Hi, it seems I have a doubt here. If you could help.. the MX that you are using as a VPN con, how this MX is getting registered with the cloud though you are connected its internet port to the L3 switch?? In addition I guess there is no wan connections it just a physical cable connected to L3 switch port ..
Hi, Why I see WAN IP changed from 172.16.33.111 to 122.202.8.153 @ 2:17? The mac address and SN and MX model is still same. :) Also can you explain why one-arm mode is recommended design, it only allow first WAN port to be used, which means 1Gbps max bandwidth. Traffic is hair-pined on same physical interface, would it be a potential performance issue? Thanks for the great video! Very informative!!
Hello, I have one question, now I trying to deploy with Hub & Spoke VPN on MX. And my requirement is that when my LAN at the spoke site, wanna access to Server, we want to run through the VPN. And in case, that one LAN user at the Spoke site wanna access the internet, we want to go through the internet itself. notice: At the Hub site, we are using with HA. Please kindly help to advise me on this.
Super useful video, thanks! I have a question regarding OSPF. I see we can now enable OSPF for MX in NAT mode. In that case, I guess the MX5 in your topology is not mandatory, right? We could enable OSPF on MX1/2 to inject the VPN routes in the L3 switch right? My second question, also about OSPF on the MX. I see in the documentation OSPF can only be used to advertise routes from the AutoVPN. Can the MX learn routes with OSPF to distribute them in the AutoVPN? Thanks for your help :)
Hello Fady. Just a quick question. From the part of OSPF routing between MX5 and layer 3 switch, why don't you directly configure an static route in MX5 pointing 172.16.33.0/24 through layer 3 switch and publish this static route into auto VPN, instead of configuring the "local network" into VPN settings? You avoid the jumping through MX1 (with the default route from MX5). Is it possible to do it?
My bad. No static routing is allowed in the VPN-CON, so you can not point it to the switch directly, right? As you specified, the solution is get the default gateway for the VPN-CON from the L3 switch.
@@FadyNETDecorators Can a 0.0.0.0 route originate from the L3 switch and propagate downstream. I am considering a design with two separate datacenters (A and B) with the need to have the default route fail over dynamically if one side loses internet. 0.0.0.0 route is originated from ISP and received via BGP into the core. If the internet goes down at site A I want the 0.0.0.0 to NOT be advertised from concentrator A and only come down from concentrator B and vis versa. With the local network statement it appears as thought the default route will always be active no matter what happens in OSPF or BGP.
Hello, thanks for very useful video,but I have a question. How I need to configure mx concentrator if we are using eigrp routing on the Catalyst switch?. Thanks in advance!
Thanks for these tutorials, super helpful. I do have a question though, kind of off the wall but... I'm wondering if it's possible to route VOIP through VPN to our VOIP provider, and avoid their ASA device? New to meraki! I'm loving it!
Thanks for your reply, I was considering the option due to mixed result of vpn tunneling uptime for certain asa devices. But this could be due to many other factors. Mainly just curious if this was a normal approach for voip between meraki and provider, still have a lot to learn! :)
Hi, it seems I have a doubt here. If you could help.. the MX that you are using as a VPN con, how this MX is getting registered with the cloud though you are connected its internet port to the L3 switch?? In addition I guess there is no wan connections it just a physical cable connected to L3 switch port ..
Hi, Why I see WAN IP changed from 172.16.33.111 to 122.202.8.153 @ 2:17? The mac address and SN and MX model is still same. :)
Also can you explain why one-arm mode is recommended design, it only allow first WAN port to be used, which means 1Gbps max bandwidth. Traffic is hair-pined on same physical interface, would it be a potential performance issue? Thanks for the great video! Very informative!!
Make sense. Thanks for the great video again!
Hello, I have one question, now I trying to deploy with Hub & Spoke VPN on MX. And my requirement is that when my LAN at the spoke site, wanna access to Server, we want to run through the VPN. And in case, that one LAN user at the Spoke site wanna access the internet, we want to go through the internet itself.
notice: At the Hub site, we are using with HA.
Please kindly help to advise me on this.
Super useful video, thanks!
I have a question regarding OSPF. I see we can now enable OSPF for MX in NAT mode. In that case, I guess the MX5 in your topology is not mandatory, right? We could enable OSPF on MX1/2 to inject the VPN routes in the L3 switch right?
My second question, also about OSPF on the MX. I see in the documentation OSPF can only be used to advertise routes from the AutoVPN. Can the MX learn routes with OSPF to distribute them in the AutoVPN?
Thanks for your help :)
Hello Fady. Just a quick question. From the part of OSPF routing between MX5 and layer 3 switch, why don't you directly configure an static route in MX5 pointing 172.16.33.0/24 through layer 3 switch and publish this static route into auto VPN, instead of configuring the "local network" into VPN settings? You avoid the jumping through MX1 (with the default route from MX5). Is it possible to do it?
My bad. No static routing is allowed in the VPN-CON, so you can not point it to the switch directly, right? As you specified, the solution is get the default gateway for the VPN-CON from the L3 switch.
@@FadyNETDecorators Thanks. These has been my 1st contact with MX but now I get it crystal clear. Thanks for your explanation.
@@FadyNETDecorators Can a 0.0.0.0 route originate from the L3 switch and propagate downstream. I am considering a design with two separate datacenters (A and B) with the need to have the default route fail over dynamically if one side loses internet. 0.0.0.0 route is originated from ISP and received via BGP into the core. If the internet goes down at site A I want the 0.0.0.0 to NOT be advertised from concentrator A and only come down from concentrator B and vis versa. With the local network statement it appears as thought the default route will always be active no matter what happens in OSPF or BGP.
Hi. Do we have the same SD WAN features on all MX models that have two WAN links?
Quick Question: will Meraki provide further features for BGP? like using communities etc?
Great tutorial. Thanks.
Hello, thanks for very useful video,but I have a question. How I need to configure mx concentrator if we are using eigrp routing on the Catalyst switch?. Thanks in advance!
Thanks for these tutorials, super helpful. I do have a question though, kind of off the wall but... I'm wondering if it's possible to route VOIP through VPN to our VOIP provider, and avoid their ASA device? New to meraki! I'm loving it!
Thanks for your reply, I was considering the option due to mixed result of vpn tunneling uptime for certain asa devices. But this could be due to many other factors. Mainly just curious if this was a normal approach for voip between meraki and provider, still have a lot to learn! :)
by default all the services will be supported once reachability between tftp server is established you just need to enable dhcp option
i try to do between MX84 and MX64 site 2 site not working with me any help could you
Great info