Meraki MS Switches Reviews

The primary use cases of Meraki MS Switches focus on the SMB market, starting from boutique size to mid-level enterprise, not very large enterprises. However, with Meraki, which is now part of Cisco, they are offering unified hardware. All Catalyst stack also supports Meraki dashboard, and the unified hardware can be recommended for enterprise size deployments as well. Meraki dashboard alone completely covers the SMB market. If enterprise grade or rugged series customers are looking for solutions, I can strongly recommend the Catalyst stack. If customers have multiple branches and want a cloud management option, I can recommend Meraki stack.

The features I find most valuable in Meraki MS Switches include cloud management, which is the primary advantage. The solution always comes with zero-touch provisioning and all switching functionalities, starting from Layer 2 switching and Layer 3 features. With respect to configuration, it supports the same protocols as Catalyst and competitors such as HPE, Aruba, and Juniper. Layer 2 and Layer 3 protocols are common across these platforms.

The special use case and advance for Meraki is that they are adding AI features to the Meraki dashboard itself with AI capabilities integrated with Cisco Canvas. I have not fully evaluated this, but we have heard about Cisco AI capabilities being built into Catalyst Center for the enterprise stack. Meraki also supports AI capabilities in the dashboard. On the operational support side, TAC assignment and automation capabilities help handle support processes. These add-on features with Meraki are significant advantages.

In terms of improvements for Meraki MS Switches, pricing is one area that could be enhanced. On the support front, the limited lifetime warranty is a concern. Aruba offers limited lifetime warranty, whereas Cisco requires a minimum license to function for hardware support or technical support. I think Cisco could improve by bundling technical support and hardware support together with the license. This approach is currently only applicable for EA customers. Standard license customers have to take additional hardware support as a separate SKU. I believe that bundling technical and hardware support with the cloud subscription itself would help customers choose a Meraki option.

To make Meraki MS Switches closer to a rating of ten, Cisco could take additional features on the AI front. I am uncertain whether they will offer AI features at no cost. Self-healing networks is a new term that enterprises are looking forward to. All OEM management platforms now feature auto-remediation and auto-fixing capabilities. The issue is that even if AI is offered without cost, customers cannot get the benefits if they cannot afford the pricing. Enterprise customers are looking to optimize operational effort and operational capabilities. They use multiple tools apart from the OEM native dashboard, including the Cisco Meraki dashboard and Catalyst dashboard. However, they still want to have end-to-end visibility. For end-to-end visibility, they can go for Digital Twin capabilities through platforms such as IP Fabric, ManageEngine, SolarWinds, and Forward Networks. There are many NMS platforms that can be integrated, allowing them to manage complete operations. Cisco could add some additional capabilities into the same OEM dashboard so that customers can benefit from improved operational management.

I have been dealing with Meraki MS Switches for almost five years.

To assess the stability and reliability of Meraki MS Switches, I am part of Infosys, and we can assess a customer during the assessment phase. We use many tools to assess the complete infrastructure. On the reliability front, the switches perform well. However, on the configuration and board level, I do not have detailed information. Since I have not handled the device in real configuration scenarios, I cannot speak to the core processing unit performance or other technical details. I have never gotten hands-on with configuring these devices or testing the performance of the switch, the heat it sustains, or how it performs in harsh infrastructure environments. Meraki switches are all indoor switches. I do not think they have ruggedized switches in their lineup. For infrastructure such as factories, small factories, or warehouses that have temperatures higher than normal in-house office temperatures, I have some doubt about how well the switches would sustain those conditions. I would need to check with the delivery and operations people handling the support. Otherwise, for indoor environments, Meraki switches have worked perfectly in terms of reliability and sustainability.

The scalability of Meraki MS Switches depends on customer needs. A customer can start from a small-scale industry such as a retail shop with ten locations and grow to hundreds or thousands. Meraki supports this capability through its cloud infrastructure. I am not certain of the exact number of supported devices, but I believe you can add unlimited devices. Multiple site options are available, allowing customers to create region-wise site counts. If a customer scales from one region to another, they can easily add locations into the same dashboard while classifying multiple regions, sites, and countries. These options are available within the Meraki dashboard.

I would rate the technical support for Cisco Meraki MS Switches as seven to eight out of ten.

Regarding improvements for Meraki MS Switches, the support depends on what support customers purchase. By default, Meraki switches come with NBD or limited lifetime warranty coverage. The limited lifetime warranty has some SLA time, though there is no defined SLA for limited lifetime warranty switches. Customers need to purchase specific support if they require next business day support, same day on-site support, or same day four-hour response support. If customers pay for additional support, the service is good. However, by default, support relies on product availability from a warehouse or other locations, which can take time. If a customer takes a switch by default with limited lifetime warranty and there is a hardware failure or power module failure, they can raise a TAC with Cisco. Cisco will begin the shipment process, validate the issue first, collect logs, and then ask for the product to be shipped. If the product is available, the customer can receive it immediately. If not available, it takes time. Limited lifetime warranty SKUs take time depending on product availability, which is why I rated the support as seven. Otherwise, customers must pay additional cost for support. The limited lifetime warranty process is the same across all OEMs and depends on their product availability for shipment. If Cisco could offer even limited lifetime warranty SKUs with either next business day support or a defined SLA for customers, it would give customers confidence in choosing Meraki switches.

The deployment process of Meraki MS Switches is straightforward and easy to deploy. The deployment includes zero-touch deployment, requiring no expertise to manage switches or access the dashboard. An entry-level IT engineer or Level 1 engineer can go to the site, unbox Meraki Switches, and simply plug and play if cloud reachability is available, meaning internet connectivity without any policy blocking from the branch firewall. The switches then directly sync with the cloud using the serial number or barcode associated with the appliances. They can easily be added into the dashboard. This zero-touch deployment capability is one of the additional valuable features.

I think the pricing of Meraki MS Switches is always on the higher side. As a consultant, I can say we convince customers that there is demand in chipsets, which is why OEMs are raising their prices. The list price is defined by the OEM, and I do not know the manufacturing cost. However, if an OEM mentions a list price of one thousand dollars and provides an eighty percent discount, the cost becomes two hundred dollars for me as a partner. I can then add my consulting charges and sell it to a customer for two hundred fifty to three hundred fifty dollars. The margin defined by Cisco is two hundred dollars. I do not know what the product manufacturing cost is. It could be fifty dollars. The manufacturer could potentially have one hundred percent margin within the selling price. The list price standardization is defined by the OEM, so compared to other OEMs, Cisco pricing is always on the higher side. However, on a deal-by-deal basis, I can get discounts from account managers. By default, when comparing with other OEMs, Cisco pricing is always on the higher side.

Regarding the licensing model for Meraki MS Switches, Cisco offers a normal license and EA (Enterprise Agreement). Enterprise Agreement has several advantages over standard licensing. The choice depends on the customer use case. An enterprise EA obviously has higher discounts. However, there are terms and conditions regarding the quantity a customer plans to purchase to have an EA contract and what business they will conduct with Cisco in the future. Many people do not know their scale and do not commit to an Enterprise Agreement. Very large enterprises or large SMB customers with multiple branches, sites, and regions can sign an Enterprise Agreement to manage all SKUs and receive price benefits. Small startups do not know about their growth, so they cannot afford an Enterprise Agreement. They can take it, but they must follow contract terms and conditions. In those areas, they have to compromise if they are going for normal enterprise and advanced licenses compared to the enterprise contract EA agreement.

I am not certain about the end-to-end visibility offered by Cisco since I did not fully understand that question. Overall, I would rate Meraki MS Switches as a seven out of ten.

Most of our clients operate in a hybrid environment, with some, such as banks and financial organizations, opting for purely on-site solutions without cloud involvement.

For customers, one of the main reasons for choosing Meraki MS Switches is that they are more economical than Cisco, while another reason is that they are fully managed, allowing centralized management via the web, which is appealing to many customers, though not necessarily for telco network operations. Having a dashboard available via the web is very important because customers can manage their entire environment across different locations with a single dashboard. Therefore, the principal reasons for adopting Meraki MS Switches are their economic benefits and the simplicity of management.

While very high-end Cisco devices have many more features, for a plant that is not overly complicated or for medium-sized customers, Meraki MS Switches provide a very good solution that is also more economical than Cisco.

Tools for remote packet capture, port cycling, and cable testing are very important for our incident resolution workflow. We typically activate all security features on Meraki MS Switches, and packet capture becomes crucial during issues such as broadcast storms and anomalous traffic. Meraki packet capture functionality is quite similar to the original Cisco packet capture, and we utilize it extensively.

It is essential to send SNMP messages to a log server for logging purposes, and we also dispatch alert messages to our ticketing systems. This integration allows us to manage upgrades and configurations efficiently; for instance, when a customer requests a new VLAN configuration, we handle it through the ticketing system, which then processes the VLAN change across all relevant Meraki MS Switches. This process greatly varies based on customer confidence in the system.

AI analytics, anomaly detection, and proactive switch telemetry are very important in Meraki. We develop dedicated AI applications to manage networks and security devices. AI is particularly useful for analyzing traffic and other network situations. While we have utilized AI for configuring some features, these are our proprietary models developed and hosted in our data center, not public models.

We are comfortable using both traditional CLI configurations and cloud-managed Meraki MS Switches, though the choice often depends on the customer's preferences. Some customers prefer to avoid cloud management, so we handle all devices solely with our management system or by sending on-site technicians. Other customers are agreeable to cloud management, which benefits some devices. However, for layer three switches where specific settings such as route maps are needed, on-site configuration continues to be necessary. Cloud management has advantages, such as improved device location identification on the dashboard.

While we can suggest Meraki, ultimately, the customer decides. If they prefer Cisco, Fortinet, or another option, we can accommodate their choice. For many customers, Meraki is a suitable option, but the final decision falls to them.

I recognize there are features that could enhance Meraki, although I might not be fully versed on them. My colleagues might have more insights about what features could be very useful.

We started working with Meraki MS Switches around 2010, right before the Cisco acquisition.

In terms of scalability, it is indeed possible to scale, but this is heavily dependent on the customer. For large clients such as Stellantis, a fully Meraki solution might be inadequate since they operate around 200 plants and have 1,000 commercial divisions, which often leads to hybrid solutions incorporating both Cisco and Meraki—using Meraki for smaller plants and Cisco for more extensive locations such as the Chrysler plants.

We don't use zero-touch provisioning because we prefer to configure devices directly on-site as we find it more effective. We have two modes of configuring devices: one is via manual configuration through the web, and the other is directly connecting to the device on-site, but we always use manual configuration rather than automation. This method builds our confidence during device delivery and installation.

Meraki is straightforward and very easy to deploy, making our installation process smooth.

A good return on investment is achievable with Meraki MS Switches, but when a competitor offers a much lower price, customers might choose that alternative, which might yield a better ROI situation. From a theoretical standpoint, investing in Meraki is justified, but in specific markets such as Italy, where investments of 100 for Meraki versus 80 for Aruba exist, ROI comparisons can be skewed.

Meraki pricing is generally reasonable, but it is affected by the partner selling the device. We have recommended Meraki as an optimal solution, but sometimes the partner's pricing may favor alternatives, as seen when Meraki quote is 100 and Aruba's is 80, which leads to Aruba winning the deal from our perspective.

Meraki MS Switches are competitive, but so are options such as Aruba. The most important factor often is price because there are customers who want specific brands such as Cisco and will go for Cisco without hesitation, and others who prioritize finding value. For many cases, we may suggest Meraki, but in tight bidding situations where price is a priority, Aruba may secure the deal. Pricing dynamics differ in different regions; in Italy, price tends to lead decisions.

I rate my overall experience and knowledge of Meraki MS Switches as an eight or nine out of ten.

Meraki MS Switches are primarily used in office spaces and organizational offices for networking within the office environment.

Meraki MS Switches free up the networking team for other projects and additional tasks that would otherwise consume their time. Building a seamless process around the switches definitely helps benefit the organization overall because it frees up high value employees.

The shift from traditional CLI based switch configuration to cloud managed Meraki MS Switches has been seamless. Many of the companies I've worked for or clients that have adopted Meraki have found that the process is so seamless and user-friendly for any level of technician to be able to jump in and find value. CLI level switching was more challenging and required deeper knowledge, whereas Meraki makes it accessible to everyone.

The overall user interface and experience of Meraki MS Switches stands out to me. Both experienced and inexperienced network engineers can jump in with relative ease to find what they need, and the help and guidance built within the tool is friendly for all engineers regardless of their experience level. Even IT technicians who aren't necessarily network engineers can jump in and resolve low-level issues.

The overall learning curve is quite easy for even inexperienced people with the product to jump in and start using it straight away and start troubleshooting and supporting users through it immediately. At just an information level, users can jump in and gather a lot of information without touching the tool and making any changes. The user interface compared to 10 or 15 years ago when needing to SSH into or console into a network switch and know all the commands to gather information is vastly improved. These days it is seamless and the entry level is quite low for people.

Meraki MS Switches remote packet capture has played a role in my incident resolution workflow. There have been cases where I've had to use packet capture, particularly if users aren't able to reach a specific site, service, or external resource. Packet capture really helps with discovering what's going on internally and the overall troubleshooting process of what is happening from end to end. It has helped internally and also with Wi-Fi issues. I've had a lot of sites where there were Wi-Fi issues and using packet capture to see if there was any lost packets or dropped packets and what might be happening there if users are in a particular area has been helpful. Combining that with the Wi-Fi troubleshooting tools that were available proved helpful.

Nothing really stands out as a pain point in recent times. There have been a couple of occasions where finding specific information requires a bit of digging around. A search function would be really helpful to find the information I'm looking for.

On MX firewalls, when looking at the ports and the devices connected to the ports, the information isn't the same as at the switch level. Being able to somehow gather that information and present it to the user in the same way Meraki MS Switches present a lot of information about what's connected to each port would be an improvement. The port details on firewalls aren't as clear, detailed, or easy to find. Either this information doesn't exist, it's not possible, or it's hidden too well.

There's always room for improvement. The main issue goes back to information finding. All the information is there and can be relatively easy to find, but there are moments where it's unclear how to locate it. Having things separated where Webex services are in a completely different portal and networking services including MX switches, access points, and firewalls are in one dashboard and view makes sense but is also inconvenient. Having the Vision portal for all CCTV content in yet another location means having to jump between different platforms to troubleshoot and find solutions. Better integration between all those platforms would be beneficial.

I have been using Meraki MX products for about six years.

I feel there are no issues with scalability. Meraki MS Switches is one of the great things in that it doesn't matter how big or small an organization is. The cloud dashboard and cloud experience scales with it and is really easy to read and use, no matter the size of the business or the network. It is a one solution fits all solution with the cloud platform.

I have worked directly with customer support and some of the network team overseas who didn't even need to provide support were very kind and supportive in stepping in to give me advice on network projects. I've always found that quite helpful. It's really easy to find somebody to have a conversation with or valued technical knowledge internally within the Cisco teams that is willing to sit on a call any day of the week and provide guidance and support. That is a great value add, though perhaps less so clients realizing that it is available to them and to us.

Before Meraki MS Switches, in some of our sites, we were using Fortinets, Ubiquiti products, and Cisco refurbished old school gear that required console access and knowledge of how to program and code them. We had a quite a range of products.

The zero touch provisioning and configuration sync with an order number makes it so easy to set up. I can jump in and the system finds all the switches, cameras, and access points that have been purchased and configures them and attaches them to the client's profile. Anybody can do that, and I would never expect a network engineer to even do it as it's almost a waste of their time.

The pricing of the hardware for Meraki MS Switches is about standard and I think it's quite fair pricing. The licensing is one of the more pain points when trying to convince a client to adopt this technology. I really have to lean on the reliability, the future support, and how easy it makes the support that I'm providing to them. It's not something they might realize, but it's the seamlessness that it introduces into supporting clients. I have to lean on that quite hard to convince them to pay what it costs for the licenses every five years or whatever they've signed up for. That is a hill that I often need to climb compared to some competitors, again, like the Ubiquitis.

I'm quite happy with what I've got. There have been occasions where conversations have come up around whether Ubiquiti is a good solution depending on the size of the business and their budget, and whether they are reliable enough. It has come up in conversations as another alternative option depending on the client's budget, but generally I'm pretty happy with Meraki MS Switches and try to push all my clients to Meraki MS Switches.

On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being worst and 10 being best, I would rate Meraki MS Switches an 8. A solid 8.

My main use case for Meraki MS Switches is Layer 2 with Power over Ethernet connections. I use Power over Ethernet daily to power Mitel phones and Meraki wireless access points. Meraki MS Switches are excellent at running Layer 2, providing Power over Ethernet, and are easy to troubleshoot, highly reliable, easy to configure, and easy to replace.

Meraki MS Switches has impacted our organization positively, creating an efficient environment. They are easy to configure, easy to deploy, and once deployed, easy to troubleshoot.

I have definitely noticed less time troubleshooting due to the visibility of Meraki MS Switches dashboard to examine the switches. Having all the information in one place is a significant benefit.

The best feature of Meraki MS Switches is the visibility to troubleshoot the switch. When I have a problem with the switch, I have visibility inside Meraki MS Switches dashboard to examine the switch, the ports, the condition of the port, the traffic on the ports, and the condition of the switch. I can determine whether it is healthy or not.

I use Meraki MS Switches dashboard daily to troubleshoot problems. If I know the dashboard thoroughly, I can troubleshoot the problem within a couple of minutes because I have full visibility of my network.

Visibility is the main highlight for me. I have used templates to deploy the switches, so all the switches are standardized on deployment, which helps.

The accuracy and reliability of Meraki MS Switches output is excellent. It tells me what traffic is being moved on that switch, by what user, and by applications. This provides good analytics to troubleshoot and understand what is happening on the switch.

Meraki MS Switches can be improved in a few ways. Currently, they have it down well. I think they need to dig deeper into the network monitoring capabilities and possibly become more advanced in monitoring to trigger alerts to a webhook to possibly a ticketing system.

I gave it an eight because Meraki MS Switches lack what a traditional Cisco Catalyst switch has. Cisco Catalyst switches are more granular in their options, whereas Meraki MS Switches does the job, but it is not as granular as Catalyst or its competitors.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for ten years.

Meraki MS Switches are mostly stable. They need to be rebooted occasionally. I think the firmware is being changed too often, and they are adding too many features too quickly, which could affect the stability of it.

Meraki MS Switches scalability is excellent. I can scale as large as I want.

The customer support is excellent.

I previously used HP Aruba switches and wireless, and I moved to Cisco Meraki for easy deployment across one hundred plus sites, primarily to use the SD-WAN feature, easy to deploy, and have visibility over all the sites under one dashboard.

Meraki is a clear winner.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Meraki MS Switches an eight.

My advice to others looking into using Meraki MS Switches is to put everything on a template if possible. Keep standardization across the platform on the firewalls, switches, and wireless access points. If possible, run the whole stack and run everything Meraki. It is all made to work together.

We have some Cisco products, although right now they are not part of our core integration, but we use all the Cisco at our branches mainly.

We have routers and switches mainly. We have some Catalyst, we have some Meraki, and Catalyst and Meraki. And then of course, the router series, the 2941.

Meraki MS Switches came in because it was just a donation from some partner. That's when we started using them, but initially, we were not using them. It has been one year since we started using Meraki MS Switches.

Meraki MS Switches are access switches.

The most core feature is that cloud configuration and access.

Unlike the other switches which are on the infrastructure where you have to first go through VPN to access whatever switches you want, you can easily access these from wherever you are, as long as you have internet. The ease to manage is a significant advantage.

Any Cisco product that we have on our network, on our WAN, we can easily tag it as long as you have done the basic configuration. It is easily accessible and identifiable.

We have been using this for over 10 years.

Cisco is a very stable platform. Even though we haven't upgraded firmware and all that for a long time, it can still perform. Unlike the other switches in the infrastructure where you find you have to constantly upgrade, they will warn you about vulnerability and all those. When you're scanning, it will tell you that there's a lot. For Cisco, once there's a release of firmware and all that, it's always very stable for a period of time.

We have not replaced Cisco switches, apart from issues to do with product or power failure and maybe other reasons. We have not replaced them quite often compared to these other products. They are quite resilient.

It is easily scalable. You can easily expand it or change and upgrade without any problem.

The support is good. Though, as I mentioned earlier, you have to pay for it, which is a little bit costly as compared to the other products.

We previously used XTREME, Huawei, and all that.

The functionality is more or less the same, but when you look at the end-of-life for the product, you find that Cisco has a little bit extended end-of-life cycle compared to the others.

It was quite tricky for Meraki MS Switches because of that whole setup of theirs. But eventually with the available documentation, we found our way around it. It's not as direct as the old Cisco products.

We work with a partner.

We have some very old products which are out of support. The cost of the support and maintenance bundle is quite costly for Cisco. The initial acquisition of the product itself is quite costly, and then the support where you have to keep them under warranty, it's quite costly, honestly.

I've worked with Cisco for quite some time now, so I don't really find that as an issue.

For the functionality that we want right now, it is normally sufficient. I wouldn't complain honestly about the functionality that it offers.

Meraki MS Switches were not bought by us; it was just a donation, but I can see the performance and whatever is quite good. We haven't actually invested in them. That's why I wouldn't know and wouldn't say anything about the cost and all that.

The overall rating for this review is 8.

All the products we deliver are mostly Cisco products, primarily infrastructure including routers, switches, firewalls, and wireless equipment. Some customers purchase ACI solutions from us.

SD-WAN is not prevalent in our business because the provider typically supplies the SD-WAN solution to the customer.

Switches are our main focus, particularly the Catalyst line. We have some projects where we propose Meraki MS Switches to customers.

Cloud management is the most valuable feature in Meraki MS Switches.

The ease of deployment and management stands out, along with the fact that customers do not need to purchase additional network management solutions. They can access the portal and perform configuration tasks themselves. The replacement process is also very straightforward.

Currently, there is no need for many more features or functions on Meraki MS Switches. Customers purchase the infrastructure and Meraki MS Switches are combined with wireless solutions that come together as a service.

Feature additions are not critical because our customers typically purchase Meraki MS Switches for POP sites and small branches rather than enterprise deployments.

I would like to see AIOps as a feature in Meraki MS Switches in the future.

Visibility and root cause identification would be valuable when customers encounter performance issues. Wireless issues are particularly complicated due to coverage and performance concerns. Shorter troubleshooting time would be beneficial.

Cisco is migrating Catalyst Center to be managed by Meraki as well, which is part of the solution today. However, the features and functions are not identical. Customers may choose to install Catalyst Center instead of Meraki cloud due to missing features or functions.

I have known about Meraki MS Switches for more than five years. Today, many customers request Meraki MS Switches because of the cost and service management considerations. Last year, Meraki became popular again in Thailand.

SD-WAN is not prevalent because the provider typically supplies the SD-WAN solution to the customer.

I rate the technical support for Cisco Meraki as excellent, giving it a perfect score.

From the customer perspective, Cisco products are rated very high. This is because their engineers have experience with and strong knowledge of Cisco products.

Cloud management is now available on small switches without subscription requirements from other vendors, though Cisco offers this differently. That brand is very small and not intended for enterprise use.

Hybrid deployment would be valuable for Meraki MS Switches to provide better flexibility when some switches lack internet connectivity.

Synchronization to the cloud for hybrid deployment requires a proxy, which may present security concerns as it could be seen as a backdoor to the system. Meraki MS Switches may be positioned behind the firewall in a secure zone where customers do not want any device accessing the internet directly. Local access options for customers with the same functionality as cloud management would be beneficial without requiring direct internet access for the switches. In serious network environments, customers have significant concerns about this requirement.

I have heard from customers that they have concerns about transitioning to Meraki MS Switches because it requires cloud access exclusively. I rate this review as 7 out of 10.

I am still using Ruckus and Cisco products. I work with Cisco Meraki basically. We are using Cisco products, including Cisco Meraki MR access points and MS switches. I use MS switches and Cisco MR access points. I work with Cisco as a partner.

The biggest advantage of Meraki MS Switches is that there is no CLI, making configuration very easy as it is just plug and play.

The best features for me include the new AI Insights installed and the good troubleshooting purposes for Meraki.

Cisco is more advanced than Aruba.

The operational efficiency of Cisco in a critical IT environment is good, as Cisco is the best option, while for non-critical environments, other switches can be considered.

The technical support from Cisco is good, but we have to take a contract ID for support, which can be a bit expensive compared to other vendors.

We have been using MS switches for more than five years.

There is zero downtime; Meraki MS Switches are reliable and stable.

We can extend MS switches and have multiple plants using the same solution. For coming new projects, we are using Meraki and Cisco switches.

I would give the support a rating of eight to ten.

I have worked with Aruba and other switches.

I did not face any challenges when deploying it. The setup is straightforward.

Meraki MS Switches are somewhat expensive.

The difference I see is that Cisco is user-friendly and can be used easily, while other vendors require some command.

If we talk about hybrid and distributed enterprise networks, there are certainly challenges that Cisco helps to resolve. End-to-end visibility affects troubleshooting capability. I would rate this review a nine overall.

I have experience with Cisco products as I implement a lot of them. For example, I implemented switches and access points when I worked for infrastructure in a motorcycle company, and I implemented 199 wireless Cisco access points for a hospital.

I also implemented Cisco Meraki MX and Meraki VMX when I worked for NS BlueScope. For the office zone and IT zone, we separated the IT and OT segments. I implemented Meraki for IT, but we used Cisco for OT.

I am still working with both products. I work with Meraki for the IT side, but I also use Cisco access points for the OT side.

I do implement Meraki switches because I work as an infrastructure security engineer. When I worked for NS BlueScope, I made a change because almost all of the switch office zone reached end of service for Cisco switches. Then I changed to Meraki for all IT areas.

From a security view, Meraki MS Switches are easy to patch because normal Cisco switches are very hard to patch or update IOS. With Meraki MS Switches, I can set up auto patching when usable. For example, I can set patching and auto patching at midnight.

I use the Zero-Touch Provisioning feature for security and try to use Zero-Touch for IT security. Zero-Touch Provisioning helps streamline my deployments by ensuring that every system does not trust anybody or anything, requiring identification and authentication while implementing MFA. Every request includes not only external but also internal network traffic, which I have to declare for verification by using authentication.

My assessment of Layer 7 application visibility on my network management strategy indicates that I attach to normally connecting and implementing everything on Layer 7, but sometimes I have to choose lower layers of the seven-layer model.

Network access controls have helped enhance security. I use role-based access control by role-based access permission. I have to implement authorization for permission, and every owner has to allow access. I create policies and steps for requests for access from different departments.

I evaluate the benefit of virtual stacking in managing my network switches by using VLAN for implementing segmentation because many companies have security issues. This is the best practice for separating segmentation for each level. For example, most companies need to separate IT from OT side and implement deep segmentation from OT. I have to separate production to protect security. I use VLAN because micro-segmentation can be very complex and require upgrading hardware. However, it is an easy way to implement segmentation using firewalls for each level for security reasons.

Network cost and sustainability impact my network cost. I have experience implementing greenfield projects. Normally, I design redundant core switches to distribution switches using star mesh and redundant links, sometimes utilizing EtherChannel in Cisco switches for redundancy. For example, I implement EtherChannel from distribution switches to access switches for redundant links for robustness if any link breaks.

Meraki MS Switches are easy to manage, but I believe they are more suitable for use on the IT side because Meraki faces the internet, requiring an open connection through the internet for control. It is not the same as Cisco switches, which operate via command line. I normally use command line for configuration, while Meraki utilizes a cloud-based dashboard that necessitates a constant internet connection for configuration. Therefore, I find Meraki MS Switches more suitable for the IT side.

The improvement needed for Meraki MS Switches is the ability to connect in the worst case when I encounter internet issues. When I cannot connect to the internet and need to configure or connect directly to Cisco switches or access Meraki for changes, I face difficulties.

When Meraki MS Switches can be configured without an internet connection, I think I can use Meraki MS Switches on the OT side.

The only improvement I seek is configuration without an internet connection.

I am still working with both products. I work with Meraki for the IT side, but I also use Cisco access points for the OT side.

I do not have any problems with Meraki MS Switches.

I find the pricing of Meraki MS Switches quite similar to Cisco's prices. I think they are cheaper and better.

I rated Meraki MS Switches an overall score of eight out of ten.

My main use case for Meraki MS Switches is back-end safety and edge connect. Our vendor uses it for connecting across the servers in support of Webex contact center, though I am not familiar with the exact usage details.

Meraki MS Switches remote packet capture, port cycling, and cable testing tools play a role in our incident resolution workflow when handling physical layer alerts. This is managed by the network team through an escalation process that includes them, so monitoring and actioning is handled by that team as a separate incident flow.

The integration of Meraki MS Switches dashboard API with external orchestration or ticketing systems to manage scheduled firmware rollouts and bulk switch port changes is handled by the network team. All of this is managed through our Jira ticketing system, which we use across ourselves and the vendor to plan any updates or changes.

The ease of configuration of Meraki MS Switches has positively impacted my organization by ensuring that communication with us and our vendor has led to quick solutions to any issues that have arisen and improved monitoring for security incidents.

Monitoring is now conducted through the app. Previously, we had to conduct much more data center monitoring and monitoring across the network itself, whereas now using the app, we can have more direct input into it.

The easy configuration of Meraki MS Switches stands out in my environment. I have experienced previous issues, and when we transitioned to this solution, the vendor's configuration was significantly easier than my previous experience.

Meraki MS Switches dashboard is a feature that stands out to me. We have had experience using it before and it has assisted in the easy configuration that I mentioned.

I do not have any thoughts on how Meraki MS Switches can be improved at this stage since we are still reasonably new to it and gathering information as we progress. So far, it has been able to do everything that we needed it to accomplish.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for 12 months.

Meraki MS Switches are stable in my experience.

The scalability of Meraki MS Switches in my experience is good, and we do not foresee any issues with growth for the foreseeable future, even with the expansion that we have planned across the business.

I previously used a different solution before Meraki MS Switches, but I am not certain what it was. It was quite old by the time we removed it and it was not a Cisco-based product from my understanding.

We, as the platform owners for the contact center, do not have a lot of input into that side.

We manage the transition from traditional CLI-based switch configuration and local console architectures to cloud-managed Meraki MS Switches across our operational teams through a cab process, which is an approval board that ensures it goes across every aspect of the business. This ensured that all of the different facets of the business were prepared and ready for any changes that were going to occur. The implementation was handled by a vendor but was deployed into our internal cloud platform.

Meraki MS Switches are deployed in my organization as a private cloud, implemented by one of our vendors. The cloud provider we use for our private cloud deployment is in-house built.

I have seen a return on investment, predominantly from the fact that the system we were using was outdated. Having an updated system has allowed us to continue growth and expansion.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing Meraki MS Switches, as that was handled by our vendor. The vendor ensured that what we were implementing was going to be suitable for the business.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate Meraki MS Switches an eight. I chose eight out of 10 because I do not rate nine or 10 very often. Eight is pretty high up in terms of my personal rating system.

Regarding Meraki MS Switches' AI capabilities, we have examined governance and security across the business with AI features that were being implemented, and it fit every requirement that we needed for the business.

We have had no issues with the accuracy and reliability of output from Meraki MS Switches at this point in time, so it seems reliable.

My advice to others looking into using Meraki MS Switches is that it is a quality product. Ensure that you are knowledgeable in everything you need for implementation. Using a vendor, we have someone that is very knowledgeable in the product, and it is complex as would be expected.

Meraki MS Switches is a web-enabled configuration infrastructure that allows us to monitor and manage our switches across different territories from a central point, which is quite beneficial for our organization.

Meraki MS Switches is well accepted, and it is a product we value in terms of operational efficiency in my IT environment.

The product optimizes the experience in a hybrid or distributed enterprise setup fully.

The end-to-end visibility offered by Cisco is very commendable and quite good.

We are currently reviewing the AI application around Meraki MS Switches conference management and our meeting rooms environment, including video conferencing capabilities. We are looking into that and have yet to make any decision, but that is the next level. We are moving away from a conventional environment to a no-WAN environment, so we are scaling down our on-premises firewall and converging everything. Those are the things we are working on.

Cisco has given us one or two presentations on AI capability, and we are still reviewing.

For now, the current system fits and satisfies my expectations, so for the future, I do not know if there are things I may want, but for now, I cannot think of anything else to add or improve.

I started with my Ghana office as far back as five years ago, and I have migrated some other offices, including the Nigeria office. I have three offices in Nigeria and some other offices, and we are very satisfied with it. It is working well.

Meraki MS Switches is very reliable, very stable, and easy to troubleshoot. We have the dashboard which we built an AI import into to do a summary and notification for us, so it is very seamless. It works very effectively, and we do not have a problem.

Downtime is a normal occurrence in any environment, but the question should be how we manage it when it occurs. Basically, there is no way you can have a seamless environment without any downtime, but most times, the downtime may be hardware-based. Perhaps something happens to one of the nodes or things that are quite easy to detect and change. Recently, we did an upgrade on the wireless access point which we completed over the weekend, and they are all working because we needed to improve their signal level. We accomplished that with the patches provided to us, and it worked very well. The switches are quite reliable.

Meraki MS Switches scaled perfectly with the growing needs of our organization.

In the West market, we have over 3,000 people, and in the East market, we have over 3,000 people, so that is over 6,000 people using it in our company.

Support is very effective; we receive direct support, and the support is excellent. We do not have a problem with that at all.

I give Cisco an 8 out of 10; I cannot give them a 10 because there may be one or two issues, but I think they are better than others.

They are more proactive and very effective, and they handle issues effectively and are very prompt, which is why I am giving them 8 out of 10 because there is some room for improvement when it comes to response time.

They are competent because it is their product; they know the product inside and out, so supporting it should be an easy thing.

I used Cisco switches before Meraki MS Switches.

It is a global recommendation; I work with PwC, and globally, it was recommended that we move to Meraki MS Switches. All those Cisco switches are text-based configuration equipment, so we decided we needed a web-enabled configuration of switches that would allow us to manage our offices in a close-knitted way and achieve better performance. Additionally, Cisco is already pushing Meraki MS Switches, and they are putting more energy into the Meraki technology.

Most of our team members are CCIE certified; they are experts in this field, so they do not have a problem with the deployment.

I am the Head of IT, so my role is to monitor the implementation. I have my network expert who is doing the technical work, and we have meetings together once we agree on the technology and the design concept. They are the ones who do the detailed work.

Basically, we have our network administrators; I have about four of them.

Cost is not the issue for us. Meraki MS Switches might be more expensive than other products, but we believe that from all analysis, Meraki MS Switches is able to deliver the kind of quality in terms of service delivery that we want, so we are satisfied with it.

In principle, we reviewed other options; unfortunately, our standard has always been Cisco, so we decided on Cisco because cost is not the issue when it comes to our decisions. Performance is what matters.

I do not know the model version, but I know that we are using more or less the later models; my Ghana office is about to replace the existing Meraki MS Switches because what we have there has reached end of life, but I do not remember the model. I can check.

I give Meraki MS Switches a 9 out of 10 overall, as it is quite good.

We have Cisco partners, but we also have a global account manager; that is where we purchase Cisco products directly, not just from any third party or from the AWS marketplace.