Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is a software-defined wide area network solution designed to simplify and optimize enterprise network connectivity in complex digital landscapes. It enables organizations to connect any user to any application, whether on-premises, in data centers, or across multiple clouds, with integrated capabilities for multicloud support, security, predictive automation, and enhanced network visibility—all built on a Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)-enabled…
N/A
Cisco Meraki MX
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Meraki MX Firewalls is a combined UTM and Software-Defined WAN solution. Meraki is managed via the cloud, and provides core firewall services, including site-to-site VPN, plus network monitoring.
We already had the infrastructure in place to use Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. Using products from other vendors would have necessitated using additional equipment or virtual appliances.
Nothing very specific to say about the concurrent products but there is lots of concepts differentiators and typically the range of hardware platforms etc... the concepts as well.
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN stands out for its robust performance, security features, and seamless integration with existing Cisco infrastructure. It offers advanced routing, centralized management, and enhanced network visibility, making it ideal for large-scale enterprises. Cisco's …
SD-WAN vs traditional routing is so much more advanced and interesting. Centralised management of devices makes everything easy to deploy, especially across hundreds of locations. The security is very similar, but I feel the network performance is improved and the setup is less …
Silver Peak is a pretty solid product as well. It does not offer as many customizations, but that also makes onboarding significantly easier. It's a tradeoff between the amount of supported features and the complexity of the dashboard. Similarly if you are willing to …
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is more sophisticated and has a wider range of functionalities than the Meraki SD-WAN solution. For Meraki SD-WAN you cannot configure all policies that it is possible for Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. Meraki SD-WAN is more as plug and play solution. For Cisco …
We've used the old Cisco SD-WAN, which no longer exists. It was a lot more complex to configure what is now called Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. So they've definitely come a long way in that it is a lot less complicated to set up and template based.
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN isn't really a hardware product, so it's more like a concept. And so it's really hard to, this is kind of unique, so it doesn't really have a competitor per se.
Actually quite well, I will say. Like I said, I think the one thing that is probably holding us back is what do we need to do to clean up our environment now if we're able to do that right now, I think we wouldn't even be in this RFP process.
When we analyzed Meraki it was clear for us, that our company complexity and need required another level of maturity that was not present for there but it was for Viptela SDWAN now Cisco SDWAN.
We have used just regular switches with regular firewalls, third party firewalls kind of do the same thing. But the problem with that is that there's a lot of configuration to be done if IP addresses changes. But with the Meraki, I don't have that problem because it's all in …
The closest thing would be just a traditional Cisco router with a DMVPN network set up, but I haven't really interacted with anything on Meraki's level. The closest thing would just be a traditional Cisco router with a VPN network.
The Meraki Dashboard has been a lot more intuitive than CradlePoint NetCloud. We switched from CradlePoint to Cisco Meraki MX because we were already familiar with the interface which allowed us to be familiar with a single dashboard.
The inclusion of unified threat management UTM capabilities were considered a crucial part of the deployment of this solution, which the easy cloud management permitted to build trust in a new solution that no member of the team knew, added that the Cisco is very well known and …
the feature rich unified threat management UTM capabilities were a crucial part of the deployment of this solution that the industry leading cloud management was an pivotal point (previously known by several members of the team), and the Cisco brand is very power full and a …
Cisco Meraki MX and Cato Networks both offer cloud-managed networking solutions, but they take different approaches. Meraki MX is a traditional hardware-based solution backed by Cisco's established networking expertise. It provides integrated security features, SD-WAN …
The top capabilities of unified threat management (utm) protects the company while maintaing costs reduced with great scalability. Cisco core values of quality and resiliency also add a part in choosing Meraki.
The enormous difference between Catalyst and Meraki products is the granular and simple deployment. The Cisco security appliance firewall gives one and you more granular activity whereas the Cisco Meraki MX is focused on plug and play and it gets one and you going. I like …
The best case, what I recommend to others and to clients to use is Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN one for is the case when you have a huge number of branches or small offices or remote offices, you name it. Even home offices, you have a large number and you want this whole infrastructure to be extremely easy to set up and also to have everything almost the same, not to have deviations from the standard configuration. This is the sweet spot for introducing Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN.
We used Meraki MX with our remote sites and connected the MX 68 to our main MX 85. We routed traffic to our enterprise network and shared application and internet access to remote sites. We have routed traffic and allow only trusted IP address sources using the firewall rules implemented in the Meraki MX. In other scenarios, if the internet is lost, the Meraki will go offline; thus, stable internet access is important to maintain connectivity
I will say the ease of use. I know it's very much a template based with feature templates and device templates when deployed properly. I truly believe that the tool can be very, very effective and actually quite robust for us to leverage for globally because we manage a lot of distribution centers and it's all over the world and a different environment in each and every location and obviously across the global markets as well. We've got a wide range of use cases and how it would be very beneficial to each of our business units that we support.
It provides a really good single pane of glass so you can really easily identify end to end, what is going on in your environment.
It provides the ability for someone that doesn't necessarily need a really deep level of knowledge to be able to operate and maintain it. I think that's probably a big selling point, but I think definitely for the people that I'm selling the products who just having a dashboard and being able to log onto it and see if things are good or bad is quite key. So it does that really well.
The initial setup and configuration of the software can be somewhat complex, especially if you are not familiar with SD-WAN technology
It has many advanced features and capabilities and as so it can be difficult to find the specific setting or option that you are looking for in the interface
Layer seven firewall rules. Just making them more granular. We've been in meetings with Cisco SES where I've said feature requests many times and that's one of the big ones where it's just a little cumbersome to implement layer seven rules right now.
Just making them more granular. We've been in meetings with Cisco SES where I've said feature requests many times and that's one of the big ones where it's just a little cumbersome to implement layer seven rules right now.
I would rate SD-WAN highly because it has significantly improved network performance, reliability, and cost-efficiency for my organization. Its ability to optimize traffic dynamically, enhance security, and simplify management across multiple locations has been invaluable. With SD-WAN, we’ve reduced dependency on costly MPLS, improved cloud application performance, and gained greater control over our network infrastructure.
It is already in place and the client is happy with it. We don't see a need to change what is already working. We want the Meraki to stay out of the way and keep things operating, and that's what it does.
No very intuitive for none trained customer, very complicated to assure a day to day operations if you don't have a strong knowledges on network routing OSPF BGP RIP etc... The different platforms and range of furnitures with specific options is very complicated for the integration and consolidation of the solution.
The Cisco Meraki MX series is very easy to use. Setting up user VPN access, site to site VPN to tie multiple locations together and managing all your devices. You can even download the latest firmware and install without ever leaving the dashboard. Meraki is the very definition of easy to use
Meraki MX devices support high availability (HA) configurations, which ensures minimal downtime if one device goes offline. This feature has helped us maintain a stable and reliable network, even in cases of hardware failures. ince Meraki is cloud-managed, we've noticed that the cloud infrastructure is generally highly reliable, with minimal service interruptions or downtime. This makes it easier to manage the network remotely without significant availability concerns. Meraki automatically pushes firmware updates and patches, which helps maintain system stability without requiring manual intervention. These updates are rolled out in a manner that ensures minimal disruption to service.
The interface is pretty responsive. The lower end devices are easy to overwhelm if you have a lot of throughput. Be sure the model you get is rated for the amount of traffic you will have. Overbuild if possible, otherwise you won't be fully leveraging the connection from your ISP.
Initial setup of any SD-WAN is complicated and difficult because there is so much to do and it is so very granular. Because of this, Cisco has a number of free onboarding help setups. I worked one-on-one with a couple of engineers during our POC, and those relationships continued afterwards into the Pilot. And that's not even counting the Cisco TAC experience or the number of How-To videos and documents they have uploaded on their sites.
I haven't ever had a bad experience with Meraki support. On the few occasions where I wasn't understanding the UI or needed some clarification about what a setting actually would do, I contacted them and they were very quickly able to provide help. Returns are simple and fast, too. We had to return a defective device one time and they shipped the replacement before we had even un-racked the one that was faulty. Unlike many other vendors, they didn't ask use to a do long list of scripted diagnostics, they just took my word for it that the device was broken and sent out a replacement immediately
great when they offered it, really tested your knowledge with hands on and see what your peers from other orgs know. glad to see that we were ahead of the curve of what our peers knew
Implementing Meraki MX devices in phases—starting with a pilot group or select branch offices—was invaluable. This allowed us to identify potential configuration issues, troubleshoot problems, and refine our setup before rolling it out company-wide. It also helped to get feedback from early users and adjust the deployment strategy accordingly. The SD-WAN capabilities in Meraki MX were essential for optimizing our WAN traffic and ensuring better application performance across various locations.
We've used the old Cisco SD-WAN, which no longer exists. It was a lot more complex to configure what is now called Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. So they've definitely come a long way in that it is a lot less complicated to set up and template based.
We previously evaluated WatchGuard Firebox Cloud, but we needed a solution that was a bit more straightforward to deploy and manage. The MX met that need for us. However licensing costs for both solutions are still a bit high.
When I first started with my company we had various infrastructure and a mix of tech. Since going to Cisco Meraki MX we have noticed better network performance and our new sites are much easier to bring online. Users have noticed an improvement in VPN connection and getting into all our systems.
It had a very positive experience, especially for the power plants that have actually already transitioned into Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. I think Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is a very powerful tool for them because again, it allows peace of mind for redundancy purposes. Most power plants are located in a very remote area where before they used to have only certain choices for circuits to get out. So this allows to integrate any choice that you have there, not just point to point. So no, it is been great. Again, we're still in the process of transforming the whole network into Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN, so yeah, no, so far so good.
From a positive impact? Basically it allows us to set up shop very quickly. It allowed us to add sites to our network very quickly. From a negative perspective, I think the only thing is that I can see from a negative perspective is I have a preference to working with ACLI in terms of how I engage with the youth tool At the moment, the only way to actually engage with a tool is on a gui and sometimes what I'd actually like is more detailed information in terms of actual configuration that you'll actually get out of ACLI.
