@DustinB3403 said in Trying to get metrics comparing two APs Cisco and Ubiquiti:

@Dashrender said in Trying to get metrics comparing two APs Cisco and Ubiquiti:

ustomer wouldn't approve adding cabling to run extra APs.

How many do they have today?

That's kind of what I'm thinking of recommending, but would want to ensure that we're list apples to apples and not against grapefuites (if you get my point).

well sure - so look at what the current APs support, then find something that does that or better for the new APs, You might have to play with power settings to keep things from overlapping to much,...

Most "hot new things" apply to existing technology. It's extremely rare that a new industry term arises before (or with) the invention of something. It's normally more a recognition of something that's been created. SaaS for example arose as a term decades after the idea was pioneered and at least five years after it was mainstream. But it doesn't make the things that predate the name not SaaS, it's just a super broad term.

@jaredbusch

I have it up and running. (DNS)

Even my guest WIFI on a VLan is now getting DHCP addresses. Everything is working great now.

@dustinb3403 said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@scottalanmiller said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@dustinb3403 said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@scottalanmiller said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@jaredbusch said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@scottalanmiller said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@jaredbusch said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@scottalanmiller said in [Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise]

The software. The hardware is about equal, sort of.

But a $95 Ubiquiti is faster than a $3,000 CIsco. So the hardware still matters. Cisco at $3,000 is "Maybe able to handle your house."

Prove this.

Don't bullshit or theorize. Prove it. Get a unit and run tests or stopping stating it like a fact and predicate these statements with "in my opinion" and such.

Granted I'll never buy Cisco in the SMB when Ubiquiti exists for the cost and performance that it currently exists with.

But none of that invalidates the quality or functionality of Cisco hardware and software.

Cost has nothing to do with that.

I'm not the one making the claim, it's based off of measured PPS between the two.

You are the one always making the claim and have never linked to source material to back up your claims.

I've never made the claim. I've repeated Ubiquiti's performance measurements. It's nothing to do with me. I just remember the number and repeat it as it is a critical guideline for understanding where Ubiquiti falls within the Cisco product range. When people are talking $10K Ciscos, we can't talk Ubiquiti, it just doesn't make sense. But at $3K and below, I've never had anyone come up with any value proposition to Cisco gear considering that Ubiquiti is measured at better throughput until that price point. Granted, Ubiquiti did the study, but Cisco has not disputed it or claimed any other performance of which I am aware.

If you're repeating it, find the source and post a link, FFS. I want to believe a lot of what you say, but I agree with @jaredbusch here. It comes out like another scott-ism.

It only sounds that way because you think I don't have sources for all of my stuff.

You can always go look up Cisco performance, too, and see what it is.

But you're the person spouting something off as a fact, so provide the source!

This is correct, it is not our job to do research when you are the one claiming a fact. It is the reader's job to verify, but the reader cannot do that without the initial facts.

Yes, I know you already answered. Just closing my part of the conversation.

@Mike-Davis said in Authenticate Laptops to Wifi against ActiveDirectory:

and on the Meraki side, you chose WPA2 Enterprise, correct?

Definitely WPA2 on the Meraki. I'll check my conditions though. Thanks for the tip.

@scottalanmiller said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:

@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:

The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change.

It's a tiny cost though, right? We are only talking about a minuscule investment, I think. If it saves a few hours of effort, doesn't that cover the cost?

No you are not. You are neglecting to add in the labor costs and only calculating on the hardware costs.

Physically changing everything will add labor cost. Ordering, configuration, staging, installation.

Yes, something else is cheaper. But not as cheap as you try to make it sound.

The existing solution is in place and already paid for. A simple support call resolved the configuration issue. There is no reason to spend additional capital to change a working solution until you have to plan for new spend on the solution.

If the existing solution was actually not functional, or some other factors were in play to offset things, then it would certainly be worth switching solutions.

By default, traffic will pass between VLANs 1 & 2, unless you go into the firewall & add rules to deny traffic

@Dashrender said in Pfsense to Meraki Site-Site Ipsec VPN:

At what size network do you normally turn on BGP?

Pretty much any time you have multiple routers & subnets. BGP is to routing what DHCP is to Up addressing (kinda). With static routes every device has to be setup manually with every network which is insane. With BGP and Autonomous system numbers it's automated and less likely to have mistakes.

Old post but just had to do this for an implementation we are rolling out. Thanks!

@JaredBusch said:

You need to upgrade your ERL to firmware 1.8 to get the full traffic analysis capabilities in the GUI.

Which has been done.

@quicky2g said:

@dafyre said:

@Jason said:

... require more fees for more throughput being used on the same device.

This is what drives me crazy about companies these days... Let me pay for a box that is sized for the network I want. If it can handle more than my current bandwidth, great! Don't make me buy a paper license just because I have a 300Mbit internet connection and your box is rated for 200 megs, but I am aactually seeing the full 300.

This is why I prefer to build my own firewall... Shorewall + Snort (or Suricata) + DansGuardian +ClamAV = Win. (Or you can just use pfSense)... Gotta build a beefy box to make it all run nice and smooth and not choke your internet.... But still probably a far cry cheaper than Palo Altos, et al.

You must have loads of fun troubleshooting all those individual systems when something is blocked that shouldn't be.

Ha ha ha. Nope. If it's a website, it's DansGuarian. If it's an App, then it is Snort / Suricata blocking it. 🙂 (In my last build, I used Suricata to block the applications we didn't want on the network).

If it's not Snort / Suricata, then it's the Firewall not allowing outgoing ports.

So the exclusions I've had to add to get everything "functional" are listed below.

File System Shield

C:\Program Files (x86)\Meraki\m_agent_upgrade.exe

C:\Program Files (x86)\Meraki\meraki-ca-bundle.crt

C:\Program Files (x86)\Meraki\ndisscan.exe

C:\Program Files (x86)\Meraki\README-winvnc.txt

C:\Program Files (x86)\Meraki\screenshot-cmd.exe

C:\Program Files (x86)\Meraki\windows-wlan.exe

C:\Program Files (x86)\Meraki\winvnc.exe

Mail Shield

Inbound Mail - Un-check 'Scan inbound mail (POP3, IMAP4)' (UltraVNC)

Web Shield Process Exclusions
The same processes as in File System Shield

@JaredBusch said:

I have never heard of a provider that required a separate trunk for inbound and outbound. that is just crazy.

So, is this just a Vitelity issue? I know many SIP providers have their subtle differences, and you always seem to find them at the most inopportune moments.

Thanks @coliver. Not the answer I was looking for, however not surprising.

Very well.. Not a deal ending issue.

I am unable to find anything on a work around. Nice thought at least

If the sales guy is doing a good job, you don't care where he is or what he is doing. If he doesn't make sales you don't care if he works hard 100 hours a week. Tracking a sales guy can only hurt from a business perspective.