<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: MR44 visibility in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531286#M311900</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Meraki roaming optimization assumes APs can communicate over their management VLAN.&lt;BR /&gt;When APs lose that visibility, the system falls back on client behavior (gratuitous ARP), which Apple doesn’t reliably provide after inactivity.&lt;BR /&gt;Android masks the problem because it refreshes ARP aggressively.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If possible, allow AP management VLAN traffic to traverse between switch stacks (even if limited to Meraki control traffic). This preserves fast roaming and state sync.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:14:11 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>aleabrahao</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-11-19T17:14:11Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531281#M311895</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello, do MR44 APs need to see each other over the LAN management or do they only need Internet access to contact the Meraki cloud?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 16:40:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531281#M311895</guid>
      <dc:creator>berty</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-19T16:40:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531282#M311896</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;For connection to the cloud they just need internet. I'm not aware of any feature that requires the APs be able to talk to each other directly. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Example: &lt;A href="https://documentation.meraki.com/Wireless/Design_and_Configure/Architecture_and_Best_Practices/Seamless_Roaming_with_MR_Access_Points" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://documentation.meraki.com/Wireless/Design_and_Configure/Architecture_and_Best_Practices/Seamless_Roaming_with_MR_Access_Points&lt;/A&gt; The requirements for roaming have no need for direct communication.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 16:45:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531282#M311896</guid>
      <dc:creator>mloraditch</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-19T16:45:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531283#M311897</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Only internet access.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 16:49:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531283#M311897</guid>
      <dc:creator>aleabrahao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-19T16:49:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531284#M311898</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;ok thanks you&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 16:50:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531284#M311898</guid>
      <dc:creator>berty</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-19T16:50:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531285#M311899</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Ok, I was wondering because I’m having ARP update issues with iPhones, and I only encounter this problem at headquarters where I have a different network topology than the other branches. At headquarters, I use policy rules on my core network that redirect the management VLAN traffic of the access points directly to the firewall. As a result, when the APs are not on the same switch stack, they cannot see each other. But in the branch offices, I haven’t implemented this specific routing, and I don’t encounter the problem.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:08:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531285#M311899</guid>
      <dc:creator>berty</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-19T17:08:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531286#M311900</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Meraki roaming optimization assumes APs can communicate over their management VLAN.&lt;BR /&gt;When APs lose that visibility, the system falls back on client behavior (gratuitous ARP), which Apple doesn’t reliably provide after inactivity.&lt;BR /&gt;Android masks the problem because it refreshes ARP aggressively.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If possible, allow AP management VLAN traffic to traverse between switch stacks (even if limited to Meraki control traffic). This preserves fast roaming and state sync.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:14:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531286#M311900</guid>
      <dc:creator>aleabrahao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-19T17:14:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531287#M311901</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Some useful documents.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://documentation.meraki.com/Wireless/Design_and_Configure/Architecture_and_Best_Practices/Broadcast_Suppression_and_Control_Technologies_for_MR_Access_Points" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer"&gt;Broadcast Suppression and Control Technologies for MR Access Points - Cisco Meraki Documentation&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://documentation.meraki.com/Wireless/Design_and_Configure/Architecture_and_Best_Practices/Roaming_Technologies" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer"&gt;Roaming Technologies - Cisco Meraki Documentation&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://documentation.meraki.com/Wireless/Design_and_Configure/Architecture_and_Best_Practices/Seamless_Roaming_with_MR_Access_Points" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer"&gt;Seamless Roaming with MR Access Points - Cisco Meraki Documentation&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:25:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531287#M311901</guid>
      <dc:creator>aleabrahao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-19T17:25:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531288#M311902</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Ok, I was also considering this hypothesis. I will test it and get back to you. Thank you.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:34:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531288#M311902</guid>
      <dc:creator>berty</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-19T17:34:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531289#M311903</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://documentation.meraki.com/Wireless/Design_and_Configure/Architecture_and_Best_Practices/Roaming_Technologies#Client_Tracking" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://documentation.meraki.com/Wireless/Design_and_Configure/Architecture_and_Best_Practices/Roaming_Technologies#Client_Tracking&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;"&lt;SPAN&gt;Client tracking information is shared with Access Points via broadcast messages, so ensure that port isolation and private VLAN features are not enabled upstream in a configuration that can block broadcasts between APs."&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 18:35:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531289#M311903</guid>
      <dc:creator>Philip D'Ath</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-19T18:35:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531290#M311904</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Since L3 Roaming (without concentrator) tunnels the user traffic directly from AP to AP, this feature depends on direct communication between the APs. The communication occurs on the management VLAN.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2025 07:34:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531290#M311904</guid>
      <dc:creator>p.deleuw</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-11-20T07:34:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MR44 visibility</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531291#M311905</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello everyone,&lt;BR /&gt;I ran a test by modifying the network topology so that the access points can communicate with each other across all switch stacks. Unfortunately, this did not resolve my issue: Apple devices are still regularly losing their Wi-Fi connection.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2025 08:08:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mr44-visibility/m-p/5531291#M311905</guid>
      <dc:creator>berty</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-12-04T08:08:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

