Cisco Meraki vMX vs. Cisco Meraki Z3 Teleworker (discontinued)

I think for us in our deployment model where it spoke to the hub, it certainly makes ideal sense. I would probably say with anyone that's signed in Azure or a cloud platform, obviously VMX appliance may not be suited. Anyone on Old Legacy MPLS may struggle to see a purpose for SD-WAN overlay of the top. But I think if you really want to introduce network communications that are low cost effective, solid in terms of availability and performance, a Meraki sdwan solution with the VMX appliance in the cloud is ideal.

Incentivized

The Cisco Meraki Z3 Teleworker appliance was ideal for scenarios where the remote worker spent the majority of their time remote. It alleviates the need for VPN software and gives the IT staff additional visibility into the connectivity of the user. We often encountered scenarios where the users broadband was having issues vs the Meraki network and the tools Meraki provides help to work through these scenarios. The case for the Meraki devices is not as strong for occasional users who cannot justify the cost of the appliance vs just logging in via VPN.

Incentivized

• It handles load really well.
• It brings simplification to the whole piece of networking network, so it makes it simple for us to diagnose and troubleshoot issues put in place as changes.
• It has pretty good site to site firewall control.
• It works well in Azure, so it ticks all our boxes.

Incentivized

• Easy setup for remote worker
• Versatility with WiFi and cable connections
• Safe to outages with dual wan setup

Incentivized

• Client VPN: Cisco Meraki vMX in general needs to implement multiple VPN profiles/ group policies for client VPN
• Alerts: Cisco Meraki vMX in general should be more consistent in sending alerts. We should receive alarms instantly.
• Event logs: More in-depth event logs for all Meraki products, such as system crashes, etc.

Incentivized

• When Internet is lost and come back we need to reset the Z3 device from the dashboard in order to register the IP Phone to CUCM
• It would be nice to manage the Z3 device to a local web portal just for TS
• Max Speed 100Mbps. It would be nice if it could run up to 1GB

Incentivized

Cisco Meraki vMX is great for small to medium businesses. It is easy to use with little out-of-the-box configuration. There is an easier learning curve on the Cisco Meraki vMX than on the SonicWall devices. We went with the Cisco Meraki vMX because we had the physical appliances already in place and the virtual appliance tied into our system seamlessly.

Incentivized

At the time of implementation, we were not aware of a comparable product from Cisco or comparative vendor. We had initially deployed the Z1 appliance and had so much success that the transition to the Cisco Meraki Z3 Teleworker was a quick and easy fit for us. The device is easy to deploy and just works.

Incentivized

This question is hard. A chain of retail or gas stations hypothetically that have simple networks in nature would flourish and scale quite well with Meraki. A chain of banks or something more complex that has more complex requirements doesn't scale very well or at least presents many caveats. Routing has always been a big setup with Meraki but I've always managed to 'get by'.

Incentivized

The product is very scalable due to its implementation to the Meraki cloud and SD-WAN capabilities.

Incentivized

• Standardizing: We can use the same "template" setup for multiple customers
• Management: Easy to manage along with the rest of the Meraki products
• Stability: Using Cisco Meraki vMX instead of VNGs in Azure provides better stability with auto-VPN between the Cisco Meraki vMX and other networks

Incentivized

• Good visibility for IT team so we can monitor and validate the teleworker traffic
• Zero Touch Provisioning so we do not need to send a Engineer to configure it.
• Consumer-grade network security

Incentivized