Meraki MX Reviews

Meraki MX Firewalls solutions are very customized for our groups. We are a worldwide group. We are currently implementing an IT solution worldwide. 

We have to replace old firewalls in the next couple of years in many countries. We are working on this project. We used Meraki MX 55005 firewalls previously. 

In between, we used many different firewalls from other companies. We won't be doing the acquisition of many new parts by these companies now.

We have tested different brands of firewalls. We have to consolidate to handle a better solution. We chose Meraki because we are already familiar with the products. 

Meraki MX firewalls are one point, but also have good availability. We have many people from different countries in which we have Cisco contracts to serve.

It's not only a technical aspect but also a commercial reason for our choice of Meraki.

We are currently replacing all other old firewalls with new Meraki systems in the next two years. We do this first for new sites and for sites that need to change. 

We do not change everything in one step also because of budget and also because of deployment requirements. This is a worldwide deployment. It will take time.

One of the things I found very important for us is for our sites to have a new device. Another was to be able to have two solutions with the ease of firewalls to control everything.

We use Meraki MX firewalls remote for small to bigger sites. One also was to have integration with have physical DC. We work also with domain control (DC) from Microsoft or Amazon. We use a whole virtual appliance with Meraki.

One aspect of the problem is that we need to have the ability to do connections that are fully integrated, i.e. between one solution at home and at the data center. The short box epicenter is from Microsoft Azure in the future.

We are currently having a problem with Meraki in the end product. They have two kinds of enterprise licenses and an advanced security license. 

The problem is that the two licenses do not currently integrate. We have to create separate companies and do an interconnection between these licenses. 

Even to do a full free trial run, we need the same kind of licenses. This is something we seek to change because it's not fair. With this license mode, we should be able to choose which sites we use and which sites we do not need.

We often see a break in the connection between both modem and dish. We found that if we communicate with Cisco, we can find the right solution to solve this.

Currently, we have found all the things we need for our company already. Only perhaps compatibility for mobile lines is still required. 

Meraki MX is the program for us. We should have enterprise licenses.

The stability of Meraki is that we have to fight working readiness. Meraki MX firewalls are perfect. We have no problems. We do agreements for a system. 

We do the changing of old IT systems. It's working very well.

The scalability is very good. We use it for plans that are electrified and on bigger plans for our domain. We have all of our plans and software licenses that match. We have deployed with this company responsibly. 

Currently, we are 400 people. We may need two more devices for 800 users. We decided to go bigger because of our proposed acquisition of many companies in the next couple of years.

Technical support is very good and quick. We have had some incidents and best response on a couple of various issues. They are very efficient.

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate this product a 7. For us, the license is a big issue and we need to get better facilities, i.e. the original problem.

From any country, it's not easy to manage a product remotely across the world. We are supporting little companies and compatibilities for three countries with different languages. 

It's not easy to deal with because the provider we use doesn't deliver to our country, even Israel. It's a problem we encounter more than the physical system. It's complicated.

The one question we get about the system in Switzerland is that when we send it to the target countries, it's not good.

We need a solution that merges both to be able to access the system and theoretically to target businesses. We don't have this possibility

Security appliance/firewall and SD-WAN. With an advanced security license, the content filtering, IDS, and geographical blocking features are surprisingly good compared to using alternative solutions with no noticeable performance hit. 

The geographical blocking is a great security feature but you have to use it with planning. I’ve managed to block a few vendor websites and mail servers without realizing what country those vendors were located in. When you’re not used to having geographical blocking, it can be hard to troubleshoot connectivity issues.  I once sort of over secured myself, and this was not MX's fault. Overall, this feature is great. It requires the advanced security license which I think while more expensive, is the sweet spot for licensing an MX with regard to features.

This solution has improved our organization with: 

• Easy of use
• Remote management

We are an MSP and Meraki provides MSPs with a combined management dashboard to centralize all clients under one single pane of glass. They offer a dynamic DNS, so Client VPNs and point-to-point VPNs can dynamically follow IP changes with no need for static IPs. The SD-WAN VPNs are also the easiest VPNs to set up in either a mesh or hub-and-spoke configuration that you will find. It works with non-Meraki VPN equipment too.

The dashboard brings all management features with you wherever you are. All you need is an Internet connection and a browser and you can manage the solution. The dashboard tracks your uplink connectivity to the dashboard and double checks with you all changes impacting the connectivity, making it much safer to enact changes remotely. Dual WAN connections are greatly simplified and site-to-site VPNs automatically connect regardless of what WAN connection is active. 

Site-to-Site VPNs are easier to set up than any other vendor’s solution. You simply pick two or more devices to tunnel together and then select what network subsets should be allowed to cross the tunnel and you are done. The solution handles all the details. Site-to-site VPNs can dynamically follow IP changes with no need for static IPs.

For MSPs, the dashboard is even more convenient as all your clients are on the same MSP account. Switching between managing different clients can be done with a few clicks once you log in to the dashboard. Two-factor authentication is available for enhanced dashboard security. 

Options for teleworkers include Meraki Z3. This device is great for extending your workforce into homes. It has a POE port built-in and can power a VoIP phone for your office communications as well as the AutoVPN capability. We deployed a lot of these during the pandemic making VoIP phones easy to set up and use for end users at their homes. This is a very easy way to support remote workers and keep them happy.

Some advanced enterprise features are missing, so Meraki MX is not for
demanding enterprise networks as it lacks high-level features (including SSL inspection).

As for SSL inspection, I think this is better performed on the Client PC where the inspection can be performed before or after the SSL encryption is done. Look at a solution like SentinalOne for this. This type of solution is going to be less prone to problems with SSL inspection.

Additionally, the native client VPN uses native OS VPN connectivity in Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux. While this is nice from the perspective of no license fees to have a client VPN, there are sometimes issues when drivers or OS updates are released that impact client VPN connectivity. DrayTek makes VPN client software that works with the MX but it is not officially supported by Meraki.

I'm not a fan of any security appliance's VPN as they typically allow access to everything on the corporate network. Specific VPN solutions like Absolute allow you to create granular access control to resources inside your firewall. I think having that level of control is a huge security plus.

More recently, Meraki implemented the Cisco AnyConnect VPN client with the MX and that is a more reliable solution than using the VPN built into Windows. I highly recommend using that or a 3rd party ZTNA solution.

There are so many options available when you are looking to create your security stack. In my experience, I've found that putting all your requirements on one solution will usually result in some level of disappointment.

On the Meraki dashboard is a “Make a Wish” button to request new features. I have made multiple wishes and they were all granted.

I have been using this solution for nine years.

Meraki hardware seems to be very stable. Their update process can be automated and I have not had any issues with stability. Also redundant Internet connectivity automatically fails over reliably. AutoVPN rebuilds the site to site VPN tunnels after an Internet connectivity failover without any admin action.

During the Intel CPU clock signal component issue in early 2017, Meraki’s MX84 product line was impacted. Once Meraki started getting replacement CPUs they shipped a replacement MX84 to swap my production unit. I was very impressed to learn how easy a hardware swap works with the Meraki dashboard. It was very simple to add the replacement unit. It began to function as a warm spare so I could then remove the old serial numbered device. A few minutes later the replacement unit downloaded the production configuration and we were up and running on the replacement hardware. I also on a separate project upgraded to a larger MX and it was just as simple.

Tech support is available from the dashboard. Meraki tech support staff have a lot more visibility into your network than you do, which is frustrating at times. I understand the approach is to keep the dashboard easier to understand. But this will frustrate more advanced users at times. The ability to run packet captures from the dashboard makes troubleshooting a lot easier.

Positive

Previously, I managed Cisco ASA equipment and enjoyed these firewalls. The need to train other admins and deploy MSP clients was at the top of my list for switching to Meraki MX. The learning curve is much less steep for new security admins and the central dashboard allows collaborative efforts when admins are in different locations. Built-in change management makes it easy to see who made specific changes as changes are logged on the dashboard.

Setup is rather easy but with templates or using an existing MX as a template to create a new MX configuration setup becomes even easier.

We perform all Meraki implementations in-house.

ROI is huge on Meraki products for admins. The learning curve reduces the amount of training required and the dashboard makes administration of MX appliances simple and that impacts ROI in a big way.

Other content filtering solutions that I have used had more bells and whistles, but given the cost, complexity, and management overhead, I am very pleased with Meraki’s solution.

I previously evaluated Cisco ASA, Fortinet FortiGate, Ubiquiti, SonicWall.

I was very worried when Cisco purchased Meraki, but surprisingly, they have not changed the organization or product lines for the worse. Cisco has mixed AnyConnect VPN and they now use Talos data for content filtering, which works very well. The hardware is still following the Meraki model which is a good thing.

It is a complete network security solution, including switches, routers, and everything else. It's a cloud-managed solution from Cisco. 

If a customer wants to deploy a remote office and have things managed remotely, and if they want to have control and provide an SD-WAN kind of experience for the customer with multiple WAN provider links to optimize, then the customer will go for a Cisco Meraki kind of solution.

In terms of WAN optimization, it's completely cloud-controlled. Anyone, even an IT hitch, can manage their network environment from a mobile phone. That is how easy it is. And users will get an immediate alert if something goes wrong.

There are strong and weak areas for each and every provider. 

So, when it comes to cost, that's what the pain is. There are other providers, like Fortinet and all those people. They can provide a more cost-effective solution when compared to Cisco.

So cost is something they should work on, like, to reduce the price.

I have been using it for ten years. 

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. We also deal with other Cisco products. So, I specifically work with the enterprise-level businesses. 

We provide support for this product. 

Meraki is very easy. It's very easy to manage the setup and all that stuff. I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy.

Cloud Deployment:

It is a solution where this can be managed through the cloud, Cisco's cloud. Meraki is the solution. You can manage it in Cisco's cloud. Generally, if you look into any router or that kind of thing, you need to put in the local IP, plug in, and do the configuration. 

Whereas in Cisco, you'll have a user ID and password. All your equipment will be listed in the Cisco Meraki cloud itself, where you can configure everything centrally and deploy it.

Deployment time:

The deployment took a few hours. Management is easy. It's centrally managed through the cloud. I don't see a challenge.

Everything is fine. But when it comes to the initial CapEx cost, it's really high.

I would rate the pricing a ten out of ten, with one being cheap and ten being expensive. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. However, my recommendation depends on the use case. 

I use the solution for some simple usage in our office for the people, so there is nothing too much. I am interested in the scalability of the tool.

The solution's most valuable features stem from the single pane of glass dashboard, along with other components of the tool like configuration, administration, monitoring part, integration capabilities with Cisco solutions, and ease of comparison with other Cisco equipment or Cisco Meraki hardware devices.

I don't think I can comment on what needs improvement in the solution because of the usage of Meraki MX in our company. The tool is not complex. For my type of usage, I am satisfied with the results of the product. I think that I may use the product on a larger scale.

The fact that the product is a little expensive and how it needs to be made cheaper from an improvement perspective is a debatable topic, in my opinion.

I have been using Meraki MX for a year and a half.

I use only Cisco hardware in my building, where I also have my network with Meraki MX. I don't have any problems, and I haven't tested the equipment in a multi-vendor environment.

I didn't reach the need to use a relevant scalability test in my company because I am using the tool for the first time for just two users and four guest users. Before I can talk about scalability, I should use the tool's scalability features.

I prefer Meraki MX for personal use. In professional terms, I am working with Cisco on a regional basis in Europe.

I am happy with the technical support for the solution. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

For networking and my personal use, Meraki MX is the first infrastructure I have experience with, but on a professional side, I use Cisco.

The product's initial setup phase was simple, considering how Meraki's documentation is very intuitive, which explains how to use the platform, its configuration capabilities, and its administration.

The solution is deployed on the private cloud.

Depending on the purpose of the solution for the user, it might be worth the money. If a user wants to use extra hardware equipment at its full potential or full features on a long-term basis, Meraki MX is a good choice. If you don't want to have a complex tool with features, workload, and so on, Meraki MX can come across as an expensive solution.

The product is a little expensive.

I did not choose any other solutions in the market since I got familiar with Meraki MX. I wanted to start with Meraki MX because I thought it was the most appropriate hardware that I could use, especially to add access points, some IoT devices, and switches. Meraki MX is a tool that I can build an infrastructure around.

Within Cisco, I checked for second-generation MV cameras.

For sure, I will recommend the tool's potential users to at least do a demo because one of the best parts of interacting with Meraki is that users can use a demo version for a certain period and do their own tests to see if it is okay or not. After I was okay with the functionalities, I went to use the product for myself.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

The solution is mainly based on the cloud which is highly adaptable to the needs of its users due to its large user base. By employing over fifty VPS, we strategically position these units where clients require them the most. Remarkably, the cost of this setup is notably more affordable compared to competing alternatives. The management dashboard allows users to oversee each branch within their network. This comprehensive view is unified within the dashboard, offering insights into the entire branch network. The system works mostly for financial institutions, particularly banking clients.

The cloud management system is really valuable.           

Direct logging is something that can be introduced. In the absence of cloud management, the possibility of local configurations and on-premise logins becomes restricted. This limitation stands as a primary concern. When it comes to resolving issues, the inability to access login options hampers troubleshooting efforts.

The stability is noteworthy; but when compared to alternative products, its stability is comparatively lower. Additionally, certain limitations are observed in terms of remote control. Price-wise, the solution stands out for its competitive and cost-effective nature compared to other alternatives. Operationally, it is user-friendly and requires minimal effort from administrators, making configuration hassle-free.

I have been using Meraki MX for the last three years.

The solution is stable however there are issues and we need to reboot sometimes. I would rate it five out of ten. 

Considering the needs of medium-class clients, scalability proves to be highly advantageous. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The initial setup is easy via the cloud portal, primarily because managed support is needed for internet access. Without this, the direct configuration of the box becomes unattainable.The duration required is significantly shorter compared to alternatives. Occasionally, when dealing with a larger number of branches, like fifty or more, we managed to complete the implementation within 14 days. In cases involving complex processes and discussions, additional time might be necessary. However, once the system is set up and connected to the cloud, other configurations can be done within an eight-hour timeframe.

This solution is viable for medium-sized enterprises and even larger ones, presenting an affordable option. The scalability aspect should be factored in, considering the specific branch alterations. For branch placements, Meraki offers a suitable scalability model, adaptable based on the branch size and user count. We own a range of appropriately sized Meraki boxes to address varying branch needs. When attending to any issues, especially during branch implementations, on-site visits might be necessary. However, in the absence of cloud management, Meraki can be easily managed centrally and remotely. This approach facilitates efficient updates, configuration management, and comprehensive visibility, all streamlined within a single dashboard. 

I would rate overall solution a seven out of ten. 

I've used Meraki MX in warehouses for small medical offices and, recently, dispensaries.

To me, the analytics feature is one of the most valuable in Meraki MX. I also find that it has good usability as it's cloud-based.

Another valuable feature of Meraki MX is that it's simple to use and it's user-friendly.

We had minor issues with Meraki MX. We had a couple of RMAs, so that could be an area for improvement, but in terms of how the RMAs went, the turnaround time and getting those back into redeployment were quick.

Another area for improvement in Meraki MX is that when you're scaling for multiple locations, you need to use the same model, but the model you'd need is only available for a short time. The specific model you require could be out of stock, or Meraki isn't making that model anymore, so Meraki should improve that.

I've been using Meraki MX on and off over the past seven to eight years.

As far as stability goes, Meraki MX is pretty good.

In terms of scalability, the process of scaling Meraki MX is straightforward.

The initial setup for Meraki MX is very straightforward.

I work in a mid-sized company, and I've used Meraki MX in small business and enterprise settings. On the small business side, two people use the product, but on the enterprise side, about twenty people use Meraki MX because of the number of locations and equipment. My enterprise customer had about forty thousand employees and at least ninety locations.

I'd rate Meraki MX as nine out of ten.

We use Meraki MX for system networking.

Meraki MX’s most valuable feature is cloud and app management. Additionally has a helpful feature for database troubleshooting issues.

We can’t access GUI management and CLI opening features when the Internet is unavailable.

We have been using Meraki MX for two years.

I rate the platform’s stability a seven and a half.

We have two administrators and 600 end users for Meraki MX.

The technical support services are good.

Positive

The initial setup is complicated when the Internet is unavailable. However, it is easy to configure and takes two years to complete.

The product’s price is reasonable.

I rate Meraki MX an eight out of ten.

You can use your web browser to do the configuration which is easier than Cisco CLI transcripts. 

We do not have account managers in our region for the solution. Some governments don't use the product since it is attached to the internet. 

The solution is scalable and you can add as much as you want. 

The solution's setup is straightforward and easier than Cisco's. There is a subscription and you need to activate it. 

The solution is expensive compared to other vendors but you can get good discounts if you know the account manager. The product is less expensive than a normal Cisco subscription. The tool's hardware warranty is a lifetime but you need to purchase support which comes in three, five, and seven years subscriptions. 

I would rate the product a ten out of ten.