Meraki Limits firewall throughput

[remixedcat]

Here's a reddit thread where SHTF

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

this is a terrible move for Meraki

 

[L&LD]

Here's a reddit thread where SHTF

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

this is a terrible move for Meraki

This is what happens when you lease hardware 'forever', after paying for it in full too.

The effective control will always be the manufacturer because it is 'cloud' based.

This is Cisco, not Meraki? (Meraki now just being a brand).

 

[remixedcat]

Yes it's Cisco Meraki but they have a different HQ location and operate kinda seperate.

 

[L&LD]

Yes it's Cisco Meraki but they have a different HQ location and operate kinda seperate.

No, no they don't.

 

[remixedcat]

Hmm they must have consolidated even further than

 

[sfx2000]

this is a terrible move for Meraki

Wow... in some ways though, it sounds like a bug fix gone awry... QoS is supposed to be a minimum committed bandwidth, not a maximum...

Between the conversations on Reddit and Spiceworks, I'm sure they'll figure it out...

@L&LD - I'm told by a couple of sources that Cisco has been fairly benign - it's not a core market, similar to what they did with Linksys - reporting P&L to the mothership, and getting some front time with their sales team, other than that, the Meraki business pretty much stands on it's own..

 

[stevech]

min/max bandwidth... I've always seen the term "bandwidth management" to mean limiting the peak and average rate for a flow (TCP or UDP/RTSP). To prevent hogging, get fairness per admin policy. QoS I think of in VoIP terms where a min is what's important.

 

[htismaqe]

@L&LD - I'm told by a couple of sources that Cisco has been fairly benign - it's not a core market, similar to what they did with Linksys - reporting P&L to the mothership, and getting some front time with their sales team, other than that, the Meraki business pretty much stands on it's own..

I worked with Meraki about 18 months ago on a big financial solution and at that time they were operating almost exactly like you've stated.

 

[L&LD]

@L&LD - I'm told by a couple of sources that Cisco has been fairly benign - it's not a core market, similar to what they did with Linksys - reporting P&L to the mothership, and getting some front time with their sales team, other than that, the Meraki business pretty much stands on it's own..

I worked with Meraki about 18 months ago on a big financial solution and at that time they were operating almost exactly like you've stated.

What they present to outsiders is not what necessarily happens internally. I do not have facts one way or another except that part of me that says 'what would common sense' indicate.

And that says they do not operate as independently as they would like us to think.

 

[htismaqe]

Well common sense with indicate they're going to do whatever they can to maximize profits. Cisco is pretty good at that.

What Cisco provides (at least to my knowledge) at this point is financial backing, marketing, and engineering insight (from a business standpoint). To me, the original issue falls under the third heading - it certainly seems to be something that could have come from Cisco. Of course, I'm a little biased - I've been dealing with Cisco for 25 years and I believe them to be some of the shadiest m*****-f****** on the planet.

Meraki is still being operated like a wholly-owned subsidiary other than those things.

 

[Razor512]

When you pay for hardware and then pay a subscription fee to use it, the company that made the product will be more likely to make business decisions that are not in the customer's best interest.
From a psychological standpoint, a user will be more willing to accept a little screwing over if the alternative means turning their hardware into a paperweight.

Cloud reliance allows more for this type of business to consumer relationship.

While it seems that they may have backtracked on that decision, it really seems like it was done on purpose. From my experience with alpha and beta level firmware, it is rare to push one out without verifying that the performance has not been negatively impacted.

They may have been testing the waters to see how much they can screw people over.