Meraki SD-WAN Reviews

I use Meraki SD-WAN in various corporate environments. It's implemented in both small offices, accommodating about twenty people, and larger offices with four hundred to five hundred people. Primarily, it's used to connect corporate networks to the Internet and occasionally between locations.

The most valuable features include understanding the throughput of bandwidth, traffic shaping, alerts and outages, and the integrated VPN. These elements are crucial for managing the network effectively. Additionally, the remote management is essential for our model, allowing us to handle multiple locations easily.

From a dashboard perspective, identifying issues can be challenging if one or two individuals experience trouble. Another area for improvement is in wireless management, where external tools might be needed to troubleshoot noise and environmental factors causing network issues.

I started using Meraki SD-WAN about ten years ago.

The solution is stable, and there are no major issues reported with its performance in our network environments.

The solution scales well, catering to both small and large office environments without requiring major changes to deployment.

Customer service and support are strong. Meraki provides good assistance which makes them reliable partners, thus earning a strong nine or eight rating from me.

Positive

In the past, I've used solutions like Fortinet and Palo Alto Networks. However, I find Meraki more suited to our internal enterprise environment.

The initial setup is easy, as you just set it up with PoE and connect it, which takes about half an hour at most.

The setup does not require a large team; it's mostly a one-time job that requires minimal staffing since everything is managed remotely.

It's hard to provide a percentage, but the solution effectively reduces costs due to its capabilities, allowing network management from anywhere in the world.

Even though it is more expensive than other options, it's reasonable when factoring in the remote management capabilities which eliminate the need for additional staffing.

I have used Fortinet and Palo Alto Networks in the past, but found Meraki better for internal environments.

I'd rate Meraki SD-WAN between eight and nine for its performance within controlled environments. If you're working in a closed ecosphere, it's an excellent choice. For more open scenarios, Fortinet or Palo Alto might offer more flexibility.

I use Meraki SD-WAN for multi-site VPN connectivity. It is mainly used for creating a mesh kind of site-to-site connection across different industries.

It offers ease of setup and ongoing maintenance without needing to have a public or static IP on all the sites.

The most valuable feature is the ease of setting up Meraki SD-WAN. It simplifies the process and does not require having a public or static IP on all the sites.

Meraki SD-WAN could be improved by including full feature routing functions similar to a normal Cisco router. It would also benefit from self-healing capabilities, where it can automatically reboot or reset if the VPN stops working.

I have been using Meraki SD-WAN for many years, more than ten years.

Meraki SD-WAN is quite stable, and there have been no significant complaints regarding its stability.

I rate its scalability as eight out of ten.

Customer service is quite good, and there are no complaints about the support.

Positive

The initial setup is very easy, and I would rate it ten out of ten for ease.

We have not conducted a cost-benefit analysis; it is more about ease of setup and maintenance.

The cost depends on the size and the device. It is generally expensive, and the price varies.

I recommend Meraki SD-WAN if the budget allows it. It is important to try it out and see if it suits your needs before making a decision.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use the product in a business environment with multiple locations that require high availability, dual circuits, and significant bandwidth. Our needs also include high-end data inspection and firewall capabilities.

The product's most valuable features include templating, central administration, single-pane remote administration, and integration with other Cisco products.

Some advanced networking features are not currently available in the Meraki product but are on their roadmap. These features are available in Cisco's higher-end solutions. Additionally, I would like to see a blade switch in the product.

I've had experience working with Meraki SD-WAN for over a year and a half.

I rate the platform's stability a nine out of ten. 

I am impressed with the scalability of the product. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

We've also used Versa SD WAN. 

Versa required hard-line configurations and knowledge of Unix-based commands, which made it more difficult to manage remotely.

The setup is straightforward if you understand networking and all the necessary components beforehand.

There is some initial ramp-up time required for the development of the network, but once everything is set, bringing new sites online is quite quick.

The deployment team included roles in networking, security, and project management.

The platform's cloud configuration has reduced our technical hands-on requirements at various locations. Previously, we had to send someone with high technical expertise to stage the equipment. Now, we only need someone to physically rack it and plug in a few cables, after which we can manage everything remotely.

The solution's pricing is in line with what we expected. 

I recommend Meraki SD-WAN and rate it an eight. 

Meraki SD-WAN is software-defined and handles key elements like bandwidth, layer seven applications, and VPN connections via automation. For instance, you can set up and configure auto-mesh connections between sites with minimal effort. The same goes for VLAN configuration; you define it, and the system automates the necessary access lists and rules behind the scenes.

In traditional setups, you'd manually create access control lists and prioritize traffic. With Meraki, it's automated. For example, you can set a rule giving voice packets priority, and Meraki's SD-WAN takes care of it instantly. Voice traffic can be prioritized by directly setting it as a feature or associating it with a specific VLAN. The result is that voice packets have priority while other data traffic utilizes the remaining bandwidth. This dynamic traffic handling is built-in, so you don’t need to write manual rules like you would with other systems.

Dynamic bandwidth allocation ensures that voice traffic always gets priority, while the Auto VPN feature simplifies network setup. The VPN configuration happens automatically, and the system fails to ensure continuous connectivity if you have a redundant connection. Everything is managed, meaning bandwidth and connections are adjusted.

Meraki did the job for what I needed. The key principle to follow is to let the problem drive the solution. Don’t pick a solution and try to force your problem into it. In our case, our needs drove the solution, and Meraki fit those needs best.  If I were looking for more throughput, there would be better solutions. For example, Palo Alto and Fortinet can offer higher bandwidth capacities. I sized the solution based on the bandwidth available, which we likely won’t exceed.

The main feature we needed was maintaining the system with minimal staff and without outsourcing support. Defining our needs led us to AutoVPN, which fits our requirement for minimal support. Meraki was the right product to meet these needs. If your priority is backend traffic and bandwidth, and you don’t need to filter traffic and scan for malware, geofence, or mesh networks, there are better options with more capacity. But that wasn’t our need.

The real issue is that many people pick a solution and try to adapt their business model, which is the wrong approach. In the long run, that limits you.

I've had no issues with stability.

When planning, I considered whether I might expand from one site to ten or even a hundred sites. The solution allows the deployment of equipment for any number of sites—one, ten, or a hundred. Once the equipment is online, it becomes fully meshed within fifteen minutes.

The response time from contacting TAC is under five minutes. Email follow-ups are also quite timely if you choose that route. I’ve never had issues with their tech support, and everyone I've interacted with has been more than capable.

Positive

We handled everything in-house, and based on my 27 years of experience, I’ve looked at Cisco. For about 20 years, Cisco routers were the industry standard. Cisco remains a benchmark for routers. If you’re looking for firewall solutions or a security appliance, a router becomes a hybrid between firewalls, IDS, and routers.

Of all the solutions I’ve evaluated, Meraki is the simplest in terms of ease of use for setup and configuration. If it's the right product for your needs, I revamped an entire wide-area network over the course of a couple of months. In total, the time spent configuring everything was less than a week.

You should have a solid understanding of networking, including wider networking concepts and security, like content filtering, geofencing, and traffic limits. Knowledge of VLANs is also helpful, but you need to plan everything before implementing it. While you can always add features later, planning for them from the start is much easier.

Once you understand the capabilities, allowing them in the future is a good idea. Assume you’ll need them and activate the necessary features upfront. When the time comes, you only need to configure them; no major reconfiguration will be required. If you do need them later, it’s much easier if they’ve already been enabled.

If you plan to use VLANs, enable the feature even if you don't need it right away. If you end up needing it later, the capability will already be in place, which is important because it can impact various settings across the system.

Over the years, I’ve learned that you often need features you didn't initially anticipate as sites grow. It's better to enable these features in advance rather than turning them on later, which can affect other parts of the routing configuration. By planning for these features upfront, you avoid the complexity and potential disruptions of reconfiguring things later.

The return on investment is strong due to the reduced need for maintenance staff. Even without negotiating maintenance contracts and pricing, the fact that I require fewer support personnel helps the cost. The reduction in outside support costs helps offset the maintenance expenses. We also replaced our phone equipment with a VoIP integrated into the Meraki platform. The cost savings from both this and the reduced need for external support nearly cover the maintenance costs.

They’re competitive across the board. For larger deployments, they’re open to negotiating terms.

Maintaining firmware can be challenging for a one-person operation managing nine different security appliances across nine sites. It allows me to schedule firmware updates for off-hours. If I forget, Cisco Meraki will push and schedule updates for me if the firmware nears its support expiration date. I can schedule upgrades through the portal after hours or in the middle of the night, and Meraki will handle the process.

If I need to make changes, I can view all my devices using the centralized portal. I can define the configurations and then apply them to individual devices or replicate them across multiple devices. Once I push and save the configuration changes, they are distributed to all the devices within two to five minutes.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I use the tool for some purposes related to technical checks.

Meraki as SD-WAN has improved our organization's work since it is a resilient tool and serves as a cloud-based product.

The solution's most valuable feature is its ease of maintenance. The tool's cost-effectiveness and value-cost optimization have also been helpful. In case you need the software upgrade, you can centrally push the software upgrades. You can push the application process from the central point.

Meraki SD-WAN has to significantly improve the company's network performance. Though Meraki SD-WAN's network performance is better than that of the MPLS circuit and other technologies, it can still improve.

The tool needs to focus on network stability, better prices, good performance, and low-cost bandwidth to improve its solution. I want the tool's cost to be less and performance to be higher.

I have been using Meraki SD-WAN for two years. I am a customer and partner of the tool.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

There has been a medium to low impact on our devices in terms of stability whenever we had to experience a downtime.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Around 100 to 200 people use the tool.

I plan to increase the use of the tool in my company.

I have contacted the solution's technical support via the web and some toll-free numbers. The tool's support team has been super helpful. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

Before Meraki SD-WAN, I used to use an independent router and switches from Cisco. My company started to use Meraki SD-WAN since we wanted to bypass the existing device since without it we were unable to go for upgrades.

The product's initial setup phase was fast. If one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the product's initial setup phase a ten out of ten.

Five to six people manage the product's deployment phase.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The solution can be deployed in six months.

Five to six people manage the product's maintenance phase.

The tool helps save some money.

The tool is costly. I rate the tool's price as a ten out of ten since it is very expensive.

I did not evaluate other tools.

I use Meraki SD-WAN in our multi-branch network operations. We use it in multiple branches.

The tool is used since it bypasses the existing devices, and then we can install Meraki's router.

The tool can enhance our network security and management since it serves as a software-defined network.

I use Meraki Auto VPN feature, and it has been useful for me in the area of network performance. When it comes to network security and management, the Meraki Auto VPN feature is good, but if we consider the network bandwidth, it depends on the network connectivity. The security and management depend on the connectivity of the whole network.

The tool's performance helped overcome the challenges in network management.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

Meraki SD-WAN enhances connectivity across various business locations. There are around five to six locations, so we have SD-WAN connectivity.

The security features within Meraki SD-WAN support organization because this is site-to-site connectivity. There is no chance of data leaks from our side because it works through a secure tunnel.

Earlier, we used MPLS and switched over to Meraki. 

Meraki SD-WAN is very convenient to use. That’s the reason we adopted it. The configuration is simple, and maintenance is very easy. That’s why we switched to SD-WAN.

If Meraki can add more features on the reporting side, that will be convenient for us because we have to rely on a different product for monitoring and reporting. That is one of the challenges. Apart from that, everything is good.

If I gauge the reporting features, suppose for device performance-related things and transactions, in terms of throughput and the types of issues we receive on the network side. If those can come into the reporting format, it will be very helpful. 

Many customers ask for their performance, transactions, and throughput. It is very difficult to get the report from connected devices. In that case, we have to go for additional management tools or monitoring tools, which can give us good features. Like earlier, we used Cisco Works. In the same way, we need to implement another product.

In the past, I have used it up to a 250 Mbps device. If we add around seven hundred to eight hundred users, the performance degrades. Meraki might have recently added more devices with higher capacity, but I haven’t had hands-on experience with those. 

I have been using it for the last year. 

As a company grows, if there are more sites from the customer side, then we need to implement. But, the scalability has been constant over the last year. I couldn’t see much change in that. 

On the monitoring side, it’s good. 

We have mostly SMB types of accounts. For very big organizations, there are some limitations. Apart from that, it is very comfortable for SMBs.

Technical support is good. We still get prompt support from their side.

Positive

We also deal with Cisco Meraki, Cisco Catalyst, and other Cisco products. Mostly we are dealing with Cisco. Apart from them, we also handle some products from Juniper.

The pricing is reasonable. Compared to other solutions, it is reasonable.

There is a separate licensing fee for the product we are using. Apart from that, we are not seeing anything additional.

We generally recommend Meraki because it is very simple. The configuration and all those things are very simple. If you have the technical knowledge, there is very little chance of making mistakes.

Even I have given training to the L1 team, and they can handle it very well. We do not need highly skilled people to handle these devices.

I would not recommend this tool to very large-scale organizations. I have not recommended it as of now. But for small and medium-sized organizations, where they do not have many transactions and have a strength of around 500 to 600, we recommend Meraki devices.

Overall, I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

Our company uses the solution for side-to-side or branch connectivity to our data center. We have 70 branches and about 3,000 end users in our environment.  

The solution operates via zero-touch configuration. We do not have to physically visit branches to configure. We just send the points to our locations for seamless, push configuration from the cloud. 

The firewall included in the antivirus protection includes many features such as IPS and traffic shipping rules.  

The solution is quite user friendly and has predefined functions that you click to deploy. 

A run optimization feature is needed to reduce the bandwidth for any uploaded content. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

The stability is very good so is rated an eight out of ten. 

The solution is scalable from a security perspective. 

Endpoint security can be managed by the end users or other third-party tools. We use Trend Micro for endpoint security. 

Scalability is rated a six out of ten. 

Our company is layer one and we have certified experts in-house, so we handle most technical issues.

Responses are not very clear when we escalate issues. Support is located in the UK and we have to get our account manager to connect us with the team in the UK. 

Technical support is rated a five out of ten. 

Neutral

The setup is easy once you are used to it. Our first setup took a bit of time but now we process setups very efficiently. 

The setup time depends on the site, user load density, and network gateway policies. It could date one day to go through all the steps for a more complex setup because you need to create the policies, map them, and integrate the active directory with the policies. 

We implement the solution in-house. 

The solution offers yearly licenses and product lines or prices are readily available on their website. 

We purchased the solution in 2018 and it is still supported. 

The solution does not include a run optimization feature for reducing bandwidth like what is available in other products. 

I recommend the solution but would like it to provide better optimization. If it does, then the solution would be considered an absolute star product. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I primarily use it to connect sites to each other over an overlay network, with protection from the next-generation firewall in the Meraki ecosystem.

The most valuable feature for me is the security functionality, its integration with Wi-Fi, and the switching approach.

The license model may need improvement because if we need to renew something, we need to completely renew the license model.

An additional feature I would like is the 5G solution. It is not yet there.

I have been using the solution for more than four years. We are using the latest version, which is cloud-based.

The stability of this solution is fine. It has a Fusion version. It does what it prompts.

The solution is scalable. It is scalable for mid-tier deployments, but not for major ones.

The technical support is decent if you open a ticket, but it can sometimes take quite a while. As for product development, it's a much more difficult story, as they have a very lengthy development cycle.

It is a cloud-based solution, so the initial setup is straightforward. Onboarding a customer can be done in a few weeks.

The deployment process is easy. It's a cloud-based system that is activated by attaching the serial number, and then the system goes live. So it's easy to set up.

The license model depends on the customer and can be a yearly license, a three-year license, or a five-year license. There may be additional costs for certain licenses, such as Umbrella licenses or advanced licenses. The pricing ultimately depends on the functionality the customer requires.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.