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 Mohit_Chauhan
Mohit_Chauhan
Here to help
Member since May 15, 2018
Mar 19 2024
Community Record
16
Posts
4
Kudos
0
Solutions
Badges
Nov 25 2023
7:29 PM
Thanks for confirming that Brash. Cheers. 😆
... View more
Nov 25 2023
7:24 PM
So i was thinking in the right direction that step should not apply to this. The document structure and language is misleading. There was another section for warm spare swap method and this was for cold spare in the sense you cannot have both active but want to be prepared and have the spare one which could be a different model be ready so it's only a matter of swapping cables in the event the main mx died on you. I have pasted the table of contents to explain my point just if you have time and want to see thru my lens and the build up frustration pondering and testing it over it for so long on a weekend. Thank you guys for confirming that. So I will just have this spare mx stay in the cloned network and if need be fire this up and move the cables onto it.
... View more
Nov 25 2023
4:59 PM
Hi guys, I believe someone would have stumble on this like myself trying to get my head around this concept of clone and replace method for swapping mx which are different models. I followed the Meraki documentation (https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/Other_Topics/MX_Cold_Swap_Replacing_an_Existing_MX_with_a_Different_MX#Adding_a_Second_MX_to_Form_a_Warm_Spare_Configuration_2 and this link as well (https://www.stratusinfosystems.com/news/how-to-replace-an-existing-meraki-mx-device/) where I go all good till step 2, but step 3 does not make sense where it is asking to enable warm spare. How is that possible when the models are not the same? I still tried different on the dashboard but never see the option where the spare MX serial will show up on the drop down menu of the adding the serial of the spare MX in the "warm spare" config pop page. Has someone tried this and if yes, can you please help me understand where I am going wrong assuming this document is correct. Mant thanks. Mohit
... View more
Feb 2 2022
4:04 PM
Thanks Phil, that should be alright then. Having the VPN subnet no more my problem now, we should be good to use the 4th available subnet. It was good to know all the info you shared, especially to be able to use the GatewaySubnet for the vMX. I wish I could have more info on that including pros and cons with that approach. Anyway thanks a lot for valuable inputs.
... View more
Feb 2 2022
3:58 PM
Thanks for the quick reply. "90% of the time" , is this using GatewaySubnet, or Server subnet? It makes sense about client subnet. This could be any subnet (outside of Azure) just like any other SDWAN site, isnt it?
... View more
Feb 2 2022
3:40 PM
Thanks so much for your inputs? 1. I have never thought of using GatewaySubnet for this as I was in the impression it should not be touched at all (as I mentioned I am quite new to Azure). The client is running Express Routes, I am hoping using GatewaySubnet should not impact that (or anything else) as we dont want that to be disturbed. 2. How about using the server subnet altogether. Is that a safe call? 3. When you say "Client VPN users (to a VMX) won't be using a subnet out of Azure", did you mean outside of the given vnet? As I was thinking that as other alternative to add another vnet in the same region and use a subnet from there, if it was possible? Thanks.
... View more
Feb 1 2022
9:00 PM
Hi guys, I am quite new to Azure and hope someone can help me with some ideas/suggestions/solution to few of my concerns in regards to commissioning up vMX on Azure Cloud. 1. /25 or /24: Can we use /25 as the subnet instead of /24 for the vMX?The reason I am asking was that whenever I have tried using /25 it gave me the error in the end of the build. Has anyone tried that? 2. Spare Subnet Issue: We have a vnet in the RG (Aus Southeast region) with /22 subnet which gives us 4 x /24 subnets. Out of these 4 , 3 are already used (one for servers, one for DMZ and 3rd as GatewaySubnet). Now we are left with only 1 x /24 subnet free. We need to use VPN clients off this vMX. How do we deal with this situation? a) Can we use server subnet to install the vMX and use this 4th spare subnet for the VPN users? In this case, do we will still need to configure the Route Table so the servers can use vMX as the next hop to reach to the WAN site? Or it will automatically do that given the vMX and servers are on the same subnet? Right now they are pointing to the Express Route for accessing the WAN sites as well as the Internet hosted in the client;s DC. b) Should we use this spare subnet just for vMX and then just add another vNet with /22 and then use a subnet from there? I think with that we will need to create some inter-vnet peering? Any thoughts on that? Look forward to hear back on the above points so I can move forward with this build. Appreciate your time in reading the above and also thanks in advance if you can provide some inputs/ideas to my concerns. Regards, Mohit
... View more
Feb 1 2022
7:31 PM
Few clarifcations on your point Phil, 1. are you suggesting we can use the same existing subnet where servers are hosted so when when the vMX comes up online, it will pick up one of the ip range from the same pool? In my case, I have only one /24 subnet available in the server vnet beside the server subnet. However, I am planing to use that for the VPN users, will this be OK? 2. The other alternative was, can I use /25 as the subnet for the vMX. So far when I have tried its giving me "conflict error" on Azure in building up the VM for this vMX. I have logged a case with Azure on that and waiting for the feedback. Thanks in advance. Mo
... View more
Oct 20 2021
6:23 AM
@Bruce thanks for your reply here. But I am still confused here. When we are attaching MR86 with say patch antenna MA-ANT-25, we have two antennas to connect. Each antenna will have two cables. So cant we have one antenna at one angle facing one aisle and the other antenna facing the other aisle, imagining we are trying to cater for coverage in two aisles. Each antenna will provide both 2.4 and 5Ghz. Am i missing something here? Thanks for your time in advance!
... View more
Oct 19 2021
11:27 PM
@Inderdeep "same orientation" means both antennas should be installed in the same location pointing in the same direction? Or you can use them in different directions as each port would be running in dual mode..?
... View more
May 26 2020
7:56 PM
1 Kudo
Hi all, Thanks for all your contribution into this discussion. I used TCP with multiple streams which actually showed much better results than a single stream where the network pipe can be tested with more data than just with the limitation of the host hardware. I also used the below links which also guided me in the testing. Just sharing for all of us, I am sure most of you would have bumped into it at some time. https://netbeez.net/blog/tcp-window-size/ https://documentation.meraki.com/zGeneral_Administration/Tools_and_Troubleshooting/Troubleshooting_Client_Speed_using_iPerf https://www.slashroot.in/iperf-how-test-network-speedperformancebandwidth Finally thanks all for the help.
... View more
May 21 2020
7:04 AM
Hi, We have site to site (3rd Party) tunnel to Azure from MX100. The commissioned Internet speed is 250M, however, when we test the speedtest or do throughout test it maximum goes to 160M. This is not the major concern though - the main issue is that servers on either side of the tunnel show poor network speed. Once this was reported, we did Iperf tests and the number are showing maximum 30Mbps as the bandwidth when using TCP mode. With UDP, it jumps to 150M. Normal speedtest from the server behind the MX shows similar 150M speed as well. Any suggestions? Also I want to understand why iPerf results are so different from the speedtest, my logic says that speedtest is also using TCP as we use http browser to do the test. Thanks for going through the above notes. Any suggestions or feedback will be highly appreciated.
... View more
Nov 19 2019
6:35 AM
Hi all, I am trying to deploy Meraki wireless for a school where they have single SSID and depending who is logging in and on which device (school leased or BYOD) the user gets assigned to a dedicated VLAN. We could achieve the partial requirement using Filter-ID & matching Group Policy on the Meraki would assign the client to the specific VLAN. However, this will remain the same regardless which device this user uses. We want that this user gets a different VLAN when it uses leased device (like laptop) and another VLAN if he is using BYOD device (like an iPad/iPhone). FYI- this setup is working fine on the Cisco classic wireless (WLC-based). There is no local profiling or ISE used in the production. Any suggestions around this?
... View more
Mar 16 2019
12:42 AM
@PhilipDAth wrote: The site to site non-Meraki VPN configuration is organisation wide. By default every MX will try and build the VPN. The tags are used to limit which MX's should attempt to build the VPN. https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/Site-to-site_VPN/Site-to-site_VPN_Settings#Peer_availability When you say to include a VLAN in a VPN it is included in both AutoVPN and non-Meraki VPNs. You can't specify a seperate list only for non-Meraki VPNs. With these limitations it may not be possible to build the non-Meraki site to site VPN and have it work in this case because of the overlapping subnets. On the ASA side it could be done, because the ASA supports doing subnet NAT based translation for VPNs - you could make this work - but this is an advanced configuration. Thanks for your inputs here. If we restrict one MX to connect to ASA in this case using TAG, & make use of the "site to site outbound firewall" to restrict what traffic goes through the tunnel, do you think it should be workable? or any downsides? Otherwise, the other thing I was thinking about (haven't seen any update from Meraki on this though) was to do NAT of traffic before tunnelling. However, from the documentation guide, it only says that is feasible on auto-vpn that too with TAC support.
... View more
Mar 15 2019
11:15 AM
Hi , We have MX to run site to site with an ASA of a different company. There are lots of common subnets in both organisations and therefore we only want the interesting traffic between a non-conflicting pair. So it is 10.0.0.0/24 behind MX and 192.168.1.0/24 behind ASA which needs to talk to each other. I read about using Tags. The thing I was not sure about was when we create/add a tag, it is applied on the network. Now the network where this MX is sitting is luckily on one subnet which is this 10.0.0.0/24, however it has heaps of static routes, auto-vpn's to Z1's and client vpn networks which talk across in all directions as they are all part of the same organisation. I was not sure if this tag will only apply to the MX LAN subnet or will also include these other subnets. If other subnets will be part of this tag, we will have issues as there are lots of conflicting subnets across the ASA side. I also read about parent tag and sub-tags options, but could not find it in the dashboard. I am sure I wouldn't be the first one trying to achieve this solution. Has someone tried this or can guide me in the right path? Any suggestions or thoughts will be highly appreciated. Thanks. Mo
... View more
Dec 4 2018
7:23 PM
3 Kudos
Before jumping in to understand SDWAN, we need to understand what is a WAN. The acronym stands for Wide Area Network which basically means your big cloud which connects all your offices together so they can talk to each other. If you only have two offices, for example, you can imagine it like a pipe connecting your two offices together. Usually this WAN service is paid service just like how you get your Internet services. With SDWAN which stands for Software Defined WAN is like a smart WAN, if I could say that. It is a technology that is capable of using any Internet services (DSL, fibre, 4G, etc) to provide you similar result what WAN was offering. So you could use for example, one Internet using fibre service and the other using DSL. However, its not only that. You can use different combination of these Internet services together to provide more resiliency to the WAN connection. By resiliency, we mean, your WAN connection will be more powerful and less prone to connection problems simply because it will not be relying on just one service.Just using the last example, if your Fibre Internet had issues, you still have connection to your other offices via the DSL Internet. With having this option of using different services concurrently, you can also control your traffic flow how it traverses from one office to other. For eg you may want business critical traffic over fibre so it is fast and less important traffic over DSL. Finally, the best part is, you can have the combination using existing WAN services as well. For eg, Fibre Internet and your existing WAN. Usually this is the recommended practice as most of the times a customer will typically have a dedicated WAN service already in place; he can simply add an Internet service and use SDWAN over them. For SDWAN between all your offices, you will need to ensure all the offices have SDWAN compliant devices to support this technology.
... View more
My Top Kudoed Posts
| Subject | Kudos | Views |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | 38234 | |
| 1 | 1988 |
© 2024 Cisco Systems, Inc.
