Meraki MX Firewalls Review

Good scalability options but it's not easy to manage a product remotely across the world


What is our primary use case?

Meraki MX Firewalls solutions are very customized for our groups. We are a worldwide group. We are currently implementing an IT solution worldwide. 

We have to replace old firewalls in the next couple of years in many countries. We are working on this project. We used Meraki MX 55005 firewalls previously. 

In between, we used many different firewalls from other companies. We won't be doing the acquisition of many new parts by these companies now.

We have tested different brands of firewalls. We have to consolidate to handle a better solution. We chose Meraki because we are already familiar with the products. 

Meraki MX firewalls are one point, but also have good availability. We have many people from different countries in which we have Cisco contracts to serve.

It's not only a technical aspect but also a commercial reason for our choice of Meraki.

How has it helped my organization?

We are currently replacing all other old firewalls with new Meraki systems in the next two years. We do this first for new sites and for sites that need to change. 

We do not change everything in one step also because of budget and also because of deployment requirements. This is a worldwide deployment. It will take time.

What is most valuable?

One of the things I found very important for us is for our sites to have a new device. Another was to be able to have two solutions with the ease of firewalls to control everything.

We use Meraki MX firewalls remote for small to bigger sites. One also was to have integration with have physical DC. We work also with domain control (DC) from Microsoft or Amazon. We use a whole virtual appliance with Meraki.

One aspect of the problem is that we need to have the ability to do connections that are fully integrated, i.e. between one solution at home and at the data center. The short box epicenter is from Microsoft Azure in the future.

What needs improvement?

We are currently having a problem with Meraki in the end product. They have two kinds of enterprise licenses and an advanced security license. 

The problem is that the two licenses do not currently integrate. We have to create separate companies and do an interconnection between these licenses. 

Even to do a full free trial run, we need the same kind of licenses. This is something we seek to change because it's not fair. With this license mode, we should be able to choose which sites we use and which sites we do not need.

We often see a break in the connection between both modem and dish. We found that if we communicate with Cisco, we can find the right solution to solve this.

Currently, we have found all the things we need for our company already. Only perhaps compatibility for mobile lines is still required. 

Meraki MX is the program for us. We should have enterprise licenses.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using Meraki MX Firewalls for about two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of Meraki is that we have to fight working readiness. Meraki MX firewalls are perfect. We have no problems. We do agreements for a system. 

We do the changing of old IT systems. It's working very well.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is very good. We use it for plans that are electrified and on bigger plans for our domain. We have all of our plans and software licenses that match. We have deployed with this company responsibly. 

Currently, we are 400 people. We may need two more devices for 800 users. We decided to go bigger because of our proposed acquisition of many companies in the next couple of years.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is very good and quick. We have had some incidents and best response on a couple of various issues. They are very efficient.

What other advice do I have?

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate this product a 7. For us, the license is a big issue and we need to get better facilities, i.e. the original problem.

From any country, it's not easy to manage a product remotely across the world. We are supporting little companies and compatibilities for three countries with different languages. 

It's not easy to deal with because the provider we use doesn't deliver to our country, even Israel. It's a problem we encounter more than the physical system. It's complicated.

The one question we get about the system in Switzerland is that when we send it to the target countries, it's not good.

We need a solution that merges both to be able to access the system and theoretically to target businesses. We don't have this possibility


Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.

1 visitor found this review helpful
Add a Comment
Guest