Meraki SD-WAN Reviews

We are resellers. We provide solutions including Meraki SD-WAN to our clients.

I like the entire set of features and the analytics.

If you compare Meraki with other solutions, the level of security is minimal.

The security needs to be improved, which is why we also use FortiGate. Meraki offers the client basic security, it is not the same as what FortiGate is offering. The customers question the security as they see that they have some loopholes. They feel that a hacker can easily enter your data. When you operate the network to the family, on the outside a hacker can see the IP address inside the network.

Customers will request a firewall to protect the network.

I would like to see Meraki include firewall security. Also, they should have encryption inside the router to make the data secure.

I have been working with Meraki SD-WAN for more than three years.

We are using models MX64 and MX100.

So far it has been stable. We have no issues with stability.

Currently, we have 10 customers who each have 30 to 50 clients using Meraki SD-WAN.

Technical support is good.

When we have encountered problems, technical support has been quick to respond.

We are also working with Fortinet.

It is easier to deploy Meraki when you compare it with FortiGate.

Meraki SD-WAN is better suited for customers who have small branches, who don't have secure data to be transferred.

Meraki is not suitable for companies that require high security.

I would rate Meraki SD-WAN a six out of ten.

We used Meraki SD-WAN for connectivity between our stores, primary data center, and service locations.

Meraki SD-WAN improved the way my company functions because it allowed quicker time to market for connectivity, efficacy, and security. It also contributed to better expense management in terms of not using dedicated services, instead utilizing more public cloud services to establish connectivity.

What I found most valuable in Meraki SD-WAN is its simplicity. I also like its manageability.

The only area for improvement in Meraki SD-WAN is its licensing model, as well as its cost structure.

I have three to four years of experience with Meraki SD-WAN, and I used it in the past year.

Meraki SD-WAN is a stable solution. It had well-managed updates that created a pretty stable and manageable environment overall.

Considering the number of locations where Meraki SD-WAN was used, I found it scalable.

I would rate Meraki SD-WAN technical support as four out of five.

Positive

We didn't use other solutions apart from Meraki SD-WAN.

Meraki SD-WAN had a straightforward setup.

I've seen ROI from Meraki SD-WAN.

I don't have information on the exact cost of Meraki SD-WAN, but I'd rate it a three out of five, just because the licensing model is very much associated with the Meraki solution. Meraki has its own pricing model.

Other solutions were evaluated, but I can't recall which ones off the top of my head.

Thousands of people used Meraki SD-WAN within the company. Meraki SD-WAN had a substantial deployment because the company I was in had quite a few locations. Hence, about fifteen to twenty people took care of the deployment, but to maintain and monitor Meraki SD-WAN, a minimum of two people would suffice.

There's no plan to increase Meraki SD-WAN usage because of the current economic conditions.

I'd recommend Meraki SD-WAN to others because it's easy to deploy and manage, but my advice is to be aware of the licensing and cost structure of Meraki SD-WAN.

My rating for Meraki SD-WAN is eight out of ten.

I'm using Cisco Meraki, both for the firewall and software-defined network.  

For the time being, we are sort of picking out the best way to use it in terms of the number of licenses and what we actually need to be able to oversee and have control over — what we really need to do. We are still looking at what are the most essential parts and whether we should increase the number of licenses or just to keep what we already have at the moment. We are taking it step-by-step for now.  

In terms of the firewall, actually what I found most interesting was that the amount of information you can get from overseeing the system from a centralized place. For example, we know the way people logged in, when they logged out, and how they access work that is on individual computers. It provides a lot of information.  

So, basically the most valuable feature so far is just the information we can actually get from the system without actually having to go into every single device. You can just get it all from one point, gather all the information that would usually take you about up to 10 minutes per computer and get it almost instantly.  

In terms of Software Defined Networking, when our older firewall was used in the setup, it was a very different configuration of various computers. What we actually thought we had was sometimes outdated and possibly not being used at all in one or two cases. Using this product was a chance to find out where actually there are vulnerabilities in our system and which places need to be updated that had not been properly updated because they sort of fell between the cracks.  

Because I have not been using the product for very long, I'm really just learning it and being overwhelmed by the amount of information that I can actually get from the system. There is really nothing that I can think of at the moment that needs to be improved. I'm just really happy about basically everything. It might happen that something will become important sometime as we get more used to the product and we are able to look into it better. But for the moment it seems to cover everything we need.  

Possibly there may be more options for integration between computers, projectors, television — sort of being able to more easily make everything included in one solution. It would be even more useful.  

I have been using the product for more than two months.  

Our impressions of the stability of SD-WAN is good at this point. We have had no issues that I know of up until this moment.  Whether we will later on remains uncertain. For now  everything is stable and working well.

The scalability of the solution does not seem like it will be a problem.  

We have not had help directly from Cisco's technical support. We did have help once indirectly through another company that we used to help us to sort out our old system. That was two years ago and I was not personally involved.  

Actually, I'm only now comparing how this system works to our experience with the old system we used. That is not something I can do instantly. But the reason we chose this solution was to consolidate and make use of improved features.  

The initial setup for the product was straightforward and we had no issues. Our deployment took approximately only about two hours.  

We did use the help of a consultant who knew more about the implementation of the product, but in the end, it really was just writing down which plug went from where to where. That was sort of our biggest issue.  

We were satisfied working with the consultant as they did help the process. In the end, we were sure it was set up correctly.  

We went to a conference two years ago to start researching another solution like Fortinet  FortiGate. Meraki was the one that seemed to stand out more to me.  

My advice to other people considering this as a solution is that I would probably just recommend them the same server and set up that we have. It sort of depends on what the person or the business needs. There are questions about how much control over it that you want to have, how much you really need to be able to oversee everything, et cetera. In terms of security issues, I think it is wonderful to be able to actually see where the pitfalls of our infrastructure are and stuff like that. But my gut feeling is I think I would probably just recommend the same system as we have.  

But the problem with that is I also don't know how Fortinet works because I haven't tested and implemented it myself. It looked promising when we researched it two years ago. I don't know, maybe it is just as good as Meraki. From what I've seen from comparisons between the two, they seem to be similar in terms of usability and price. I could be mistaken about some of that. But I'm happy with what we have, so I can recommend our system as something that is working for us.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Meraki SD-WAN, Software Defined Networking as an eight given the fact that I've only been working on it this short of time.  

The best feature we're using is the packet shaping. We can feed the traffic shaping rules according to our requirements, so if we need application-based packet shaping, we can configure it. If we want URL-based traffic shaping, we can do that too.

Also, we can enable per-client bandwidth according to our requirements. 

The solution can only support two up-links, so if you have three internet lines, there is not a provision to connect the third internet line. There is a provision to use the cellular data like a dongle, and you can use that dongle to connect the third line. We need that feature because we need to have three internet lines. The product should be able to support more than three internet lines.

I've been working with Meraki for the last four and a half years. 

It is stable for my business requirements. Some of our locations are assembly branches, so we use MX60 at those locations. We use that effective product for user compatibility, and we haven't had any issues.

The solution is scalable. We have 100 locations using this solution. 

We had a licensing issue, so we contacted the support team and got a response. I would rate their help as a four out of five. 

Previously, we were using the MPLS network. We then removed the MPLS network and installed Meraki products, which are compatible with this technology, so that's why we're using this product now. 

The initial setup is very easy, you just need to configure the IP addresses, gateway, subnet mask, and DNS. Once it's connected to the internet, you have to claim the device on the dashboard, and then the dashboard will automatically show if it's online or not. Once it is online, you can configure the policies, as per your requirements, through the dashboard. The remaining part of the setup can be performed and configured on the dashboard.

It takes around 15 to 20 minutes to configure it. 

We have a yearly license. 

You can use this solution for SMB branches according to your requirements. At this time, you cannot use Meraki on a single device, so suppose you have a core suite, distribution suite, and access suite. If you're a data center, you cannot use the solution at this point.

I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten. It is very user-friendly, and it doesn't take much time to configure the simple dashboard.

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

I am the architecture lead.

I believe this solution does a perfect job. It delivers what it's supposed to do and it's secure. The Meraki interface is really well driven and very mature. I like that it's a dashboard on the cloud so profile settings can be done from anywhere.

I think Meracki still has some work to do in terms of catching up with other companies when it comes to AI. 

I've been using this solution for a year. 

The solution is stable. 

When it comes to scalability, there's no compromise with Cisco, there is always scalability. 

Our technical support is local, from Saudi Arabia, and I believe the Smart Tech function is really awesome. 

The initial setup is straightforward, everything is built-in, and it's plug-and-play.

You need to pay for quality. We don't have a problem with the price but I know there is competition. We have an enterprise contract with Cisco. 

I take this solution 10 out of 10. 

The solution is used principally to have high availability services, high-quality services, and communication with two or more service providers in the same place.

The administration in the cloud that Merakioffers is great.

The solution is user-friendly.

Its integrations are good.

We haven't had any issues with customization.

Overall, it's a good product.

The product is easy to deploy.

We have found the scalability to be good.

The solution is stable. 

Pricing is very affordable. 

I do need to explore the solution a bit more before really finding fault in anything.

The distribution could be improved. We have a lot of problems with distribution. The late deliveries likely have to do with the time it takes for the fabrication of components. It is a principal problem at this moment.

It would be helpful if there was reporting. I'd like to be able to hand reports related to performance right over to clients. 

I've used the solution for maybe a year or a year and a half at this point. 

Overall, the solution has been stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It's pretty reliable. 

Our company has many projects that employ Meraki's SD-WAN.

The scalability of the product is quite nice. 

I haven't dealt with technical support. However, MEWraki is pretty simple to use, and therefore, we haven't really needed support from Cisco. 

The initial setup is fairly straightforward. It's not overly complex. 

Deployment would take a week or two at a maximum. It depends on the customer's requirements. 

As a service provider, we install SD-WAN services in the sites of our customers.

The pricing is pretty reasonable. 

I'm a Cisco distributor in Mexico. We are a service provider. We install SD-WAN services in the sites of customers.

We have multiple deployments, both on cloud and on-premises. 

I'd recommend the solution. the management is easy and the solution is pretty reasonably priced.

I would rate the solution at a ten 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.