What is our primary use case?
We replaced all our legacy routers with Cisco SD-WAN. The number one use case is more to do with network management, better policy integration, and keeping the policies consistent across all our locations. That was one of the major areas where we thought SD-WAN has reduced a lot of burdens so that the engineer can focus on actual issues.
We were doing a lot of policy-based routing earlier for our hub and spoke topology. With SD-WAN, the hub and spoke, of course, stays. However, manageability, scalability, and ROI are the three major factors with which it has helped a lot.
We could eliminate most of our expensive MPLS links, move them, do the local internet breakouts, and integrate with the NGFW firewalls. These were an added benefit to us. It was a tectonic shift. Right now, we are not spending as much on resources or engineers to keep the lights on.
How has it helped my organization?
The integration, scalability, and ROI that Cisco SD-WAN provided are the main features that helped the organization advance further.
What is most valuable?
The solution has helped us to lower expenses.
The initial setup is quite straightforward.
It is very stable.
We can scale the solution.
What needs improvement?
SD-WAN itself is vendor locked in. At one point, Cisco should make it open so that if we have multiple mergers and acquisitions happening, it's easier to consolidate. Right now, if we are running Cisco, and the other organization in an acquisition scenario is deploying some other competitive vendor, the communication, the manageability of running two separate ESD instances, becomes a burden that falls back on us, especially the network administrators. It's better to consolidate and come up with better products, especially targeting AWS as their underlying transport.
Traditionally, what Cisco has done, is they have always considered internet gateways or links and the MPLS links as their transport technology. In some devices, they have also used ELTs. Now, since we have 5G in place, they could look at private 5G ELTs, and they could expand that line, again, particularly in the ESD space since AWS has recently released their own SD instance where they are allowing their customers to backhaul.
With SD-WAN being a very custom solution and a vendor-specific solution, we would end up having multiple software-defined instances where one is running in Cisco, and one you are running with AWS, and then again tomorrow, another SaaS-based player or a similar player will come up with something else.
For example, when two organizations merge with each other, there is likely a scenario where organization X is running (for example) Juniper, and the other organization is running Cisco. The administrators would end up having to separate ESD controllers. You do not have a single ESD controller that is open in nature, where you can manage Cisco and Juniper devices. That is a concern. So if the controllers were made open, with compatibility between the vendors, that would be a very good thing for the industry overall.
As a market leader, they are better positioned to go ahead and make that kind of change. If you look at the history of Cisco, before MPLS came into the game, it was Cisco, Juniper, and a few other vendors who came together and created a very good protocol.
We need them to start focusing on the SD-WAN compatibility with other environments and not being so vendor locked with Cisco environments.
They should get better controllers that can especially talk with AWS and Azure. Right now, I have taken a subscription with AWS Project Gateway. I will have to place a Cisco CSR image if I want to make it a true SD-WAN solution. Instead of using a separate image, if they could make the Cisco's controller open or a transit gateway solution, that would be ideal.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've used the solution since 2018. We've used it for around four years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We found the solution to be quite stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.
We haven't seen major issues.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The product is pretty scalable.
In terms of Cisco SD-WAN, we have close to 200, and that's a pretty big number. We have about 12 engineers around the clock using the solution.
How are customer service and support?
For the SD-WAN portion, we are getting good support. We have no major concerns about the level of attention we get.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I did do a POC with VMware, and it was not great. We struggled with configurations. I've also done a POC with Aryaka and have used Fortinet and Palo Alto, as well as Viptela.
The difference between Cisco and other options is that you get a good number of engineers. Second, the amount of time required to troubleshoot the protocol level is lower. I'm using the word protocol on the operating system that gets loaded and comes with the software. They don't even have a proper support line, and the support will not be aware of the production issues. The other competitors are three years away compared to where Cisco is today.
How was the initial setup?
The solution is very straightforward and simple.
We did engage with Cisco during the initial POC and rollout. Later, with adequate materials and training materials, engineers, and resource availability, we never ran into challenges.
When I speak with my other colleagues in other organizations where they did use Fortinet, they did use other products, they ended up spending a lot of labor hours and only figuring out that near the end after they struggle with configuration.
I'd rate the setup a four out of five in terms of ease of implementation.
From a maintenance perspective, it's not that frequent. Every quarter, the manufacturer releases its own patches and updates, which we are following through its life cycle. That's very normal.
What about the implementation team?
We handled the implementation ourselves. We did not need to worry about getting help from outside vendors.
What was our ROI?
We have seen a positive ROI and a reduction in costs.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The price varies. They have different products, including routers, some of which are now being removed or deprecated. The new platforms with the CSR 8,000 series have competitive pricing, and the kind of features they're providing justifies the cost - especially when you look at the number of features and support that comes with it.
I'd rate the pricing at a four out of five in terms of its competitiveness.
What other advice do I have?
We are a customer of Cisco.
I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.
*Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
