I looked at them quite closely before they were crushed purchased by Cisco. They had a good looking product line and great management features (remote or not). Simple and effective yet powerful.
I bought a Linksys WRT 1900AC for my home a while back which can ONLY be managed remotly through http://linksyssmartwifi.com. This disturbed me at first, but sure enough when I wanted to get to it from away from home it was quite handy.
So maybe remotely manageable networking devices is the way of the future.
In this industry, however, it seems that many integrators already use something like GoToMyPC to remotely access and maintain VMS systems--at which point you could probably also do LAN based network management if necessary. So it may not be worth the cost.
We have a customer that provides their own switches (Meraki) that we deploy cameras and Genetec on, and they work just as well as any other switches we've deployed on. It really shouldnt matter whether its Meraki, Aruba, or any other number of cloud-managed switches as far as the VMS or cameras go... switching is so built around standards, I can't see it being right/wrong/different than anything else.
Also just noticed my poll didn't work right. Fixed that now.
Most of our larger customers networks have no WAN access so I am not sure Meraki would be a good fit. I am asuming these switches need to have WAN access for the cloud-management to work? yes/no
IPVMU Certified | 03/28/15 05:36pm
Hi Ethan, Funny you should ask this question. I have been driving myself crazy over it for the last month because at "My Day Job" (we recently outsourced our IT department) they want to redo all of our switches to a Meraki Backbone topology. They also want to replace all of our camera switches at the same time. They want to use VLANs so that they can share the POE ports to power access points with the switches. "They Know what they are doing" so I trust that I will wind up with better throughput. I have been trying to compute how much bandwidth I really need; we run Milestone and I can't seem to figure out how much bandwidth the client takes.
FWIW, here is a spreadsheet of Cisco 300 series with POE, and Meraki 200 Series. In the Cisco, the SF means 10/100 and the SG meaeans 10/100/1000. All of the Meraki are Gigbit ports... Oh, and BTW, Cisco owns Meraki... on these switches all ports are POE
|Manufacturer ||Model Number ||POE Ports ||64 bit mpps ||Max Gbps ||POE Power |
|Cisco ||SF302-08P ||8 ||4.17 ||5.6 ||62W |
|Cisco ||SF302-08PP ||8 ||4.17 ||5.6 ||62W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SF302-08MP ||8 ||4.17 ||5.6 ||124W |
|Cisco ||SF302-08MPP ||8 ||4.17 ||5.6 ||124W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SF300-24P ||24 ||9.52 ||12.8 ||180W |
|Cisco ||SF300-24PP ||24 ||9.52 ||12.8 ||180W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SF300-24MP ||24 ||9.52 ||12.8 ||375W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SF300-48P ||48 ||13.1 ||17.6 ||375W |
|Cisco ||SF300-48PP ||48 ||13.1 ||17.6 ||375W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SG300-10P ||8 ||14.88 ||20 ||62W |
|Cisco ||SG300-10PP ||8 ||14.88 ||20 ||62W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SG300-10MP ||8 ||14.88 ||20 ||124W |
|Cisco ||SG300-10MPP ||8 ||14.88 ||20 ||124W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SG300-28P ||24 ||41.67 ||56 ||180W |
|Cisco ||SG300-28PP ||24 ||41.67 ||56 ||180W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SG300-28MP ||24 ||41.67 ||56 ||375W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SG300-52P ||48 ||77.38 ||104 ||375W (PoE+ supported) |
|Cisco ||SG300-52MP ||48 ||77.38 ||104 ||740W (PoE+ supported) |
|Meraki ||MS220-8P ||8 ||na ||20 ||124W |
|Meraki ||MS220-24P ||24 ||na ||48 ||370W |
|Meraki ||MS220-48LP ||48 ||na ||104 ||370W |
|Meraki ||MS220-48FP ||48 ||na ||104 ||740W |
If somebody outside the tent is managing gear why isn't it the integrator. "Why are you walking away from that revenue opportunity." (famous last words.)