Cisco Meraki MX Reviews

We use Meraki MX firewalls with Cisco. Some features must go through Cisco to implement. What the application needs is not included in Meraki. 

I use Cisco to access a portal and they provide the features. Then we implement it in Meraki.

It's the vision of the company through the managing directors to use Meraki as a solution for switches. I suggested using the firewall or a private solution like FortiGate.

FortiGate is cheaper than Meraki. Even the license renewal is less than Meraki.

The features we have found most valuable are the firewall and the monitoring tools.

This product has room for improvement. The main features not included with the firewall is the virtual domain. With Meraki, the interface for the virtual domain could be improved.

The virtual domain is a concurrent session. The concurrent session is limited in Meraki, like FortiGate. In MX100, it's around 200 to 25,000 concurrent sessions.

In the same model with FortiGate, it's around five million concurrent sessions. It's very important to improve in Meraki.

In my view, it is very important that the number of concurrent sessions is increased.

It's stable, but there are also some features not included in Meraki.

I'm using it. It's very good. One person is required for the administration only.

The solution's technical support is good. I would rate it 8/10.

I was using Cisco and FortiGate.

The initial setup is simple. Our deployment took around 30 minutes.

I did the setup by myself. Sometimes I referred back to the integrator for support if I need to for a specific tool or policy.

Our license for the Meraki MX firewall is on an annual basis.

I am not switching to Meraki. I am combining. I'm combining to be consistent with FortiGate as it has a more powerful graph. If I do not renew the license in Meraki, the box sets would be stopped. 

In FortiGate, I can have up to one month or two months to renew. The box is working locally. It's not important to the internet service to get registered. But the box is fully licensed.

I was with Cisco but it's very expensive.

For this solution, Meraki is still more expensive than FortiGate. The FortiGate license is still less than the Meraki license. 

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate Meraki MX firewalls a 7. If they were to add the configuration tools, then it would be much higher.

We made a big change recently in the company. The company didn't have a firewall. We suggested putting Meraki products in the company.

One improvement from Meraki is security. It improves security in our network. We don't have any problems with receiving intrusion alerts now.

When you try to create an IP or when you have an alert about when a website is banned, these features are helpful. 

What I would like to see in the next version is to have more interfaces for WAN links. 

For example, if we have three providers, we can't connect to Meraki because it has only two WAN ports.

I would like to have on Meraki more WAN ports, i.e. one data internet port for two lines.

The stability of this solution is very good. You can handle everything. The Meraki MX Firewall is very easy for us to use.

The scalability of Meraki is fine. It's for me for IT, and then another person also uses it. We are two people. If something happens that we don't know how to handle, we ask for the help of the company's tech support team.

Dataways is the integrator that we bought it from to increase scalability. The limit is 48 users with shares of the Meraki for 48 ports.

In the future, we are going to increase security and put in another Meraki.

Technical support is good. It's a firewall company for medium-to-small companies. It's a little bit expensive. In order to work with Meraki support, you have to buy permission.

Buying a contract for support is three years plus some money. Usually, one or two people is enough to monitor it.

We didn't have a firewall at all previously.

The initial setup of the Meraki firewall was straightforward. Deployment took a few days. 

We bought Meraki from a Greek company called Dataways. They made an initial configuration of the Meraki device.

We were evaluating between FortiGate firewalls and Meraki. Finally, we chose Meraki. But FortiGate is a very good option.

I recommend anyone look towards the possibilities of firewalls of this caliber with Meraki. 

Research the top firewalls to compare, depending on how many users and the purpose of the need. It is great to have a firewall like Meraki or FortiGate.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Meraki an eight or nine.

The security level of our organization has changed by using Meraki MX Firewalls. We didn't have the UTM before but now we have sandboxing, tray scanning, attack preventions, and monitorization. Our security level has improved. 

The most valuable feature is the cloud solution because it is configurable from anywhere. It is very user-friendly and not hard to learn. 

We feel that Cisco provides smaller features with fewer possibilities versus other solutions out there. 

The basic configuration takes 10-15 minutes which is great. 

Our users find the entire package quite expensive. The price of the application itself is not expensive but if you take a license, it costs more than the application itself. If you get it for five years, it is almost double the price of the application.

We looked at Sophos products and there is something to be said about their ability to build a price out of what your user wants. This is not an option with Meraki. 

It is a good fit for our business needs and our client needs. 

This is an edge firewall in our company. It has the powerful options of ISP, AMP, antivirus, SD-WAN, applications control, and traffic shaping. 

In a week, we can make new policy and view what all our users did.

We appreciate the ISP features: AMP, Antivirus, applications control, and traffic shaping. The dashboard is very intuitive and easy to understand. 

I think for now, it is good. However, we could have more reporting options and the ability to send alarms to the administrator. 

It has good support services.

Our organization had a traditional WAN. We had routers to connect our branches, which was a very complex solution. 

Now, with Cisco Meraki MX84, we have a SD-WAN, and we only need Internet in all our branches. Thus, we have an easy solution to connect new branches and it is very fast.

It is very fast to implement and very easy to configure.

SDWAN and all types of implementations.

Simple to manage.

Real Auto VPN with load balancer without needing a public IP. It is simple and functional.

More detail needed for configuration of the VPN. No peer Meraki.

Meraki lets us control all the traffic data and analyze it. The Traffic Shaping lets us install voice servers and give quality of service. It prevents us from being hacked and delivers information about who and where the attack came from.

• Managed centrally over the web: You can manages all your Meraki devices in a single account.
• Site to Site VPN: The device can establish a VPN connection to multiple sites in a mesh environment in seconds, and without complex VPN knowledge.
• Traffic Shaping: The device lets you decide how you want to use your internet services. Due to the fact that Meraki can accept dual WAN, you can decide the way you balance the data traffic. 
• Content Filtering:  Excellent, and very easy to use. You can establish rules over specific content, what is allowed to be used, and assign them to a single device or a group.
• Intrusion detection and prevention (IDS/IPS): The best feature. It can detect malware, even a virus, and warn you by email about the device that has it. When the Meraki detects that something is wrong, it automatically blocks the connection or the intrusion, delivering a graphic report with all the necessary content.

It would be great if the Meraki devices let us see, in real time, the internet demand on a single device.

The only stability issue is in Content Filtering. Sometimes we need to report these types of issues to Cisco support.

You need to change the device based on information that Cisco provides. If you overload the Meraki throughput, it is time to change the device.

Excellent.

Fortinet. We switched to Meraki because it lets you see what's happening in your LAN and WAN in a graphic and web environment. Our customers are very grateful because we let them log in to the Meraki and let them see their network activity.

You only need to know about firewalls, content filtering, and networking.

It is more expensive than other solutions, but it is a cloud-managed network solution and support is given at the moment you call. That give a very big plus.

The Meraki UTM is excellent when you buy the Advanced Security license. If you buy a different license you lost all the valuable functions.

Fortinet, Barracuda, and other open source solutions.

Using it as an endpoint firewall on different locations. We used different MX devices to setup a VPN from off-site locations to our main office. It is a firewall for dummies. Almost sets itself up.

Minimal fuss. Stable and fast enough. Easy to administer and saves time when you have many smaller locations that you have to manage.

Auto-setup VPN between locations and the simple "cloud-panel" to administer all devices with an elegant overview, all from one place.

It can always improve pricewise regarding throughput.

No.

No.

Have not contacted customer service/technical support yet.

Smaller devices: SonicWall, ZyXel, etc.

We switched to get the Auto VPN function and the brilliant administrator panel, where all devices are accessible from one place.

Initial setup was straightforward and extremely easy.

No need for a vendor team to implement. Used in-house expertise.

Not measured.

You get what you pay for.

With this device, "anybody" can set it up.  Should keep IT man hours to a minimum.

Did not really evaluate other solutions as this was a side project to our "main" firewalls. At the time, we did some research on the Internet and did not really find anything comparable to Meraki.

The solution is simple, fast to set up, and brilliant for its use.

• Users can manage and troubleshoot from anywhere.
• It's easy to set up, configure, and manage.
• It provides superior security.
• Interconnected management unlocks new possibilities.
• Lower TCO (total cost of ownership).

• Easy and simple to deploy for new branch
• Easy and simple to troubleshoot from anywhere
• We are better secured
• Good warranty

It can be improved in many areas, because it has many proprietary models for many different areas.

I have been using this solution since 2009.

Yes, I have encountered some issues in the past.

I usually contact technical support for advice. The technical support team is very good. We can send them an email or call them directly.

Some older solutions which we had before, we converted to this solution and used old technology that was difficult to control.

The initial setup was simple.

Before choosing Meraki MX Firewalls, I had some other options: Fortinet FortiGate and Cisco ASA.