Meraki SD-WAN Reviews

We primarily use the access points and switches for remote locations for a client. We have 100 or more remote offices, and we connect those together to a data center in Florida.

We like that it is cloud-enabled.

The solution is easy to use. It's so simple to set up and connect the connection points. We don't require any static IPs or anything like that on our ISPs. It's very quick and easy.

It is stable and reliable.

The solution can scale so long as you are scaling Meraki products together. 

It offers a very good "single pane of glass," which helps with management and visibility.

I don't have any notes for improvement. 

Technical support could be more knowledgeable and responsive. 

You do have to pay for the solution in perpetuity. 

I've used the solution for six or seven years. 

The stability is pretty good. I'd rate it an eight or nine out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is very scalable as long as it is a Meraki-to-Meraki environment. 

I'd rate the scalability eight out of ten. 

Technical support isn't the best. They aren't as responsive as we would like. The quality of the techs needs to be better. They need to be more knowledgeable. 

Neutral

The solution is very simple to set up, and we don't need any static IPs from our ISPs. This simplifies things. 

I'd give the ease of setup a ten out of ten. 

Meraki's a subscription service. You "pay forever," and in that sense, it can be a little expensive. That said, I'd rate it seven out of ten in terms of affordability. 

I'm a customer and end-user. 

Other than warning people that it is a subscription, this does offer a single pane of glass which makes it easy to manage if you have multiple sites.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

Instead of having MPLS or direct, separate internet connections at each branch location, we can use SD-WAN to route the traffic to data centers. If someone is hosting applications or other web servers in a data center, we can route that traffic toward the data center where the application server is located, and they can access a wired local service provider.

It's deployed on the cloud and can be managed from the cloud. It only needs to be connected to the internet, and then it will start communicating with the Meraki Cloud. If it's connected to the cloud, it will sync the configuration on the cloud to that device.

Meraki AutoVPN is an interesting feature. If there are multiple network connectivities in an organization, Meraki creates an AutoVPN. It creates a channel automatically.

The UI is user-friendly.

The granularity could be improved. It's not very granular for URL filtering or content filtering. If you want to do a specific route or a specific rule, that feature is lagging a bit. 

The stability could also be improved.

I have used Meraki SD-WAN for two years.

I would rate the stability as eight out of ten. It's quite stable, but we've had issues in the past.

I would rate the scalability as eight out of ten.

I would rate technical support as nine out of ten. Support is pretty knowledgeable and assists us in whatever manner they can. It can take about 30 to 45 minutes  to connect because of longer hold times.

Setup is easy and straightforward. Deploying the SD-WAN hardware needs to be done statically. Once you have found the IP address, it connects to the internet. That's the only thing where physical assistance is required. The rest can be managed via cloud.

If you're doing the deployment remotely, only one remote person and one technician is needed. If you are onsite, then one person can do the deployment.

We did the implementation in-house. The documentation on their portal explains everything. We just had to go through the documents if we needed any assistance. It was pretty helpful.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

For a larger enterprise level customer, I would recommend the MX450 or MX400 series.

Our use cases are mostly in the financial sector. 

The classifying of the applications, for example, has been a very useful feature. It helps in contract service, in traffic shaping, and in controlling the balancing between the links that they have over the internet. They have the intention of DI, the direct internet access, as the agencies on the remote side have direct internet access to be able to consume some applications in the cloud.

The product does have a variety of features we can work with.

There's a good balance between 4G and LTE. There are backups to keep the connection going. The MPLS link we had, for example, is just for a backup in case one of the two links goes down.

We have had some problems doing the implementation. We had to open a case with Cisco. The deployment was solved with Cisco's tech help. 

In terms of the applications, the policies that we configured didn't work as expected. However, Cisco's tech also helped us deal with this as well. 

Meraki has a limitation in the number of links that it can work. For example, in Cisco, we can work with many, many links if you link with Viptela, however, in Meraki, we just get to work with two links or a maximum number of three links including the LAN link. It was a problem. When clients need many links and you have just two links it's a problem.

I've worked with the solution for a while. I've done POCs with five or six different clients.

Technical support is quite helpful in general.

I have worked for the last 15 years, more or less, with Cisco. For the last eight years, I have worked with Cisco and Aruba, especially with Cisco in data center technologies, in SDN technologies like ACI, like SD-Access, or SD-WAN, for example. I have worked in design as well. For example, in the design of data centers, in the designs of WAN networks, LAN networks, and Wi-Fi networks.

I have experience with Cisco Viptela, and Cisco Meraki with the MX series, which I have basically worked with within Cisco Meraki.

In wireless, I have worked in Cisco with the Cisco Ethernet, for example, and in Meraki as well, and I have worked with the MR series in the Cisco in Meraki.

We implemented, for example, Meraki in eight places in a banking environment. We implemented the MX series and we did approach the provisioning that has the solution to develop the implementation in many places. We implemented it in more than 2,000 places - wherever they have services.

We struggled a bit with the implementation, however, we did reach out to Cisco and they were able to help us get back on track.

Cisco technical support did end up helping us with the implementation, however, we mostly did it ourselves. 

I work in a company that is a partner of Cisco and we sell the Cisco Meraki SD-WAN solution.

We have implementations both on-premises and in the cloud. 

I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I work for a carrier, and we consume, resell, and integrate Cisco products. I'm a product manager, and I have a couple of products that are built around Cisco Meraki's offerings. One of them is a managed business wifi solution, and the other one is an SD-WAN solution. I own both of these products. 

Meraki is really big in retail and education, and that's where we see a lot of use cases. It is a low-cost or entry product. It is not a sophisticated, complete solution. People who are very concerned about the total cost of ownership will look at a Meraki solution more. 

The deployment is a combination. The orchestration is on a public cloud, and then the customer locations are all premise-based Meraki devices.

They're known for their ease of use and ubiquitous management platform that covers everything. Meraki really excels in plug-and-play solutions. You just plug it up, and everything works. All of the components—the firewall/router, the switches, the access points, the cameras—work very nicely together, and they all can be managed from one platform. That is probably their biggest selling point. Everything comes in one ubiquitous package, and you don't have to manage different components from different platforms. You can see everything from one platform.

From the vice perspective, they just are not as robust as some of the other vendors. They have limitations in throughput and the number of circuits that they can support on a wide area network. Their higher-end security is all cloud-based. They have some capability with the premise-based solutions, but the higher ends are all cloud-based, and that's via Cisco Umbrella.

Their support can be better. They do not offer a lot of hands-on support for their products.

I have probably been using this solution for three years.

From the stability perspective, everybody is pretty much on the same level playing field. I don't really see anybody standing out more than anybody else. Meraki is a low-cost equipment provider, so they're not offering big metal devices that plug into racks and a data center. They're more along the lines of the hard plastic desktop type of units. They have the same meantime between failure as most other products, so it's difficult to put them above or below anybody else. They all are pretty much on the same level playing field.

Scalability is good as long as you're doing a simple task. If you're just deploying SD-WAN and you're not putting in cameras, wifi access points, and a lot of different components, scalability is really good. From that perspective, they do well. Their niche is retail and education, and both of these areas can be very large networks depending on the provider.

We do not have plans to increase its usage. They are really premise-based solutions that are managed from the network, and we are not staying with that same type of approach in our product lines. We are moving to a fully-integrated network approach to security, connectivity, and management.

I would rate them one out of five. They do not offer a lot of hands-on support for their products.

We use three or four other SD-WAN providers to offer the same type of product. We have VeloCloud, Fortinet, and Versa. The main differences are more capabilities, more functionality, better support, better value, and a better total cost of ownership.

Everything is plug-and-play. If you're using all Meraki components, it is very easy to deploy.

The deployment duration is very short. There are not a lot of design concerns. There is not a lot of configuration. Everything can be done over the air from a network-based platform. So, it is very easy and very fast to deploy.

We've created a lot of things internally to compare different vendors and different technologies. From a customer perspective, I don't really do ROIs for evaluating vendors, but I'm familiar with the ROI. It really varies. There are other vendors that are also considered low-cost that technically perform better than Meraki. So, from a comparison perspective, it's difficult to know if you've got a better ROI with one vendor versus another without really understanding what it is that you're trying to accomplish.

Some customers may put a high value on ease of management, ease of deployment, and ease of managing and monitoring. Meraki does a decent job at all of that, whereas other companies may put a higher value on the features and functionality, security, and other things that are inherent to other products. Therefore, it is difficult to put them into a single bucket or category. From a low-cost provider perspective, their ROI for a customer is probably in line with that category of vendors.

They have a baseline software license, and then they've got an SD-WAN software license, and then they've got an advanced security software license. 

They're low cost, and they'll provide any amount of flexibility that you want from a modeling perspective for payment. Typically, it's either annually or multi-year, but they are a lower-cost company. They're not the most expensive by far.

There is an additional cost of the equipment that doesn't tend to be high.

Meraki is known as a lower-end SD-WAN solution. It has limitations from the hardware and the software perspective. They've gotten better over the years, but they were always viewed as a low-cost or entry type of product. They don't do a lot of the more sophisticated features and functionality of some of the other SD-WAN providers.

From a customer perspective, it really depends on:

• What are they looking for?
• What are they concerned about?
• Do they have any other products?
• Are they using any other security mechanism and is it network-based or premise-based?

It is just about what fits into their network and what they're currently using.

I would advise having a good understanding of the physical requirements for the facility that it's being deployed. You should have a good understanding of what you need from a component perspective, such as extra switches or extra access points. That's probably the biggest thing. There are other products for which you may have to pay a little bit more, but they are going to be better performing, and they will give you better service. So, you need to understand, especially if you're going with a low-cost vendor, that you might end up having to pay more because you had to add more components to the solution.

I would put it a little bit over halfway. I would rate it a six out of 10. It is certainly a good product. They have a lot of basic features and functionality. They can provide a good solution, but you may end up having to pay more than what you anticipated to get everything that you want because they don't include as much as some of the other vendors.

There is no comparison with a normal broadband connection versus one that is the dedicated connection that we have. We have saved a lot of money after deploying Cisco Meraki.

We have many businesses in geographical locations, and due to this, we need it in many different locations. It has become very easy for us to deploy these products. They claim that it is zero-touch configuration. That is true. Suppose if I want to deploy this product in Manila, I don't have to have this product in my hand in the wire and I don't need to go to Manila. It's not like that.

It can be delivered to them and as soon as they plug it we can push the configuration. That is the beauty of this SD-WAN technology that we have.

The solution is helping me, not only for side-to-side connectivity but also for defining different VLANs, different networks, between the firewalls. I can do firewalling between these networks.

I can manage it very well and in a very easy way. This is from the technical perspective.

After deploying Meraki, we have a drastic fitting on connectivity because before Cisco Meraki, we used to have a physical broadband internet connection and it is very, very expensive in Dubai.

The security firewall features that are embedded in the product is very good. The security, including the internal threat protection, the IPS, or the advanced threat admin, are very good. 

The hardware is okay as compared to any other product.

The advanced license is expensive. Part of the cost involved is high. If you are only a small or medium business, it may not be the best option. For branch divisions, yes. This is a very useful product and I don't have any problem with the CAPEX however, I have a problem with the OPEX as the OPEX part of the advanced license is quite expensive. 

We'd like features that provide more transparency when there are issues. Right now, it's hard to get clarity on problems. We need more visibility.

I've been using the solution for three years at this point.

The solution is quite stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

It's scalable.

We might have a plan to extend to maybe a hundred percent more sites within 2021. Hopefully, within this year, we will add almost double the size that we have right now. Currently, we have a total of 1200 employees that will double to 2400 and they each have their own devices. There are other guest users as well. There might be 4000 unique devices that need coverage.

The technical support isn't always ideal. Occasionally, we are unable to understand what is happening. When we escalate the matter, the response that we get from Cisco is not satisfactory as sometimes they are depending on the log, and sometimes they are depending on what is connected to a device, for example, and any cascaded device connected to it. They will say that maybe it is because of the device that it's connected on. They seem to have difficulty pinpointing the issue at hand.

Before using Meraki, we had the 1900 series of Cisco, and before we were using it with a DMVPN. This was the technology that was there before. We've always used Cisco.

The initial setup is straightforward. However, it depends on how you are setting it up. There are companies that do a very basic setup, and with a basic setup, anyone can do it. Even if you are not a technical person you can do this. It's very, very easy with zero-touch configuration. 

That said, when it comes to full functionality, in our case, we are completely using all of the features. We're doing integrations and using authentication and group policies and the advanced treatment events, and firewall rules, as well as traffic shipping rules. All of these are different. It's a bit more of a complex process.

We're working with a DNS Umbrella. When it comes to that much functionality, it is not easy, actually. It's not a basic thing. You need some experts to do the installation configuration.

While they've made it pretty user-friendly, they've also made it in such a way that handicaps IT staff. YOu always have to escalate issues to Cisco to get it sorted.

Once you get over the first implementation and move to configuration, it's pretty easy.

YOu only need one person to handle the deployment process.

I tend to handle the implementation and configuration. I'm well-versed in Cisco. I don't need a consultant or integrator to assist me.

We are a customer and end-user.

We have an SD-WAN technology that works on Cisco Meraki with MX appliances. Then we have a core appliance, from Core/Distribution and edge. These are all HP routers.

We are using the latest version of the solution. We get automatic updates to the latest versions.

While the solution is on-premises, it can be managed on the cloud.

I would recommend the solution. I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

Meraki SD-WAN is used to manage traffic between customers. We can make traffic-shaping rules, limit or deny sites, etc. SD-WAN can also do load balancing.

SD-WAN is a complete enterprise solution for securing traffic. 

The blocklist on the Cisco Meraki side isn't complete or very large. We'd like to see them update and expand this. 

I have used Meraki SD-WAN for seven years. 

 I rate Meraki SD-WAN nine out of 10 for stability. 

Setting up Meraki SD-WAN isn't difficult, but it isn't simple. It was easy for me because I have worked with other SD-WAN solutions. 

Cisco Meraki firewalls have a 10-year license, but there is a three-year license for other equipment.  

I rate Meraki SD-WAN nine out of 10. Cisco Meraki SD-WAN works better than other solutions. I recommend using Cisco Meraki SD-WAN with the Cisco Meraki Dashboard to centralize all your equipment, such as access points, links, switches, etc., in one console. 

One of my clients is using Meraki SD-WAN in their office to manage their internal desktops, internal servers, and laptops. Any connectivity for the home-based workers is managed by Cisco Meraki Switches.

I appreciate the cloud-based management feature the most. It's a crucial aspect for me because it allows me to manage the configuration remotely without having to visit the on-premise location. The ability to do this from my home is a major benefit. Additionally, security is good.

I have been using Meraki SD-WAN for approximately two years.

I rate the stability of Meraki SD-WAN a nine out of ten.

When we upgraded from the old Cisco models, we encountered very few challenges during the migration to Meraki SD-WAN. In the future, there may be a few challenges to overcome during migration.

This solution is used mostly in enterprise-sized companies.

I rate the scalability of Meraki SD-WAN a seven out of ten.

I rate the support from Meraki SD-WAN a nine out of ten.

The deployment time of Meraki SD-WAN can vary. For someone new to the process, it could take a couple of hours. However, for someone with hands-on experience, such as myself, it only takes approximately two to three hours to set up the entire configuration.

I rate the initial setup of Meraki SD-WAN a nine out of ten.

We used two people for the deployment of the solution.

I have received a return on investment using this solution. The manageability cost has been reduced.

Pricing is a significant concern for me. Amongst all the firewall brands, Cisco is one of the most expensive options. Despite its reputation and security features, many customers opt for other brands, such as SonicWall because of their lower prices. These other brands offer similar features to Cisco but at a lower cost. Cisco's pricing is something that could be improved to attract more customers. The brand has a good reputation, but when it comes to budgeting and pricing, it is not always the first choice.

The solution is very expensive.

I rate the price of Meraki SD-WAN a nine out of ten.

In my professional network, when people ask me about which brand of switches to use, Meraki SD-WAN is always the first recommendation. However, the final decision often comes down to budget. If a customer has the budget for Meraki SD-WAN, I recommend it, but if budget is a concern, there are other brands that can be considered.

I rate Meraki SD-WAN a nine out of ten

We use it to provide our customers with a single dashboard for visibility, monitoring, and control across the networks. It makes it easy for us to integrate particular services with the customer's overall requirements.

The features of SD-WAN are very appealing because you have a centralized dashboard and multiple options to terminate. You have an internet leased line, which means that you can connect your broadband and 3G and 4G cellular networks on the same router. This makes it easy for us to manage everything on a single dashboard. That is, you can integrate multiple stacks in such a way that you do not have to maintain any other dashboard. You get single-pane-of-glass accessibility with Meraki.

Meraki is lagging behind in using a single pipe from service providers. That is, it would be good if they could use both the internet leased line and broadband connectivity.

In a future release, I would like to see integration with a security solution like Cisco Umbrella. This will give complete visibility on a single dashboard.

We started using this solution six months ago.

The data plane is installed on-premises, and the management plane is in the cloud.

It's very stable, and the overall cloud availability or management plan availability is almost 99.5%. It is absolutely awesome.

You can scale it at any level; there is no limit to the scalability. The best part is that it can be managed remotely. You do not have to send in an engineer. You just have to send the box to the customer, and they just have to plug it into the network. You can configure Meraki devices right from the workplace.

The technical support for this solution is absolutely superb. It's available 24/7. If our engineers are facing any issues, technical support is always available.

The replacement cycle is absolutely superb. Cisco support is globally number one, and I would give them a ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is very simple.

The price can vary depending on the challenges that you need to address. When you look at the stability and reliability against the price, you absolutely get the value for the price.

I would recommend Meraki SD-WAN to those who have multiple sites across several different geographical locations and to those who really want to connect their branch offices, their depos, their factories, etc.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Meraki SD-WAN at nine.