ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Meraki Rate-Limits Z1 to 50Mbps

    IT Discussion
    cisco meraki meraki z1
    12
    28
    4.9k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • NicN
      Nic
      last edited by scottalanmiller

      https://www.reddit.com/r/meraki/comments/41laj8/did_the_z1s_just_get_a_bandwidth_lock_pushed_down/

      Looks like they added this in after the fact, which is a bit of a dick move.

      Meraki Z1

      J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
      • brianlittlejohnB
        brianlittlejohn
        last edited by

        Glad I never purchased any Meraki equipment. I demoed some then saw the recurring fee and decided against it.

        J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
        • scottalanmillerS
          scottalanmiller
          last edited by

          That is absolutely ridiculous. Sounds like someone at Ubiquiti is paying Cisco to cripple their gear to teach customers a lesson for having bought from the "big name" vendor.

          RojoLocoR JaredBuschJ 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • Minion QueenM
            Minion Queen Banned
            last edited by

            The recurring fee makes them less than desirable for a lot of the SMB.

            scottalanmillerS MattSpellerM 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 3
            • scottalanmillerS
              scottalanmiller @Minion Queen
              last edited by

              @Minion-Queen said:

              The recurring fee makes them less than desirable for a lot of the SMB.

              And for the enterprise or anyone who could possibly be a customer.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
              • RojoLocoR
                RojoLoco @scottalanmiller
                last edited by

                @scottalanmiller said:

                That is absolutely ridiculous. Sounds like someone at Ubiquiti is paying Cisco to cripple their gear to teach customers a lesson for having bought from the "big name" vendor.

                As if buying and using Cisco gear isn't painful enough lesson already...

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                • scottalanmillerS
                  scottalanmiller
                  last edited by

                  Not to mention the up front price being a problem too.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • scottalanmillerS
                    scottalanmiller
                    last edited by

                    Plus things like rate limiting and not being able to trust your vendor. Major hurtles.

                    A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • A
                      Alex Sage @scottalanmiller
                      last edited by

                      @scottalanmiller I think you mean roadblock.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • MattSpellerM
                        MattSpeller @Minion Queen
                        last edited by

                        @Minion-Queen said:

                        The recurring fee makes them less than desirable for a lot of the SMB.

                        My boss is a Cisco fanatic - even she says the fees are pure extortion.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
                        • JaredBuschJ
                          JaredBusch @scottalanmiller
                          last edited by

                          @scottalanmiller said:

                          That is absolutely ridiculous. Sounds like someone at Ubiquiti is paying Cisco to cripple their gear to teach customers a lesson for having bought from the "big name" vendor.

                          Where the hell did that come from? Insinuating bad shit on Ubiquiti for Cisco's screw up?

                          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • scottalanmillerS
                            scottalanmiller @JaredBusch
                            last edited by

                            @JaredBusch said:

                            @scottalanmiller said:

                            That is absolutely ridiculous. Sounds like someone at Ubiquiti is paying Cisco to cripple their gear to teach customers a lesson for having bought from the "big name" vendor.

                            Where the hell did that come from? Insinuating bad shit on Ubiquiti for Cisco's screw up?

                            It was sarcasm. That it sounds like Cisco is letting someone intentionally cripple their gear so that their competitors look better. Ubiquiti is the only real competitor here.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • scottalanmillerS
                              scottalanmiller
                              last edited by

                              But you are right, it could just be an outright hatred of customers or internal sabotage or a gamble that their customers are unbelievable suckers.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • J
                                Jason Banned @Nic
                                last edited by

                                @Nic said:

                                https://www.reddit.com/r/meraki/comments/41laj8/did_the_z1s_just_get_a_bandwidth_lock_pushed_down/

                                Looks like they added this in after the fact, which is a bit of a dick move.

                                This is misrepresented. The Uplink Bandwidth is not a throttle, it's used to do QoS/thortlling on SSIDs that are to Scale (of the overall bandwidth). Likely just something is wrong in the config or there's some other firmware bug.

                                NicN 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • NicN
                                  Nic @Jason
                                  last edited by

                                  @Jason meraki says it's not a bug - here's there response:

                                  As discussed in our Z1 datasheet (https://meraki.cisco.com/lib/pdf/meraki_datasheet_z1.pdf) the rated throughput for the MX (firewall) is 50Mbps.
                                  Therefore the speeds you are achieving are correct and are within the specifications as outlined in the datasheet.
                                  If you were previously achieving higher speeds and have now seen a drop in performance this may be caused by changes within the new firmware update. However your device is still achieving speeds as specified within the datasheet.

                                  J W 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • J
                                    Jason Banned @Nic
                                    last edited by Jason

                                    @Nic said:

                                    @Jason meraki says it's not a bug - here's there response:

                                    As discussed in our Z1 datasheet (https://meraki.cisco.com/lib/pdf/meraki_datasheet_z1.pdf) the rated throughput for the MX (firewall) is 50Mbps.
                                    Therefore the speeds you are achieving are correct and are within the specifications as outlined in the datasheet.
                                    If you were previously achieving higher speeds and have now seen a drop in performance this may be caused by changes within the new firmware update. However your device is still achieving speeds as specified within the datasheet.

                                    Actually Cisco has already said they think there is a bug in the dashboard software causing it.

                                    But yeah expecting more than it's rated bandwidth is still on the customer, not Meraki.

                                    NicN 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • NicN
                                      Nic @Jason
                                      last edited by

                                      @Jason you have a link to that newer statement?

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • J
                                        Jason Banned @brianlittlejohn
                                        last edited by

                                        @brianlittlejohn said:

                                        Glad I never purchased any Meraki equipment. I demoed some then saw the recurring fee and decided against it.

                                        We found the costs to not really much different than paying for smartnet (now totalcare) for our old APs.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • W
                                          WingCreative @Nic
                                          last edited by WingCreative

                                          @Nic said:

                                          @Jason meraki says it's not a bug - here's there response:

                                          As discussed in our Z1 datasheet (https://meraki.cisco.com/lib/pdf/meraki_datasheet_z1.pdf) the rated throughput for the MX (firewall) is 50Mbps.
                                          Therefore the speeds you are achieving are correct and are within the specifications as outlined in the datasheet.
                                          If you were previously achieving higher speeds and have now seen a drop in performance this may be caused by changes within the new firmware update. However your device is still achieving speeds as specified within the datasheet.

                                          Sounds like someone forgot to flip a "don't go above rated throughput, if they want more they'll pay more" switch in the firmware until today.

                                          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                          • J
                                            Jason Banned
                                            last edited by Jason

                                            It's not unusual, many Cisco routers require a paper licence when you go above certain bandwidth limits on them (mean they are a paper licences not one that's enforced by software, much like CALs, CUBE etc) Many of them are per 100MB for the WAN.

                                            Our palo alto's require more fees for more throughput being used on the same device.

                                            dafyreD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 1 / 2
                                            • First post
                                              Last post