Meraki SD-WAN Reviews

Meraki SD-WAN serves as our SD-WAN. As I previously stated, we have over a thousand retail stores across the country, and we have Cisco Meraki at each one. 

I'm not particularly close to it. Because our infrastructure team is in charge of that. I'm more on the information security side. But, from what I understand, the product works well and there isn't much that can be done to improve it.

More automation is always a good thing, but I'm not particularly close to the Meraki. That is more of an infrastructure team's responsibility. I'm not too familiar with the Meraki environment, but I suppose more automation is always a good thing.

We have over a thousand retail locations across the country, and we use Cisco Meraki for our SD-WAN solutions in all of them.

While I am new to the company and have only been with them for five months, I have been using this solution for a few years.

We are working with the latest version.

I'm not directly involved in SD-WAN monitoring and maintenance, but based on what I've heard from our infrastructure team, it's working well.

Meraki SD-WAN is a stable solution.

Meraki SD-WAN is scalable.

We have approximately 4,000 users in our company.

I have not contacted technical support. That is something that our infrastructure team handles.

We do not use Juniper.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I am not aware of the licensing fees.

I would rate Meraki SD-WAN a nine out of ten.

I am the architecture lead.

I believe this solution does a perfect job. It delivers what it's supposed to do and it's secure. The Meraki interface is really well driven and very mature. I like that it's a dashboard on the cloud so profile settings can be done from anywhere.

I think Meracki still has some work to do in terms of catching up with other companies when it comes to AI. 

I've been using this solution for a year. 

The solution is stable. 

When it comes to scalability, there's no compromise with Cisco, there is always scalability. 

Our technical support is local, from Saudi Arabia, and I believe the Smart Tech function is really awesome. 

The initial setup is straightforward, everything is built-in, and it's plug-and-play.

You need to pay for quality. We don't have a problem with the price but I know there is competition. We have an enterprise contract with Cisco. 

I take this solution 10 out of 10. 

I work for a carrier, and we consume, resell, and integrate Cisco products. I'm a product manager, and I have a couple of products that are built around Cisco Meraki's offerings. One of them is a managed business wifi solution, and the other one is an SD-WAN solution. I own both of these products. 

Meraki is really big in retail and education, and that's where we see a lot of use cases. It is a low-cost or entry product. It is not a sophisticated, complete solution. People who are very concerned about the total cost of ownership will look at a Meraki solution more. 

The deployment is a combination. The orchestration is on a public cloud, and then the customer locations are all premise-based Meraki devices.

They're known for their ease of use and ubiquitous management platform that covers everything. Meraki really excels in plug-and-play solutions. You just plug it up, and everything works. All of the components—the firewall/router, the switches, the access points, the cameras—work very nicely together, and they all can be managed from one platform. That is probably their biggest selling point. Everything comes in one ubiquitous package, and you don't have to manage different components from different platforms. You can see everything from one platform.

From the vice perspective, they just are not as robust as some of the other vendors. They have limitations in throughput and the number of circuits that they can support on a wide area network. Their higher-end security is all cloud-based. They have some capability with the premise-based solutions, but the higher ends are all cloud-based, and that's via Cisco Umbrella.

Their support can be better. They do not offer a lot of hands-on support for their products.

I have probably been using this solution for three years.

From the stability perspective, everybody is pretty much on the same level playing field. I don't really see anybody standing out more than anybody else. Meraki is a low-cost equipment provider, so they're not offering big metal devices that plug into racks and a data center. They're more along the lines of the hard plastic desktop type of units. They have the same meantime between failure as most other products, so it's difficult to put them above or below anybody else. They all are pretty much on the same level playing field.

Scalability is good as long as you're doing a simple task. If you're just deploying SD-WAN and you're not putting in cameras, wifi access points, and a lot of different components, scalability is really good. From that perspective, they do well. Their niche is retail and education, and both of these areas can be very large networks depending on the provider.

We do not have plans to increase its usage. They are really premise-based solutions that are managed from the network, and we are not staying with that same type of approach in our product lines. We are moving to a fully-integrated network approach to security, connectivity, and management.

I would rate them one out of five. They do not offer a lot of hands-on support for their products.

We use three or four other SD-WAN providers to offer the same type of product. We have VeloCloud, Fortinet, and Versa. The main differences are more capabilities, more functionality, better support, better value, and a better total cost of ownership.

Everything is plug-and-play. If you're using all Meraki components, it is very easy to deploy.

The deployment duration is very short. There are not a lot of design concerns. There is not a lot of configuration. Everything can be done over the air from a network-based platform. So, it is very easy and very fast to deploy.

We've created a lot of things internally to compare different vendors and different technologies. From a customer perspective, I don't really do ROIs for evaluating vendors, but I'm familiar with the ROI. It really varies. There are other vendors that are also considered low-cost that technically perform better than Meraki. So, from a comparison perspective, it's difficult to know if you've got a better ROI with one vendor versus another without really understanding what it is that you're trying to accomplish.

Some customers may put a high value on ease of management, ease of deployment, and ease of managing and monitoring. Meraki does a decent job at all of that, whereas other companies may put a higher value on the features and functionality, security, and other things that are inherent to other products. Therefore, it is difficult to put them into a single bucket or category. From a low-cost provider perspective, their ROI for a customer is probably in line with that category of vendors.

They have a baseline software license, and then they've got an SD-WAN software license, and then they've got an advanced security software license. 

They're low cost, and they'll provide any amount of flexibility that you want from a modeling perspective for payment. Typically, it's either annually or multi-year, but they are a lower-cost company. They're not the most expensive by far.

There is an additional cost of the equipment that doesn't tend to be high.

Meraki is known as a lower-end SD-WAN solution. It has limitations from the hardware and the software perspective. They've gotten better over the years, but they were always viewed as a low-cost or entry type of product. They don't do a lot of the more sophisticated features and functionality of some of the other SD-WAN providers.

From a customer perspective, it really depends on:

• What are they looking for?
• What are they concerned about?
• Do they have any other products?
• Are they using any other security mechanism and is it network-based or premise-based?

It is just about what fits into their network and what they're currently using.

I would advise having a good understanding of the physical requirements for the facility that it's being deployed. You should have a good understanding of what you need from a component perspective, such as extra switches or extra access points. That's probably the biggest thing. There are other products for which you may have to pay a little bit more, but they are going to be better performing, and they will give you better service. So, you need to understand, especially if you're going with a low-cost vendor, that you might end up having to pay more because you had to add more components to the solution.

I would put it a little bit over halfway. I would rate it a six out of 10. It is certainly a good product. They have a lot of basic features and functionality. They can provide a good solution, but you may end up having to pay more than what you anticipated to get everything that you want because they don't include as much as some of the other vendors.

The solution is used principally to have high availability services, high-quality services, and communication with two or more service providers in the same place.

The administration in the cloud that Merakioffers is great.

The solution is user-friendly.

Its integrations are good.

We haven't had any issues with customization.

Overall, it's a good product.

The product is easy to deploy.

We have found the scalability to be good.

The solution is stable. 

Pricing is very affordable. 

I do need to explore the solution a bit more before really finding fault in anything.

The distribution could be improved. We have a lot of problems with distribution. The late deliveries likely have to do with the time it takes for the fabrication of components. It is a principal problem at this moment.

It would be helpful if there was reporting. I'd like to be able to hand reports related to performance right over to clients. 

I've used the solution for maybe a year or a year and a half at this point. 

Overall, the solution has been stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It's pretty reliable. 

Our company has many projects that employ Meraki's SD-WAN.

The scalability of the product is quite nice. 

I haven't dealt with technical support. However, MEWraki is pretty simple to use, and therefore, we haven't really needed support from Cisco. 

The initial setup is fairly straightforward. It's not overly complex. 

Deployment would take a week or two at a maximum. It depends on the customer's requirements. 

As a service provider, we install SD-WAN services in the sites of our customers.

The pricing is pretty reasonable. 

I'm a Cisco distributor in Mexico. We are a service provider. We install SD-WAN services in the sites of customers.

We have multiple deployments, both on cloud and on-premises. 

I'd recommend the solution. the management is easy and the solution is pretty reasonably priced.

I would rate the solution at a ten out of ten.

We are resellers. We provide solutions including Meraki SD-WAN to our clients.

I like the entire set of features and the analytics.

If you compare Meraki with other solutions, the level of security is minimal.

The security needs to be improved, which is why we also use FortiGate. Meraki offers the client basic security, it is not the same as what FortiGate is offering. The customers question the security as they see that they have some loopholes. They feel that a hacker can easily enter your data. When you operate the network to the family, on the outside a hacker can see the IP address inside the network.

Customers will request a firewall to protect the network.

I would like to see Meraki include firewall security. Also, they should have encryption inside the router to make the data secure.

I have been working with Meraki SD-WAN for more than three years.

We are using models MX64 and MX100.

So far it has been stable. We have no issues with stability.

Currently, we have 10 customers who each have 30 to 50 clients using Meraki SD-WAN.

Technical support is good.

When we have encountered problems, technical support has been quick to respond.

We are also working with Fortinet.

It is easier to deploy Meraki when you compare it with FortiGate.

Meraki SD-WAN is better suited for customers who have small branches, who don't have secure data to be transferred.

Meraki is not suitable for companies that require high security.

I would rate Meraki SD-WAN a six out of ten.

We have multiple ISP's connected, usually it's two. Two ISP's per site and we have to make sure that the site-to-site connectivity is managed and is maintained — the redundancy has to be maintained. 

The different services that we offer from different offices are available wherever we need them. That's the purpose of going with the Meraki SD-WAN solution versus another company. It's very straightforward. Their full mesh network just works. That's important.

The seamless end-to-end setup is really what makes it beautiful; that's why Meraki is good. It's much easier than some of the other vendors to manage and keep track of what's going on because you can see it in real-time on the portal. I don't really feel like VALO Cloud gives you a good idea of what's going on. VALO Cloud devices don't work nearly as well, in my opinion, as the Meraki devices.

I think they should enhance the security. I feel like the security is decent, but some other people that I work with say there are better options available. Cisco requires you to upgrade the firmware to custom firmware on the devices you want to go beyond Diffie-Hellman five. DH5 is in the lower part of the spectrum. Other devices, even Cisco devices are using DH15 or higher. I think DH24 is the highest that's currently available. 

The feature set right now requires a firmware upgrade that's custom to enable that kind of encryption. They should just have it in a dropdown. If they could fix that, I could tell my other colleagues, "Hey, look, Cisco can do it right out of the box." To enable higher-end encryption, higher than Diffie-Hellman five, DH5, requires a custom firmware. If they could make that built into the standard firmware as an option, I would love that. 

I think that from Cisco's perspective, they've chosen not to do that simply because it requires more performance.

That's how they keep it because they say, "Oh, look at the performance. It's the same as the other guy." Yeah, but the other guy's using DH15 or DH14 and you're using DH5. The level of encryption means more horsepower required from the processor on the devices so that's why it increases the footprint. The more CPU, the hotter it gets and then it doesn't last as long; the performance is not as good because it's using more resources, etc. Cisco should definitely sell equipment with better processes or better performance for our processes because that would give us a higher level of encryption on our firewalls.

I have been using Meraki SD-WAN for roughly four to five years.

The setup time is excellent. The ease of setup is excellent. It's a set it and forget it solution. Once we created the mesh network, if we have to change an ISP, it doesn't mean we have to change an entire configuration. We just unplug it, plug the new one in, change the IPs and it works. Some SD-WAN providers give you a valid internet IP address as part of their solution, and others don't. A lot of the SD-WAN providers that provide internet access use Meraki devices as a black box. They just hand off one interface to the client-side and that's it.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Meraki SD-WAN a rating of eight. If they could do better on the performance side, that really would make a difference.

There is no comparison with a normal broadband connection versus one that is the dedicated connection that we have. We have saved a lot of money after deploying Cisco Meraki.

We have many businesses in geographical locations, and due to this, we need it in many different locations. It has become very easy for us to deploy these products. They claim that it is zero-touch configuration. That is true. Suppose if I want to deploy this product in Manila, I don't have to have this product in my hand in the wire and I don't need to go to Manila. It's not like that.

It can be delivered to them and as soon as they plug it we can push the configuration. That is the beauty of this SD-WAN technology that we have.

The solution is helping me, not only for side-to-side connectivity but also for defining different VLANs, different networks, between the firewalls. I can do firewalling between these networks.

I can manage it very well and in a very easy way. This is from the technical perspective.

After deploying Meraki, we have a drastic fitting on connectivity because before Cisco Meraki, we used to have a physical broadband internet connection and it is very, very expensive in Dubai.

The security firewall features that are embedded in the product is very good. The security, including the internal threat protection, the IPS, or the advanced threat admin, are very good. 

The hardware is okay as compared to any other product.

The advanced license is expensive. Part of the cost involved is high. If you are only a small or medium business, it may not be the best option. For branch divisions, yes. This is a very useful product and I don't have any problem with the CAPEX however, I have a problem with the OPEX as the OPEX part of the advanced license is quite expensive. 

We'd like features that provide more transparency when there are issues. Right now, it's hard to get clarity on problems. We need more visibility.

I've been using the solution for three years at this point.

The solution is quite stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

It's scalable.

We might have a plan to extend to maybe a hundred percent more sites within 2021. Hopefully, within this year, we will add almost double the size that we have right now. Currently, we have a total of 1200 employees that will double to 2400 and they each have their own devices. There are other guest users as well. There might be 4000 unique devices that need coverage.

The technical support isn't always ideal. Occasionally, we are unable to understand what is happening. When we escalate the matter, the response that we get from Cisco is not satisfactory as sometimes they are depending on the log, and sometimes they are depending on what is connected to a device, for example, and any cascaded device connected to it. They will say that maybe it is because of the device that it's connected on. They seem to have difficulty pinpointing the issue at hand.

Before using Meraki, we had the 1900 series of Cisco, and before we were using it with a DMVPN. This was the technology that was there before. We've always used Cisco.

The initial setup is straightforward. However, it depends on how you are setting it up. There are companies that do a very basic setup, and with a basic setup, anyone can do it. Even if you are not a technical person you can do this. It's very, very easy with zero-touch configuration. 

That said, when it comes to full functionality, in our case, we are completely using all of the features. We're doing integrations and using authentication and group policies and the advanced treatment events, and firewall rules, as well as traffic shipping rules. All of these are different. It's a bit more of a complex process.

We're working with a DNS Umbrella. When it comes to that much functionality, it is not easy, actually. It's not a basic thing. You need some experts to do the installation configuration.

While they've made it pretty user-friendly, they've also made it in such a way that handicaps IT staff. YOu always have to escalate issues to Cisco to get it sorted.

Once you get over the first implementation and move to configuration, it's pretty easy.

YOu only need one person to handle the deployment process.

I tend to handle the implementation and configuration. I'm well-versed in Cisco. I don't need a consultant or integrator to assist me.

We are a customer and end-user.

We have an SD-WAN technology that works on Cisco Meraki with MX appliances. Then we have a core appliance, from Core/Distribution and edge. These are all HP routers.

We are using the latest version of the solution. We get automatic updates to the latest versions.

While the solution is on-premises, it can be managed on the cloud.

I would recommend the solution. I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

It allows us to steer the traffic into two parallel links.

The most valuable features of this solution are load balancing and the security possibilities you have.

Meraki is more or less an intelligent load balancing. A lot of features are missing that other SD-WAN solutions have. For example, forward error correction and WAN optimization. These features are missing.

The best thing would be if you could have more than two uplinks in the Meraki Gateways. Also, forward error correction would be nice to have.

We have been using Meraki SD-WAN for approximately a year and a half.

We are using the latest version.

It's very stable.

We are a small company. We have approximately 120 users.

With Meraki, you have only two WAN links. You cannot have more than that.

You can scale it very easily if you want to have thousands of locations, but in every location or with every Meraki WAN gateway, you can only have two WAN uplinks.

We have not contacted technical support, it's always perfect.

Cisco's technical support is very good.

The initial setup is quite simple.

We are a training company that provides training on Meraki. It's a matter of minutes to implement an SD-WAN router.

We have a team that is responsible for maintaining this solution.

If you purchase a Meraki gateway, you have to purchase a license. It's a basic license, and you will have SD-WAN included.

When you buy a Meraki gateway, you already have SD-WAN.

When comparing Meraki SD-WAN with other SD-WAN solutions, Meraki is more or less for free. It's an easy to use solution that helps you to do things that you can't do without SD-WAN. 

It is not as advanced as the Cisco SD-WAN solution, or SD-WAN solutions from other vendors.

It does not have a very rich feature set.

For others who are interested in using Meraki SD-WAN, I would suggest that they know the limitations of the two uplinks and that it is not a separate solution. It's included in what you have. You will not have the same dashboard as you would have with the Cisco SD-WAN, or VeloCloud, VersaStack, etc.

For a free solution, I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

The advantage of Cisco Meraki is that they take the complexity out of the backend, they do it for you. One of the reasons that we switched to Meraki SD-WAN, was because they have a feature called Auto VPN.

I have to keep the operating systems on my switches and routers current and to do that with any other piece of equipment, would literally require me to download the newer operating system. I'd have to get a TFTP server setup to transfer that image over to the appliance. By the time I'd finish, even on the five sites that I have, that's five routers and seven switches.  A combined or aggregated downtime across the sites, potentially of six hours. Whereas now I can schedule the update for the middle of the night or anytime, and it happens on its own.

The portal updates and reboots the device and off it goes. I don't even have to be connected to do it, it just happens. That is of value to me that nobody else is promoting. Between the Auto VPN and the update of the operating systems to keep current, those are the key features.

The network insight and reporting are great.

There are literally things you cannot do in a graphical user interface that can be done from a command line. Certain commands that you can issue to any device from a command line are basically explicit; the same as a server or any other IP or any computer-related piece of hardware. If you can get to the command line, you can give it explicit instructions that basically tell it to do something that's hard to describe in a graphical environment. Periodically, there are some issues that you have to figure out how to work around.  That's a very technical thing, most people won't run into it. 

Six years.

Excellent.

The wide-area network side of the setup was pretty straightforward. I picked up some little details here and there that I wasn't aware of. I had been playing with their equipment for probably a year and a half to two years before I implemented it here. But not for wide-area networking.  With some assistance from Cisco Meraki, as soon as I added appliances, literally within 15 minutes, the site is meshed into the WAN.

Now, since rebuilding the WAN with Cisco Meraki, I keep a cold standby in the closet. All I have to literally do is go to the portal, assign the license to it, and tell it that this is going to replace a defective unit at another site.  I plug that device in, within 15 minutes it will take over. So I'm no longer dependent on an outside resource to get our network up and running again.

That's what's important to me. Is there better equipment out there that can handle more bandwidth and maybe do more things? Yes, but I do not have the bandwidth and may be losing other benefits.

The portal is hosted by Cisco Meraki, it's in their servers someplace. The way routers and firewalls typically are managed, is the way it's been done forever. The way the purists want to do it is via direct access to the unit. Going from unit to unit, configuring and troubleshooting, and doing all the magic. With Meraki, you cannot do an internal configuration from the unit directly. The advantage of this is that the configuration on the device is encrypted. Nobody can walk up to it and reconfigure it. Nobody can gain remote access into it and reconfigure it. So in my mind, the security profile on the unit is actually more secure.

But then, once the unit is installed and assigned to your organization, it's registered in the portal. From there you look at each device and define what it can do, which is the essence of software-defined networking. The portal allows you to configure security, connectivity and filters.  Changes in the portal are communicated to affected devices in a matter of minutes.

I don't know that it's cheaper, but for the Auto VPN and automated updating, it's a time saver for a smaller IT team.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Meraki SD-WAN a rating of ten — it's been working flawlessly for us.

Meraki SD-WAN is used to manage traffic between customers. We can make traffic-shaping rules, limit or deny sites, etc. SD-WAN can also do load balancing.

SD-WAN is a complete enterprise solution for securing traffic. 

The blocklist on the Cisco Meraki side isn't complete or very large. We'd like to see them update and expand this. 

I have used Meraki SD-WAN for seven years. 

 I rate Meraki SD-WAN nine out of 10 for stability. 

Setting up Meraki SD-WAN isn't difficult, but it isn't simple. It was easy for me because I have worked with other SD-WAN solutions. 

Cisco Meraki firewalls have a 10-year license, but there is a three-year license for other equipment.  

I rate Meraki SD-WAN nine out of 10. Cisco Meraki SD-WAN works better than other solutions. I recommend using Cisco Meraki SD-WAN with the Cisco Meraki Dashboard to centralize all your equipment, such as access points, links, switches, etc., in one console.