:44 PM
5 Kudos
I had a very interesting problem today that I wanted to share. I recently migrated a customer from a very close to default catalyst 3750x switch running L3 to MS425 running L3. Migration went well, no real issues to speak of, until 2 weeks later. We were performing a Netscaler (ADC) fail over, and the fail over failed. When the Netscaler(ADC) failed over, nothing could reach the ADC. As you know there isn't much of a CLI to really dig into, but once I dug into how fail over was configured on the netscaler and read a few Meraki and Netscaler articles, opened a Meraki TAC case, I figured it out. The default fail over methodology for netscaler uses "GARP" Gratuitous ARP, each Netscaler in the cluster has its own discrete MAC address, and when the ADC fails over, the new active ADC sends out a Gratuitous ARP to let the Meraki know that it now owns all the IPs. Here's where the problem lives: The ADC by default, sends its Gratuitous ARP with an operational code of 0, which means its a Gratuitous ARP "REQUEST". Meraki MS Switching at L3 will ONLY react to a Gratuitous ARP with an Operational Code of 1, which means its a gratuitous ARP REPLY. Code 0 and Code 1 can be seen in a wireshark capture. The Fix was one of 2 things, reconfigure the ADC to send Gratuitous ARP "REPLY" instead of REQUEST, or change the Failover methodology to use vMAC (basically using a floating virtual MAC address), like a firewall in an HA pair. Here's the Citrix Netscaler Document https://support.citrix.com/article/CTX208384, that outlines the "GARP" configuration, Meraki has NO online documentation explaining how the MS switching line reacts to Gratuitous ARP. I opened a ticket, and the TAC support person told me that the Meraki MS switching line only reacts to a REPLY and not a request. We submitted a feature request to make the MS switch respond to both a REPLY and a REQUEST Gratuitous ARP. I hope this info helps someone out there. Happy MeRaKiNg!
... View more
07-21-2020
05:44 PM
Did you ever get an answer to this? I just ran into some Gratuitous arp stuff myself, and came across this post. I didn't see an update, and was wondering if you got an answer outside of the community.
... View more
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | 2578 | |
| 5 | 3874 | |
| 5 | 2026 | |
| 3 | 1670 | |
| 3 | 6148 |
