Topic starter
10/06/2026 2:36 am
TL;DR: Cisco’s Meraki Systems Manager end-of-sale and 2029 support sunset are pushing teams toward identity-centric UEM models that bind device control, directory identity, and network authentication into one architecture, according to JumpCloud. The governance issue is not simply replacing one console with another, but collapsing disconnected identity and device-management silos before they create control gaps.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by JumpCloud: “Cisco Meraki SM vs JumpCloud: The Upgrade Guide”.
Key questions
Q: What breaks when access management is separated from identity governance?
A: Teams gain the ability to grant access but lose confidence that access remains appropriate over time.
Q: Why does identity-centric UEM matter when a device-management platform reaches end of sale?
A: Because the real risk is not tool replacement, it is control fragmentation during transition.
Q: How should teams evaluate agent-based UEM versus profile-based MDM?
A: They should decide based on whether they need local execution authority as well as configuration delivery.
Practitioner guidance
- Map endpoint control to directory authority Define the user directory object as the source of truth for login, device policy, and network authorization before decommissioning legacy MDM workflows.
- Inventory coexistence risks before migration Identify profile conflicts, agent isolation risks, and certificate path dependencies across Windows, macOS, Linux, and network access before rollout.
- Validate Cloud RADIUS and EAP-TLS paths Test certificate templates, supplicant settings, and fallback behaviour in a staged environment so network access does not fail during the cutover.
Bottom line: The Meraki SM sunset is pushing teams toward identity-centric UEM, where endpoint control and identity governance are managed together.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
11/06/2026 1:35 am
Identity-centric UEM works because it collapses endpoint control into the same governance plane as identity, but that consolidation also exposes the quality of the directory itself. Once device access, local login, and network authentication share a control surface, stale identities and excessive privileges stop being separate problems. The field should treat UEM migration as a directory governance event, not a device project. Practitioners need to measure whether the directory can safely absorb endpoint authority.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 67% of organisations still rely heavily on static credentials despite the risks they pose to agentic AI deployments, according to The 2026 Infrastructure Identity Survey.
- That same survey found that only 13% of security leaders feel extremely prepared for the reality of agentic AI, which shows how fast governance is lagging behind operational adoption.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who should own identity-centric endpoint governance?
A: Ownership should sit across identity, endpoint, and network teams with one accountable control owner. If those functions stay siloed, no one can reliably manage the lifecycle of directory objects, certificates, agents, and local access together.
👉 Read our full editorial: Identity-centric UEM after Meraki SM sunset changes endpoint governance
12/06/2026 3:10 am
Identity-centric UEM is really a directory governance model, not a device-management refresh. The article shows that the key change is where authority lives: in a directory object that governs login, policy, and network trust together. That matters because endpoint controls only become durable when they are tied to the same lifecycle as identity and access. Practitioners should treat the migration as an identity architecture decision, not an MDM procurement event.
A question worth separating out:
A: By testing profile coexistence, agent trust, and certificate-based network authentication before broad rollout. The practical risk is not only technical incompatibility but also temporary exceptions that become permanent control gaps. Staged cutover, clear unenrollment logic, and certificate validation should be part of the migration plan.
👉 Read our full editorial: Identity-centric UEM after Meraki SM sunset changes endpoint governance