We use it for integrating internal systems that require a fast and reliable connection. For example, for interbank connectivity to India, we put in NetFoundry so that our system can have a faster connection to that system. It is just point-to-point connectivity instead of doing an IPsec.
Easy to set up, stable, and helpful for integrating the systems that require a fast and reliable connection
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
The Network as a Service that they offer is most valuable.
What needs improvement?
They can provide hardware for specific use cases because some of the NetFoundry solutions don't have the hardware. Currently, they're more into software, but some of the clients want a single brand instead of having multiple vendors. So, if they can offer hardware as well, it would be good.
If they have a firewall capability, that would be good. Currently, because they don't have a firewall, we are required to put another layer of control on top of their solution. A built-in firewall would be quite good.
Their technical support can be improved. There should be a better handover of a case from one support person to another.
For how long have I used the solution?
We have been using it since 2019.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It is quite stable. We don't have a problem. If we deploy a single node, in the future, the customer can just expand the redundancy in the cloud.
In terms of reliability, we haven't encountered or heard of any issues from our customers. We don't have issues related to the product going down and other things.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability in the cloud depends on the infrastructure and architecture design, but in the product itself, it is easy to have redundancy for scalability and BCP.
How are customer service and support?
Technical support is quite challenging because when the case is handed over to someone else because of the shift change or anything else, it requires us to go through the incident again, which is a challenge. It should be properly handed over by the person who was handling it before. I would rate them a four out of five. The handover is the only problem. In terms of the skills of the people handling the incident, we don't have any problems.
How was the initial setup?
It was pretty straightforward. For AWS, it took us one to two days to fully configure and integrate everything. It was quite fast.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I don't have the cost, but in terms of its management viability, it is acceptable for most of our clients. It seems quite fair.
What other advice do I have?
If you're going to implement this, you need to plan your environment setup and architecture for the future. For example, when you want to have an active environment, it is quite challenging if the design is not aligned. If there is a constraint on the architecture itself, it can be quite challenging. So, you should look at the end-to-end use case before you acquire this solution.
I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Private Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
