AWS Direct Connect Reviews

Our customers primarily use AWS Direct Connect for hybrid cloud solutions. They have parts of their equipment in their on-premise data center, while also using AWS infrastructure for backups, databases, storage, and virtual machines. This is beneficial, especially for bandwidth-intensive workloads.

AWS Direct Connect offers higher security options by avoiding internet-related problems such as DDoS attacks and provides stable bandwidth. Another significant benefit is the cost-effectiveness of not having extra traffic costs, depending on the egress cost when data moves out of the AWS cloud to a company.

It also helps with sensitive information security by providing a reliable connection that does not suffer from internet attacks and offers constant bandwidth control. Additionally, dedicated connections allow for MACsec encryption, enhancing security further.

One area that needs improvement is the cost of the ports, which is a concern as these charges are quite high. It is primarily a budget issue because while the solution is effective, the port costs can deter organizations from adopting it. Similarly, although AWS, Azure, and Google have slight differences in pricing, high port costs are a common issue.

Scalability beyond 10 gigabits is more expensive since AWS does not offer hosted connections over this limit; it only provides direct connections, which affects scalability and related costs.

Regarding the stability of the solution, it is stable.

In terms of scalability, the solution is quite good; it is scalable up until 10 gigabits, but over 10 gigabits, it is more expensive to scale from 10 to 100 because AWS does not have these hosted connections anymore. It only has direct connections, so there is a difference then.

I cannot rate the technical support from AWS on a scale of zero to ten because we do not have direct connections with AWS. The customer does, and we are just building a part of the connection.

Neutral

We are system integrators with AWS and provide connection services to our customers.

Connecting with AWS Direct Connect is straightforward; our part is just straightforward to connect at Layer 2. What is more complex might be the part the customer has to do, such as the routing configuration.

We are not purchasing any solution directly from Amazon, such as through AWS Marketplace; we just build the connection between the customer and Amazon. The customer purchases the needed gateways and ports at AWS, so that is not part of what we do for them. We just provide the connection.

When comparing AWS Direct Connect, I do not know if AWS is the most expensive because that is not the part I work closely with, as we just do the connections. I would say that Google, AWS, and Azure are at the same level. There are probably differences, but I do not think they are significant.

Regarding the benefits from the multiple virtual interfaces in the product, there is no interface for the product; it is just a connection that we have. It is an ethernet connection we offer. The customer, from the customer side to AWS, receives an ethernet point-to-point connection, and that is it. The interface and everything along with the communication with AWS, the customer has to do by themselves to build the routes and everything.

The connection speed that our clients are using ranges from 100 megabits up to 10 gigabits.

The main concern is the port costs. Clients do not report technical problems, so it is mainly always an issue of money. The solution is nice, but sometimes they avoid it because the port costs are high. This is not a problem AWS has exclusively; Azure has the same costs, and these port costs are quite expensive.

I would rate this review as an 8 out of 10.

We are using SAP boxes for the ERP system. We are using VPNs, elastic internet IPs. We have Route 53. We have mail because it is necessary to have mail if we want to publish a domain on the internet.

The best features of the AWS VPN are that it is not expensive and cheaper. It also has the security regulation with 3DES protocol. They have the security protocol we require to encrypt the information in the link.

We have two VPN connections - one is the main and the other is the backup connection with a different internet provider. We are located in North Virginia.

AWS VPN is cost-effective and affordable. It has the security regulation with 3DES protocol, and they have the security protocol required to encrypt the information in the link.

We have the VPNs for our concrete ready-mix plants and users, which provides good response time.

There is a gateway as part of the VPN connection. The integrations help with centralizing management.

It is working fine for us as it is.

AI is the icon in the future, so they need to provide more information for us. For us, it is a new concept, and we will try to use it for our vertical industry in ready-mix concrete.

I am still using AWS products.

We are dealing with a Mexican partner because in Mexico we have a regulation with the invoices. We need invoices, bills, and payments supported by a document called CFDI. We are paying a Mexican dealer that has the main contract with AWS.

We are planning to work with an Active Directory in the near future, but at this moment, we don't have this functionality.

We are using EBS and EIPs. We have the servers, space, EBS, IPs, Route 53.

We are using a VPN connection where AWS provides a configuration file, which we download to our routers. It is a connection used by the internet through a public link. We are using an enterprise VPN for a public link, not AWS Direct Connect.

We are using DrayTek routers.

I rate this solution a 10 out of 10 because we have high availability and good response time.

Positive

I use AWS Direct Connect to connect our on-premise infrastructure with AWS. We have a data center with our own servers and applications, and I create some AWS machines that need to connect with our on-premise servers.

AWS Direct Connect allows me to connect our on-premise infrastructure directly with AWS infrastructure. This is particularly beneficial because it helps me use our infrastructure for databases and testing while leveraging AWS's computing power for production purposes. 

I also do not need to expose management of our machines to the public internet, enhancing security by using a private connection.

AWS Direct Connect is straightforward and performs well for me. However, having more locations could improve the convenience of using the service. I currently connect through Equinix, but more data center locations would be beneficial.

I have been working with AWS Direct Connect for two years.

AWS Direct Connect has been perfectly stable since the deployment. I have never experienced any problems.

The scalability of AWS Direct Connect is excellent. I can connect even with a hundred gigabit interface, allowing for expansion as needed. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

I cannot speak to the technical support from AWS as I did everything automatically on the system and did not require any interaction with support.

Prior to using AWS Direct Connect, I did not use a different solution for these use cases.

The initial setup was very easy. It primarily involved selecting a location and completing the necessary documentation for the connection. Once set up, everything was managed through the portal.

The deployment process required four people, including myself and the team that went to the data center for the connection setup.

By using AWS Direct Connect, I avoid the need to contract certain AWS services, like databases, as I can use AWS’s computing power efficiently alongside our own infrastructure. This has contributed positively to our return on investment.

Initially, I decided on AWS bas I was certified in AWS, which made the transition quicker. However, I am now considering other providers like Oracle, Google Cloud, and Azure for potential cost benefits.

For new users with on-premise infrastructure looking to migrate or implement services on AWS, starting with AWS Direct Connect is crucial as it provides reliable connectivity. 

I would rate AWS Direct Connect a ten out of ten.

I'm not an end user of any of those SAP products. I wanted to have a comparison between different solutions for process mining and process modeling, but I'm not an end user of any. I have Microsoft only, not on an enterprise level.

The ease of use is valuable, but regarding reliability, I had some problems.

We encountered issues with the connection. The VPN was not connecting on multiple occasions.

I have been using the solution for a year now.

It has different locations. It is global.

I don't think it is easy to set up. It's not really difficult but not easy. Most of the time we have to contact an IT person for that.

The implementation was done by our organization. I'm not sure if they are external people or exactly from AWS Direct Connect. As an end user, I cannot set it up myself.

I generated the report for SAP Signavio products. The implementation was done by our organization, though I'm not sure if they were external people or from AWS Direct Connect. As an end user, I cannot set it up myself.

I am not the best person to provide advice because I'm not a buyer persona. I'm just a user persona and not a decision-maker on buying it. I don't know exactly what criteria I should look at.

I'm a student, not a researcher.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate AWS Direct Connect a seven.

I am utilizing EC2, RDS, S3, VPN, DynamoDB, VPC, and a variety of protocols.

The most valuable feature of Direct Connect is its low latency to the users. It also provides stable connectivity to AWS, which is essential for our requirements.

There is no room for improvement in Direct Connect right now. It meets our requirements satisfactorily.

I have been using it for one year.

Direct Connect is pretty stable. We do not have any issues with bugs, and it does not break down.

AWS products are scalable, and there is no problem with scalability.

Their support team from Amazon is great.

Positive

There was a requirement to connect onsite to AWS. For that requirement, I suggested Direct Connect to my management.

The initial setup is straightforward. There are documentations available for deployments from AWS, so it is pretty easy.

If the requirement is low latency, then Direct Connect is pretty stable. If the requirement is not low latency, then VPN Connect, site-to-site VPN, is a good choice.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use the setup for our operations in QGIS, VoIP calls, instance monitoring, and application deployment.

The platform's most valuable feature for us is its robust network performance. This capability ensures minimal latency and reliable connectivity across multiple AWS regions, including Ohio and others in the United States.

The platform's stability needs improvement.

We have been using AWS Direct Connect for more than four years.

I rate the product stability a nine. It could be enhanced.

In our experience, AWS offers a robust portfolio of AI services that cater to a wide range of needs. They provide two primary AI services, which are quite comprehensive and deeply integrated. AWS provides many options and functionalities for those looking to leverage AI, especially for complex applications like chain AI. 

Comparing AWS with Azure, the choice largely depends on specific use cases and organizational requirements. We've found AWS particularly strong in generative AI and other advanced AI capabilities, which are crucial for our security and monitoring needs. It's essential to assess these factors carefully to ensure the chosen platform aligns effectively with your AI deployment goals and operational strategies.

I rate it a seven out of ten. 

It is a stable solution. It doesn't require configuring security programs and overhead with the VPN connection. We have to implement it normally via the Internet. It offers low latency and SLAs on that connection.

It is complicated to do additional BGP configuration for the product. It is not a well-promoted solution. So, customers are not aware of its advantages.

We have been using AWS Direct Connect for three years.

It is a stable platform.

The product is scalable enough. Most enterprises are using it more often than small businesses.

The BGP configuration is tricky for customers. Although, there are guidelines to help with the process. The deployment time depends on-premise locations. If they have a fiber connection, it takes two weeks to complete. In contrast, new construction takes a lot longer to complete.

We have a department to handle all the projects. It provides customers with one point of contact to maintain the connections. It is easy to maintain the platform using standard processes.

The product is neither low-priced nor expensive. It has reasonable pricing in terms of the features offered. You can go for a DSL connection if you want a low-priced connection. Also, it offers more expensive solutions, including special SLA agreements.

It is worth the money and has different pricing models. We purchase its monthly subscription.

I advise others to consider the product’s advantages and communicate with the service provider. We ensure it fits the company's requirements. I rate it an eight out of ten.

We use Direct Connect to connect our cloud to on-premises data centers. We also used to use it for connecting multiple clouds together, but we don't use it for that anymore.

The general benefits of the cloud, such as being a managed service with relatively low maintenance, high availability, and scalability, help us in our operations. Direct Connect provides better connection quality and link diversification for high availability.

The general benefits of a managed service include low maintenance, high availability, and scalability as required. 

Direct Connect provides an improved connection quality and a diversified link, which contributes to high availability and failover capabilities.

I would like to see better traffic visibility and higher throughput security, especially for organizations that require more than what the current limit allows.

I have worked with the direct link for three years in different positions and companies.

There haven't been any issues with Direct Connect, and it's highly available.

Direct Connect is scalable for our needs, although we are not heavily invested in AWS.

We haven't had issues with Direct Connect that required escalation to technical support.

Positive

Before Direct Connect, I worked with ExpressRoute in Azure for similar purposes and they work equally well.

If you are somewhat familiar with Direct Connect, the initial setup is not really too complex. It is a set-and-forget solution.

It always comes down to expertise. Networking and cloud knowledge are required, and for us, we have the right people to manage it.

Not really. Direct Connect is a requirement rather than a solution that provides specific savings.

The cost is in line with what other cloud providers offer. As a customer, you always want something to be cheaper, but it aligns with industry standards.

We use ExpressRoute in Azure and have used similar solutions in other clouds.

I would recommend the service, but it isn't always the right solution for every problem.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the solution for database and cloud storage.

The solution is easy to migrate and has a user-friendly interface.

The solution's terminologies could be more precise. They should improve this particular area. Also, the patch upgrade process could be better.

We have been using the solution for three years.

The solution could be more stable. We encountered some glitches during the patch upgrading process.

We have 500 solution users in our organization. It is scalable. I rate its scalability a ten.

The solution's customer service could be faster.

Positive

One must take initial training to comprehend and execute the implementation of the solution. It takes around a week to complete the setup.

We implemented the solution with the help of our in-house team. It requires four engineers for deployment and maintenance.

It is an expensive solution. I rate its pricing a seven. We purchase its monthly and yearly licenses depending on the use cases.

I advise others to get the proper training to understand the solution's functionalities. I rate it an eight out of ten.