Meraki MX400 NAT Question
-
@Dashrender said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@Dashrender said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
Gotta convince the bean counters, and they'll be unhappy for the next 2 to 3 years, lol.
Even if you're saving them money?
Can't save something that's already spent.
But you can save against future costs. For instance a 3-year renewal.
Sure, but that's years from now...
In the meantime, saving against additional technical debt risks and unnecessary effort.
-
The MX400 is sunk cost. At that point, that money is gone, it's not part of the equation. Now today, the question is, going forward, does messing with the MX400, keeping it around and potentially investing more into it or needing to work around limitations justify not spending $300 on a replacement system?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@Dashrender said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@Dashrender said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
Gotta convince the bean counters, and they'll be unhappy for the next 2 to 3 years, lol.
Even if you're saving them money?
Can't save something that's already spent.
But you can save against future costs. For instance a 3-year renewal.
Sure, but that's years from now...
In the meantime, saving against additional technical debt risks and unnecessary effort.
This is always this.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
Gotta convince the bean counters, and they'll be unhappy for the next 2 to 3 years, lol.
Even if you're saving them money?
Yepp. AFAIK, the license and maintenance were all rolled together. But this was after I left, so I dunno.
Ah, well two things...
- Is it STILL saving them money? Check it out.
- It should make them unhappy with whoever selected the Meraki, not you.
The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change. The Meraki APs that they have there are working out rather nicely though.
-
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change. The Meraki APs that they have there are working out rather nicely though.
What defines "rather nicely"? Sounds like technical issues and high cost. Not sounding good to me
-
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@scottalanmiller said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
Gotta convince the bean counters, and they'll be unhappy for the next 2 to 3 years, lol.
Even if you're saving them money?
Yepp. AFAIK, the license and maintenance were all rolled together. But this was after I left, so I dunno.
Ah, well two things...
- Is it STILL saving them money? Check it out.
- It should make them unhappy with whoever selected the Meraki, not you.
The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change. The Meraki APs that they have there are working out rather nicely though.
I do like the Meraki APs... but you can rip and replace all of them for less then the cost of the maintenance and still get exactly the same functionality.
-
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change.
It's a tiny cost though, right? We are only talking about a minuscule investment, I think. If it saves a few hours of effort, doesn't that cover the cost?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change. The Meraki APs that they have there are working out rather nicely though.
What defines "rather nicely"? Sounds like technical issues and high cost. Not sounding good to me
Technical issues was the last round of gear. This Meraki kit works good for them except for the little niggle we have with source natting. (Thanks for whoever posted the"official" term for that.. I couldn't remember it to save my life).
-
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@scottalanmiller said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
Gotta convince the bean counters, and they'll be unhappy for the next 2 to 3 years, lol.
Even if you're saving them money?
Yepp. AFAIK, the license and maintenance were all rolled together. But this was after I left, so I dunno.
Ah, well two things...
- Is it STILL saving them money? Check it out.
- It should make them unhappy with whoever selected the Meraki, not you.
The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change. The Meraki APs that they have there are working out rather nicely though.
I do like the Meraki APs... but you can rip and replace all of them for less then the cost of the maintenance and still get exactly the same functionality.
They know. I told them several times during their research.... *shrugs*.
-
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@scottalanmiller said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
Gotta convince the bean counters, and they'll be unhappy for the next 2 to 3 years, lol.
Even if you're saving them money?
Yepp. AFAIK, the license and maintenance were all rolled together. But this was after I left, so I dunno.
Ah, well two things...
- Is it STILL saving them money? Check it out.
- It should make them unhappy with whoever selected the Meraki, not you.
The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change. The Meraki APs that they have there are working out rather nicely though.
I do like the Meraki APs... but you can rip and replace all of them for less then the cost of the maintenance and still get exactly the same functionality.
They know. I told them several times during their research.... *shrugs*.
Fair enough. You did your due diligence and some one chose a different solution.
-
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@scottalanmiller said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@coliver said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
Gotta convince the bean counters, and they'll be unhappy for the next 2 to 3 years, lol.
Even if you're saving them money?
Yepp. AFAIK, the license and maintenance were all rolled together. But this was after I left, so I dunno.
Ah, well two things...
- Is it STILL saving them money? Check it out.
- It should make them unhappy with whoever selected the Meraki, not you.
The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change. The Meraki APs that they have there are working out rather nicely though.
I do like the Meraki APs... but you can rip and replace all of them for less then the cost of the maintenance and still get exactly the same functionality.
They know. I told them several times during their research.... *shrugs*.
Fair enough. You did your due diligence and some one chose a different solution.
Yeah. At that point, I wasn't an employee anyway, lol. Still happy the Meraki stuff is working out for them.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
@dafyre said in Meraki MX400 NAT Question:
The team that is there now are the ones that have to convince the bean counters of the need to change.
It's a tiny cost though, right? We are only talking about a minuscule investment, I think. If it saves a few hours of effort, doesn't that cover the cost?
No you are not. You are neglecting to add in the labor costs and only calculating on the hardware costs.
Physically changing everything will add labor cost. Ordering, configuration, staging, installation.
Yes, something else is cheaper. But not as cheap as you try to make it sound.
The existing solution is in place and already paid for. A simple support call resolved the configuration issue. There is no reason to spend additional capital to change a working solution until you have to plan for new spend on the solution.
If the existing solution was actually not functional, or some other factors were in play to offset things, then it would certainly be worth switching solutions.
