Cisco Meraki MX Reviews

We have migrated all wide area network (WAN) links from the conventional connection to the cloud-managed SD-WAN. 

We have all ranges. We are using the lowest model MX65 and the highest model MX450. We have deployed on-premises and on the cloud because the hardware requires an on-premises placement and then it works on the cloud.

We have more than 1500 users. We have approximately 1500 employees, and we also have guests who are bringing their own devices. Some of the users have got multiple devices, so the number of users increases. When you look at the dashboard, you might find more than 3,000 end-user devices across the group.

Meraki MX has not only simplified our wide area network connectivity operations. It also gave us a very cost-effective solution. As compared to the most expensive MPLS and leased-line circuits, it works on a broadband connection.

It has the most advanced security features, for example, layer 3 and layer 7 firewall capabilities and the end team and IPS protection. It also has IPS, and it has very good functioning of cloning services.

You don't actually have to touch the device. If you have multiple companies in different countries, you don't really require this device to be touched. You can get it delivered directly to any office of a country, and then you can simply put your configuration over the cloud. It's very simplified and easy to manage. 

It gives a very good granular visibility about your network. Earlier, a lot of things were lacking in the network. We were unable to identify where the problem was, but after implementing Meraki MX, we are able to dig down and identify where is the problem. We can easily and quickly identify the sources and the root causes of the issues.

From the improvement perspective, we need more monitoring capabilities. We want to have full-based access visibility, such as, what is happening when something is trying to reach and it is denying. We cannot see some parts of it. 

The integration of active directory with this product is not very fruitful. It has some bugs or lacks in the functionality of active directory integration. We are unable to identify where exactly and whether it has really applied our policy. 

We have been using Meraki MX for more than two years. We deployed this product two years ago.

Stability is there in Meraki MX. The availability is 99%. We have been monitoring the organization for the past two years, and we haven't got any downtime because of Meraki MX. It is either because of the ISP link being down because of non-payment or maybe some issue with ISP link or power outage. We haven't got any problem with Meraki MX itself. 

Their technical support is satisfactory. I would not say very satisfactory, but it's okay. We are only covered with the support license. 

They are good up to some extent, but because we have been using these devices or this product, sometimes, we know better than their support team. In fact, we had a problem related to active data integration with Meraki MX during the implementation, and the support team was unable to resolve it. We resolved it ourselves. We would expect better support from Meraki MX.

We used the conventional Cisco routers.

The initial setup was straightforward. Before deploying Meraki MX, we did a POC for three months, and this POC was successful. In fact, we were given only 60 days, but we took over 90 days to do a complete assessment to see whether this fulfills our needs. When we were sure that this is the right solution for us, we deployed it across the group.

Initially, we required an integrator. There was a vendor who deployed this service, but after the first-time implementation, it was very easy because it's a very quick thing to do. We did not require any assistance from any of the vendors. 

We have got in-house resources. When we get a new device, we don't require any implementation or installation support. We do it ourselves. It's very simple. We've been doing this deployment across the group. Initially, we had about 30 sites. Now, we have 40 sites, and the number of sites is increasing.  

The license cost depends on the box. We acquired a different product line. We are dealing with MX appliance now, that is, MX6, MX54, MX100, MX250, MX450. Every box has got an identity, and it has got its own specification. Every box has got a different license fee.

We deployed Meraki MX in UAE when it was not a mature product. We took a risk, but we were successful. We saved a huge amount of money after implementing and removing all the MPLS and leased lines. We got a broadband connection because Meraki MX could work on a broadband connection. We have drastically saved a very good amount of money, which was one of the successful things apart from the successful solution.

From the IT perspective, people are more relying on the cloud for cloud hosting. Instead of having the data center on-premises or hybrid, people are moving towards cloud hosting. The integration with cloud managed services is there. We have some services hosted on Azure. We also have some services hosted on Amazon. We have a plugin with the cloud manager, Meraki MX. It has VMS features available so that we can have the security and our own private cloud connected to Amazon, Azure, or any cloud services, which is a future proof solution.

I would, of course, recommend Meraki MX. Everyone should have this cloud management solution. We never had any problems after the implementation. This solution also gave us the confidence to deploy across the group. If we had experienced, for example, sluggishness, slowness, or some unreliability, we would have not continued deploying it. Based on this, I would strongly recommend that any company in the world can deploy this product without any hesitation or doubt. It's very reliable. 

They are continuously updating the firmware and resolving the issues. They're always there to help you out. So, we should not be worried about this product. I would highly recommend that the Meraki MX appliance should be deployed.

I would rate Meraki MX an eight out of ten. It has got pros and cons, but the pros are more.

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. 

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.

We are a solution provider and Meraki is one of the firewall products that we implement for our customers.

Meraki is very easy to set up. It has a cloud-based setup where you log into a portal and it communicates with your device.

You can't set up complicated firewall rules, such as the ones that can be handled by Sophos. Sometimes you need to contact Meraki Cisco support for extra setup because as a normal user or administrator, you can't do it.

If you use the VPN to link Meraki with your onsite domain with Active Directory then it doesn't work properly. It will work for one or two weeks, then it will stop. They need to improve the link between Meraki and Active Directory.

When the internet connection is lost, you are not able to change any of the firewall rules because you cannot connect to the portal. This is unlike Sophos, where you can log on to it physically and change the rules.

It would be good if they allowed you to implement the certificate. At the moment, you can link Meraki with the self-signed certificate in your domain, but you cannot set up the active service VPN with Meraki on a certificate.

I have been working with Meraki MX for five years.

Stability is not a problem, although we did one time have a Meraki device that was dead on arrival.

The technical support people from Meraki are brilliant. When you call, you reach them quickly and it's like you are talking with second-line support. By comparison, with Sophos, it's not always like that. The people from Meraki really try.

We sell the Sophos UTM solution to protect some of our customers. I am a certified Sophos architect and it is easier to set up than Meraki.

We are also resellers of FortiGate.

When it comes to reading the logs of other devices, it is much easier with Meraki, FortiGate, or even the Sophos XG firewall.

At the moment, all of the firewalls on the market are doing the same thing. Once you buy the license, it will cover everything.

I have never had a problem setting up a Meraki device, other than one time when the unit was dead on arrival. Once they are set up, they work fine.

The suitability of this product depends on the customer's needs. If they don't need really complicated firewall rules, yet want to protect the network and want really good web filtering, then I recommend using Meraki. If on the other hand, they have a really complicated setup and want better filtering, then Sophos is the better option.

Also, if you have your own web server or mail server on-site, then I recommend Sophos. If instead, you have a normal office network with mail stored in the cloud, then I recommend Meraki.

Overall, this is a good product but it does have some limitations. Sophos UTM gives you more options, for example.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our company and clients use this solution. Our clients range in size from small, medium, and large organizations. Within our company, there are roughly 50 people using this solution. 

I love the simplicity of Meraki MX — specifically, the simplicity of the dashboard.

Currently, I don't see any big areas for improvement; although, It lacks some switching features. For instance, when you use MX to link the firewall to a stack, you cannot use LACP.  You cannot use switching behaviors as you see on the Meraki switch. This would be a really cool feature to have — real switching features on Meraki MX.

I have been using Meraki MX for five years.

Meraki MX is very stable. We haven't experienced any issues relating to stability. It's also very scalable, too.

We are in the first line of support, so we use the support differently than traditional customers — they are good.

Yes. We used Cisco, Palo Alto, a bit of Fortinet, and others. Currently, we only provide Meraki and Meraki-related devices.

The price could be lower, but compared to the TCO of other products, it's not really that expensive. When we sell it to customers, the first fee of the quote is often a bit odd; however, consider the small number of resources needed to manage it, there is an advantage to using Meraki MX.

You need to be ready to change your mindset of classical firewalls. Meraki is really more powerful with the full stack, which is the real purpose of this solution.

The real advantage with Meraki is the interaction between different prototypes, like Xpoint which is Amex — this is a game-changer. It's great when you have the full stack and you can play with the different settings and interact between Meraki devices.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Meraki MX a rating of eight.

We are using it for retail and on building sites in combination with the 4G system. We are using the latest version of this solution.

It is easy to manage, which is one of the most important things for us. It is also flexible, stable, and scalable.

The whole Cisco Meraki range requires easier access for cameras. For a security center, it would be helpful to have easier access to cameras through the portal. Its licensing cost could also be better.

I have been selling this solution for five years.

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have a lot of customers for this solution. In terms of the number of users, there are about 200,000 users.

Their technical support is very good.

It is easy to install. It took us one hour to deploy it.

You need a consultant or integrator only when you have a complex installation. We are an integrator and one of the larger resellers of Meraki. We have about 50 people, and we also have a 24/7 service desk.

Its licensing cost could be better.

I would absolutely recommend this solution. We will keep on selling this solution. 

I would rate Meraki MX a nine out of ten.

The primary reason we implemented this product is as a gateway router. That is the first functionality that we sought out for. It also has all of these built-in intrusion detection and malware protection firewall features. So, we are also using it for the firewall capability that is built into it.

The whole selling point for this product is that it's cloud-managed.

They have very good technical support and I have relied heavily on them.

The ports can be VLAN separated, so we use that feature, or we used it in the past.

It would be nice if the different services, including the SIEM SOC and endpoint detection and response (EDR) were integrated into one, so that I don't have to go to different vendors for different services. Ideally, I would like to have one place to shop.

This is a stable product.

They have very good technical support.

We also have a Barracuda.

I worked with the previous, older router than was in the company and it was command-line driven. That was terrible, so I find that the Cisco Merki is a great improvement. Overall, I'm really happy with it, although I cannot compare it to any others.

My understanding is that all of the products have evolved from a command-line interface to being web-based and cloud-managed.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

I deployed this product, although I relied a lot on Cisco support when I set it up.

This is a nice device, although I find that when you speak with professionals about it, they put down these combined devices that have many different functionalities. They say that it is not like a bonafide firewall, the same way that they say the Barracuda IPS is not as good as a dedicated one. I wouldn't be able to tell you whether it's good or it's better unless something really bad happens. I don't know, for example, whether it works great or it's that we haven't been attacked yet.

We have a SIEM SOC managed service and as part of it, they rely on the logs that the Meraki generates, so it can't be that bad of a product.

Overall, this is a very nice product.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Meraki MX offers advanced filtration options, plus it behaves like a router and a firewall at the same time.

There is room for improvement relating to third-party VPNs.

You can only have one tunnel in the whole infrastructure — one tunnel with one device. I cannot have multiple terminals running from each of the devices to the same third-party.

I have been dealing with Meraki MX for nearly five years.

Meraki MX is both scalable and stable.

The technical support is quite good — very fast.

The initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment took roughly two hours, max.

If you are a small scale company looking for an SD-Wan solution, plus UTM box-type combination, then Meraki is the best option — based on the price and the features available.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Meraki MX a rating of nine.

We use it for UTM devices.

We have roughly 200 users, using this solution.

We prefer UTM solutions.

As far as what needs to be improved — nothing really comes to mind. It does what we need it to do.

I have been using Meraki MX for more than five years.

Both the scalability and the scalability are great with Meraki MX.

The initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment takes less than one day.

If you're thinking about implementing Meraki MX, make sure to plan it properly. Planning takes time which gives you the ability to make sure it's scaled properly, without too much complexity.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine — nothing is perfect.

Within our company, there are a lot of remote access users. We also have a couple of offices and some international users as well.

In general, Meraki MX is easy to work with. 

I have been using Meraki MX for two years.

Meraki MX is both scalable and stable.

I really didn't experience any areas of complexity. The most complex part of the initial setup was setting up a conference camera. We host a lot of international board meetings that require video calling. 

The pricing could always be improved — especially with the shape the economy is in at the moment.

I don't have much advice to offer — everybody has to do their due diligence.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Meraki MX a rating of eight.