Meraki MX Reviews

The solution is useful and easy to manage, and we deploy it on-premises.

The solution is very valuable because it always updates firmware or operating systems.

The price of the solution can be improved because it is very expensive. 

We have been using the solution for approximately three years.

The solution is scalable.

The solution is easy to set up. If you are familiar with it, it will take only a few hours to complete the deployment.

We have chosen to stop using this solution because the cost of renewal is  expensive.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but the price can be improved. I recommend the solution to people who can afford it.

I used the MX80 as primary FW in a small Office with 50 users. The options provide even non-FW-specialist a way to manage and block certain aspects of internet usage.

The main purpose of the Meraki is to use Internet for Users. Not filter traffic for Servers. 

Together with other network gear you get an overall visibility into each client on the network. Thats is fantastic. Meraki offers free trails and you can get the entry level gear very cheap. The support model allows usage of the cloud management only if you have support. But then you get all features and updates.

We now use the small MX as a VPN tunnel in the small offices. The SDWAN feature is great as it connects to any point if one is not available. Setup is easy as bam. Check it out.

Everyone is able to look at the cloud management to find out problems and identify the source. You don't need a FW specialist any more. You can even outsource the maintenance and support via a support account and delegate access in networks, locations or even only one device.

The solution was cloud managed, so I could access it from anywhere and deploy it with zero configuration. No need to configure anything. Just send it to the location and connect with the internet. 

The event logging, alerting, and reporting features could use improvement. Especially the export of the log is difficult. There is an API to connect to, but I have not found it easy to extract something yet.

I have used this solution for 4 years.

I did not encounter any issues with stability. Once a device was just dead and dead replacement. Once we had to replace a device because of predicted failure. Both cases were handled well by the support. We had only next business day support.

I did not encounter any issues with scalability. High bandwidth will cost something. You might be better off using multiple streams with multiple providers.

I would rate technical support 10/10.

I previously used Cisco and I switched because of missing manageability.

I now use a central Sophos FW and this can be managed through the central AV and Protection Cloud Management if you use Sophos as AV client.

The initial setup was easy. Some features need more investigation (client VPN). SDWAN is great. Some more training on how to set something up would help like VLAN. Even if it is that easy to configure it, the basic concepts might be missing.

Other provider did not jump on Meraki as I would expect. Most of them do not support nor use Meraki. It is difficult to find support provider to help if there is a problem.

With many locations you will save a lot on traveling and deployment, as you don't need this any more. The costs inc. support is comparable with other vendors.

Compare total costs (setup and management), taking in mind that cloud features do more than just stop traffic on the edge: they identify both traffic and users.

Is it getting used to have support as a must. But realistically I would not use any other FW without support today.

We used Cisco products, we tested several other vendors too. Sophos is a close match in manageability and offer real FW features, but is more complex and needs more training.

Meraki is still best for an office FW. Simple categories, features, SDWAN. I would not use it for Web Server protection or Server to Server firewall so.

Be prepared for a new way of managing networks. Test it. See the webcast. The zero deployment is a killer feature. Network Products like switches and Wifi do the rest.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

AutoVPN features allow you extremely simple mesh or site to site IPSEC VPN tunnels with no configuration. It's self managed and saves a bunch of time and effort.

Setup and configuration is cloud controller based so you just setup anything you need and don't actually have to configure the device other than to ship it to where it's going, and it configures itself with the settings you used without needing to hit the local LAN interface.

Setup and configuration could not be quicker. Their support is also unlimited, you call, you get a person who knows what they're doing and they always solve the problem.

There are a few things that are odd that I can do with other firewall products that I can't do with a Meraki. Such as - wanting to setup two firewalls in front of the same protected subnet. Since they 'act' like one when they are added, it won't let you setup the firwall in the traditional way where it's on the same LAN and has a proper public IP. When you attempt to save, because of their oversimplification of firewalls, it complains that you already have a firewall in front of that subnet. The only choice the leave you is to match the exact firewall and use their built in high availability. I don't want to do that in this case because I was intentionally terminating certain VPN tunnels on one, and other tunnels on the other. I could do this with an ASA, CheckPoint, SonicWALL, or Fortinet, but not here.

About 2 or 3 years and across 80 plus sites.

Tech support is California based today. Good in most cases, but they have no power in true design change requests. Some things they don't have in the interface are only viewable by Meraki.

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.

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.