Aruba Wireless Reviews

Aruba is part our our network infrastructure.

The most valuable features are ease of use, a simple management interface, cost-effectiveness, reliability, and simple installation.

The web-based GUI is much simpler to use than similar products by Cisco.

Because it's cloud-based, it takes time for the floor maps and the heat map to load. I understand the reason for this but it would be nice if once you click on the flop map, instead of waiting sometimes 20 or 30 seconds, it would come up a lot quicker.

I have been working with the Aruba Wireless cloud service for between a year and eighteen months. It's fairly new but I work on it every day.

This is the most stable wireless product that we have had.

We have only had similar products by Cisco but we've had a lot of problems with them. Our partners have come out to look at them, as well as remote services, and they've told us that "everything is fine". However, we have to reboot APs here and there at all of our sites.

Once we implemented the Aruba solution, we've not had those problems since.

We have nine remote sites right now, around the world, with multiple access points per site. Some sites have two or three access points, whereas others have between 25 and 30, depending on how large the site is. In total, we have 147 access points.

We have a data network that we use, and we also have a guest network. ADF authentication logs into the data network and the guest network is open. It's pretty simple to scale.

We had a building and a site that we decommissioned, so we have between nine and eleven spare APs floating around. All you have to do is plug them into the network using the right port, give them a name, and they come online. After that, you assign a foundation license to them and overall, it couldn't be simpler.

With the spares and backups we have, should we need to scale, and we always do, it's easy.

The technical support is good. They know what they're doing although the biggest problem that I have with them is their accents.

You open up a ticket and I have nothing against the people, but it always routes to India. We open a support case and they're very difficult to understand. Not all of them, but a lot of them are. As such, we've had some problems communicating and we've had to use text messages to compensate for the accents.

Otherwise, their technical skills are top-notch.

Another thing that I'll say about their tech support is that it's easy to get in and have a ticket assigned, which gets the ball rolling when we have a problem. With Cisco, it sometimes took days to get an engineer assigned.

I also have experience with Cisco wireless LAN controllers and a little bit with the Meraki line of networking equipment.

We were primarily running Cisco products at one time. However, we pulled out the Cisco devices because they were too complicated and too expensive.

We bought out another company that is currently using Aruba wireless LAN controllers. However, we're getting rid of that system and moving them to the cloud.

The reliability of Aruba products is better and the technical support from Aruba is more responsive.

Cisco is good but there's much better competition out there.

The initial setup is very easy.

Once the cloud is set up, you assign each AP a license through the web portal. You plug it in, make sure it's in a port that's configured for our Wi-Fi network, and it works. It's a three or four-step process and it's very simple to do.

Maintenance, such as deploying updates, can be done using a single person. I do all of it for our company and we have 147 access points, worldwide.

Doing an upgrade involves two clicks, and it can be done within 15 minutes.

This can be compared to Cisco, where you had to pre-stage everything. It was painful and it took me four hours to complete.

This is by far the best investment that we've made in a long time.

Aruba Wireless is much cheaper than our previous solution by Cisco. It is a significant saving, measured in thousands of dollars per year.

We looked at Fortinet, Aruba, and several other vendors. Ultimately, we found that Aruba was by far the best.

We authenticate through Aruba ClearPass, which is the TACACS server that we use.

This is a product that I recommend and especially if you're with Cisco, I suggest switching. Cisco just makes things complex. They are simplifying things with Meraki, which is something that I understand because I've been in the IT industry for a long time. With the company scaling back, I'm doing the job of three or four people and with this in mind, it's important to go with simplicity. Cisco, for some odd reason, just cannot keep it simple. It has to be complicated, even when it comes to their documentation.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

The hospital's internal network is used for communications between staff, including emails and direct point-to-point access. One of the most challenging features of the network is its ability to facilitate live video communications between staff in different parts of the world that can view operations live. We use Aruba Wireless to help facilitate the three requirements of always on-time, on-live, and on-direct. In certain cases, I have to communicate with another surgery room, whose call may be back to back or parallel in that same venue.

The most useful feature of this product is the configuration that allows us to have several areas covered with one unit. However, when we have to make maintenance to that unit, the other units can go back and support the one that we have in maintenance. This back-to-back service or this come-alone service is the best thing for us. If I have to remove the unit that we have in surgery, I know that another unit or two can take its place.

The most important thing that needs to be improved is the internal web feature. This allows all our units to use this as an internal GPS to locate somebody or some elements. However, the problem is that they need another unit different from the 535. This point is not good because we put that on this unit, and changed it from 515 to 535. For this unit, just to enable the possibility of locating equipment, we have very expensive equipment in the hospital and we put a GPS stack, so the system can track. We put them in all the time, but we need another unit to make it functional. Aruba can improve this by including the GPS stack in each unit. This would reduce our maintenance work.

Aruba Wireless needs to provide more visibility into the differences between their models so we can better understand them. The changes between the 515 and the 535 are just scalable in one step; We don't feel that one unit is going to be better in so many ways. Instead, it is just one change. The scale from one model to another is very short and because of this we are going to try to save money, we're going to pick up the lowest model because the newer model, doesn't have many additional features.

The bad things about the product are the price, the information about the product, and the time it takes to deliver the product. 

I have used the solution within 12 months.

The heat map is already running and it is very stable. There are no issues with the corners of the building, except for the sign, which I think is covered well. I give the stability of the solution a nine out of ten.

I give the scalability of the solution a nine out of ten.

As we had to present our submission or change a model to another, the technical support was very bad. The work I have to do to research the difference between the models and compare them is all manual. When we asked the factory, what the differences between the models are and what is going to be the advantage from one another. The training can't support me. I have to do all the research myself. We asked the representative, and we had conversations with the factory, and nobody tells us it is a small change, instead they say it was a software issue. When we have to present the submission, the presentation has to be very complete with all the technical information, with all the features and we have to say this is a processor that works in this area, this works at this speed. The technical support could not help with any of our required information.

Negative

The initial setup is very easy because we change all the models. We have around 1,000 units and we changed all of them in one week.

The implementation is completed in-house by our team for our customers.

Aruba Wireless is expensive. The balance between quality and price is there, but the cost is still high.

I give the cost of the solution a seven out of ten.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

Eight IT people are required for the maintenance of the solution.

The first thing I'm going to do is check all the features to make sure they meet our requirements. The step from one model to another is very important. There are little changes, and we have to review a lot to know the difference between the models, and what the major advantage between them are. In PeerSpot, we've seen the difficult differentiation, but the compliment of the functionality, how does it work, what is the benefit that I get with each model in the field? What is the difference between the software, and the versions? Is it throughput out? It's a factor that we need to consider. It doesn't address the major concerns, and I check every single specialized page and I don't see anybody saying, "Okay, five megabytes is a huge improvement in throughput out."

We primarily use the product for wireless connectivity in terms of securing wireless access.

Wi-Fi 6 is the most beneficial aspect of the solution. Apart from that, the WPA3 introduction in terms of security is one of the key features.

The solution is stable.

It's a scalable product.

Technical support is helpful.

The pricing is pretty good.

The scope of improvement would go along with the technology's adoption into the market. Even though Wi-Fi 6 has been introduced, everyone is quite skeptical in the market in terms of the adoption part, as the platform network should be that strong to cater to that kind of bandwidth. While it may be great in the future, currently, the existing versions are incompatible with some of the networks which customers own.

They could improve the seamless roaming, which is already there, however, needs some tweaking.

I've used the solution for quite a long time. I've been deploying this product to multiple customers and it's been almost five years.

The solution is stable. For example, even some military organizations are using Aruba Wireless and RF features. It is quite reliable for an enterprise to work with.

Aruba works with small to large companies. Data is open for all three. They have different kinds of solutions for individual stakeholders in terms of small, medium, and large. They have a different product portfolio offering for small. They have something else for mid-size enterprises and larger enterprises as well. Everyone can be catered to.

It is quite easy to scale, even if a small-scale business is starting with a standalone deployment. They too can scale up to 50 or 60 access points on a mid-scale deployment eventually. The group pattern in terms of the wireless controller has limits to the physical hardware appliances if you already own one. That said, the cloud adoption part is one of the aspects which gives you quite a bit of scalability and you need not worry about your scalability and your future growth.

Technical support is quite brilliant and they offer good support as well as product replacement. Any Aruba product that is wireless includes a limited lifetime warranty wherein the delivery scope is not bound to an SLA. They will give a replacement if you purchase support or not. That is the best part of Aruba.

Positive

I also use Cisco.

There are no differences in the technology. There are some user experience differences. Integration would be a part of that. There are many integrations possible in the Cisco portfolio in terms of their own product line. If the entire portfolio is of Cisco, then the integration is quite easy and Cisco has the same kind of offerings. The SLA might differ and some of the user experiences might differ. However, in terms of the portfolio, Cisco stands out as they have an enterprise-class and a different portfolio altogether to cater to the cloud-based market. They have an entire offering called Meraki. They do focus on the enterprise with Cisco. Companies that are small or medium scale work more with Meraki.

The standalone deployments are straightforward whereas the introduction of wireless controllers and security parameters can be complex. That depends on the architecture to which you are applying. Even though direct integration with any of the radio servers or any of the triple-A authentication servers like Mac is very straightforward, it could be complex depending upon the environment.

A standalone deployment would not take more than 15 minutes. It is quite simple. You might need some pre-planning before that. If you planned enough in advance, then it would take you 15 minutes or 20 minutes at a maximum to deploy. If there's a wireless controller deployment, it would take a maximum of two hours to three hours. Not more than that.

Maintenance as such is not required. It's just the regular maintenance that you do in terms of software upgrades or firmware upgrades, in terms of when vulnerabilities are found. 

Aruba is quite competitive in pricing. In some cases, on a case-to-case basis, Cisco also gives better discounts in terms of price. 

You may have to pay for additional support if you require services bound to some actual replacement time. They will charge you some amount for RMS support, not for technical support. Eventually, the technical support is built into the cost.

I used to work with an organization that had a business relationship with Aruba, however, recently I've moved on.

I typically work with the latest version of the solution.

It can be deployed on-premises as well as in the cloud.

I would recommend new users utilize each and every feature of the wireless capabilities which are being offered for security. There is quite a bit of integration possible.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for wireless service. We currently use the latest version but have been using the solution since version six. 

The solution is hybrid because it is deployed on-premises but managed in the cloud. 

Our company currently has 300 users and we plan to grow by 100 more.  

The solution is well designed so you can easily integrate it in an infrastructure network. 

The APs can be implemented as a campus AP, remote APS, or instant APs. As soon as you buy the solution, you can instantly use APs. You don't need anything external because you can use the virtual controller inside the APs.

It is easy to create clusters using the controller that comes inside the AOS of the APs. 

You can add an external controller at any time because the solution is resilient and very upgradeable. 

The security components are very, very, very well designed and strong. 

The Aruba Central portal allows you to centralize all management for your infrastructure and security. It is not a monolithic solution. 

The solution's documentation could be better organized in an information portal. There are many assets on the technical side so there is a lot of documentation. Sometimes it takes work to find what you need because of the vastness of information. You need to know the products to find things. The solution could offer some kind of portal for documentation to better organize things. 

The cloud CHS and remote APs could be improved faster. The solution has already been integrated with the cloud and there are plans for other product integrations but they could occur faster. 

I have been using the solution for five years. 

The solution is very stable and reliable. I rate stability a nine out of ten. 

The solution is very scalable. I rate scalability a ten out of ten. 

The technical support is very useful and good. Every time we need help and open a case, they solve our issues. Technical support is very knowledgeable about the solution.

Most of our issues are regarding upgrading versions or firmware. We sometimes need assistance finding new versions. The process for solving our issues is very straightforward. 

Technical support is rated a ten out of ten. 

Positive

We previously used Cisco. 

The setup is very easy. All the APs come from the manufacturer so you can start right away with configurations. The features make configurations and upgrades very easy. 

I rate setup a ten out of ten. 

Three in-house engineers implemented the solution with help from an integrator. Deployment took one week to ten days. 

There is no ongoing maintenance because the solution is very, very reliable. 

The pricing is fair and similar to other products. It might be a bit cheaper than Cisco. 

I rate pricing an eight out of ten. 

Cisco is a good product but is old and very monolithic. They are working to improve but their mindset is different.

The solution is the future because it integrates with the cloud and addresses new needs. We prefer the design and strategy of the solution over Cisco. 

When you are looking for a wireless option, it is important to pay attention to key points that include resilience, expandability, security, and integration.

The solution is one of the best available and is very valuable for centralizing management. It is very resilient and expandable so you can grow it to the needs of your company. Even if you buy the small solution, the features of the big solution are there. This is a great benefit over Cisco. 

For example, you buy a switch from Cisco that includes 48 ports but only 16 of the ports have licenses. If you need more ports, you need to buy more licenses. With the solution, you don't need to buy additional licenses. What you buy is what you get with all the included features like AOS and security. This is very important because you can start small and grow using the same device with no extra licensing costs. 

It is important to find a solution that already implements security. The solution has all these features included so that is why we moved away from Cisco. 

The solution also integrates very well with nearly every other vendor. 

The solution is a very good product and I rate it a ten out of ten. 

We use Aruba 7010 controllers to deploy our wireless system infrastructure. We're planning to use Aruba for our wired network, including the core switches. We're waiting for the upgrades of existing wired infrastructure to be delivered.

One advantage is the built-in Zigbee-based IoT functionality. You don't need an additional dongle to enable that option. 

Aruba is missing some features that are available in other solutions, such as the email notifications. It's a bit complex to configure the notification part. Mainly I'm talking about the rogue WiFi detection. 

This email notification is crucial for us, but it isn't possible to configure with the built-in software. You need something else, like an external system log collector or another Aruba software. These notifications are essential in hospitality for PCI compliance. My colleagues in famous luxury hotel chains need that report.

One of the requirements for PCI compliance is rogue WiFi detection. When a rogue AP is discovered, they need a notification sent to a certain email. If there is no built-in feature, you need either to purchase an additional software to make sure that you are notified through that software. This feature is built into Ruckus.

We've been using Aruba Wireless for a year now.

We haven't conducted any upgrades to the latest version, but Aruba support suggested we upgrade. We need to schedule the time because it will cause downtime, but it is stable. 

Some access points have frozen a few times. We restart them, and that resolves the issue, but we've never had significant issues with the APs, controller, or the software itself. No one has complained about the system and the infrastructure in general.

It's scalable depending on the number of licenses you buy. We two people in the IT department managing the controller and access points. In a hotel, the usage depends on the occupancy. It can be up to 1,000 people, but let's say about 500 people.

Aruba support is knowledgeable. We never had an issue contacting support, but I I've had the chance to troubleshoot the same system in a little different environment. They're responsive, and you never feel like you're on your own with them.

We were using an older generation of the AP, and it was outdated by the time we upgraded. I also had some experience with Ruckus. It wasn't extensive, but my colleagues say that Ruckus is more reliable in a hospitality setting, and the coverage is better. 

Aruba lacks functions like the rogue Wi-Fi notification, but it's a good product. It just requires fine-tuning to get what you need and a good experience. Ruckus can do everything out of the box. You have an initial input, and it does everything for you. You can get the same from the Aruba.

The Aruba partner deployed the solution. I was partially involved, though. It wasn't that difficult, but it took a while because we have complex corporate standards. It was maybe three weeks plus testing in the lab. 

Aruba is cheaper than their competitors in our market since we don't have a full Ruckus presence of the Ruckus here. There are no licensed modules, so it's a one-time purchase. 

We have a five-year care plan, and the access points have a lifetime warranty. We had one or two access points malfunctioning. It looks like a factory issue, but local support replaced them pretty quickly, considering the problems with logistics worldwide.

Once you factor in the lifetime warranty, it's cheaper and not bad feature-wise. At some point, some of their products were not available, like WiFi 6, but that was last year. 

I rate Aruba Wireless eight out of 10. It has good support and solid options for the access points. However, if the Ruckus solution were the same price, I would go for Ruckus. We have some budget limitations, so we ended up going with Aruba and fine-tuning it.

In general, we have no issues with coverage. It works fine, and it's WiFi 6. At that point, there was no WiFi 6 hospitality version of the access points from Ruckus available in our market. That was one of the biggest advantages in addition to the price. We also got an IoT-enabled solution by default. If you don't need these notifications, you can go with Aruba product. Otherwise, you need to consider that in advance.

We use Aruba Wireless to direct all enterprise traffic, including emails, video calls, and browsing. Each office typically has between 50 to 150 users. My biggest office has 150 users, and the smallest office has 25. Depending on the strength, we use the APs.

All of our users access the internet through a wireless connection, and we do a lot of Zoom calls through Aruba Wireless. We send emails and have internal tools like Zoho, NetSuite, and cloud applications like G Suite or Office 365. Everything goes through the Aruba Wireless.

I think Aruba Wireless' Wi-Fi 6 capability is something that really makes a difference. We used to have bottlenecks. Each user has one laptop on one mobile device, so that equals 40 devices connecting to one AP. The Wi-Fi 5 series couldn't handle the traffic during peak hours, and when I say "peak hours," I mean Monday at 11 a.m. We used to see a lot of packet drops, but we haven't seen that problem at all since we moved to Wi-Fi 6.

Aruba needs to improve two things. One is security. These days, security is about more than just the endpoints — it's also about the devices connecting to the endpoints. They need to improve wireless intrusion detection and prevention. If Aruba can do something like that, I think it would be a game-changer. The second thing is the range. Before Aruba, we had Ruckus, which covers a larger area than Aruba. 

We have been using Aruba Wireless for about two and a half years. 

Aruba Wireless is stable.

Aruba Wireless is highly scalable because it also offers a cloud version of the controllers where you can add as many APs as you want. You can add close to 10,000 APs, so it's really scalable for us.

I rate Aruba technical support six out of 10. We have a hard time connecting with them every time. There is a long queue whenever we reach out to support, and we have to wait for them to answer calls. Once we get in touch with them, we have to coordinate with different teams, so our engineers struggle to understand who are the correct team members. I think support is another area where Aruba needs to improve.

Neutral

We previously used Extreme Aerohive then we started using Cisco Meraki for some of our locations. We had Meraki at one or two of our offices, but we decided it was too costly, so we shifted to Aruba.

We've also used Ruckus Wireless, which is an 802.1X solution. Ruckus lacked a security feature that is available in Aruba. We didn't want to compromise on security with Ruckus even though the range is really good. It can cover larger areas and a greater number of devices. However, we are an organization that places a high premium on security, so that is why we switched to Aruba.

I think Meraki and Aruba can go hand in hand, but Meraki is expensive, and the OpEx is costly. You need to renew the licenses every year, so it's a lot of overhead. Meraki is a fantastic solution apart from that. 

Setting up Aruba was straightforward. We did the initial deployment on our own. After we got the Aruba Central licenses, Aruba's team provisioned the first five APs and prepared documentation on how to do provisioning. My team was quickly able to do that. We completed everything in a day and had it running without any challenges.

We had a lot of downtime with Aerohive. The AP used to reset every three days or four days, and we would lose connectivity. Zoom calls were interrupted, and emails failed to send. Even my company's founder faced many challenges with the wireless. But after shifting to Aruba, we haven't seen any downtime. We've gone two years without downtime, so we are doing well now.

The price of Aruba Wireless is fairly reasonable. It was within our budget.

I rate Aruba Wireless eight out of 10. If you're an enterprise customer like us working with applications daily, you should check out Aruba. However, if you're an educational institution, a large stadium, an auditorium, or something like that, I suggest Ruckus.

I was able to provide Aruba Wireless to financial, Telco, and hospitality industries.

If you're looking into a wireless solution, more and more people now are using Aruba Wireless. There are two key reasons why: in a developing country, many of the companies look at the cost and quality of a solution. Cost-wise, Aruba Wireless is very attractive here in the Sri Lankan market. The other key reason is Aruba Wireless provides their key product portal and a limited lifetime warranty. Other providers do not provide that level of warranty. These are the reasons why a customer would choose to purchase Aruba products than Cisco, or any other access point or wireless solution.

The key feature of this solution is the value for money. If customers can get a good quality product at a very competitive price, plus a limited lifetime warranty, then this gives very high value to the customer, which is what you can get from Aruba Wireless.

Aruba Wireless is able to provide value addition, apart from their product features.

This solution is user-friendly and their technical support team provides very good support.

An area for improvement I found in this solution is the configuration. Though it's currently an improved version, it could still be made easier, so technical people could benefit from being able to configure Aruba Wireless within a quicker amount of time.

I'm a specialist and I've been in this industry for 22 years, and I've been dealing with Aruba Wireless for over 10 years. I've worked with it within the last 12 months.

Aruba Wireless is a stable product.

Aruba Wireless is scalable. We have different product segments and we educate different customer requirements and industries. Because of COVID, all industries are facing a lot of challenges, but we find this product scalable.

We have our pre-sales team with us in-house, but we do have two technical support people distributed here locally. We always communicate with them. They share their product knowledge, experiences, and user case studies, to help us improve. We also share our experiences with them to also help them improve. On a scale of one to five, I'm giving the technical support team a four. They provide very good product support.

The initial setup of Aruba Wireless is not complicated. In the past, it was complicated, e.g. We needed experienced technical people to do the configuration and the initial setup. Nowadays, even basic technical people can do it.

It has improved, but what we are expecting is that when new technologies arise, along with the new technologies, the configuration should be simplified.

The cost for Aruba Wireless is good. It's attractive.

I evaluated Cisco Wireless.

Our company's role is system integrator. We are involved with products and solutions which we provide to the end customers. The products we provide vary, because it would depend on the requirement and customer requirement levels. It would also depend on the current pricing of the products, e.g. this is because we provide different vendor products, not just Aruba. We also provide Cisco, Maracas, and the entire product spectrum that we provide to the customers.

We provide the latest version of this product to our customers, because with the latest version, the benefit to the customers is that they can get the maximum usage of the product lifetime.

Other than the product features, our customers value our onsite support, onsite feedback, clarifications, and installations. We are able to quickly sort out the issues experienced by our customers.

For people who are not currently using Aruba Wireless, I would tell them to look into the Aruba product range and try it out for themselves. They'll find out that these are Amazing products with very good product support.

I'm rating Aruba Wireless an eight out ten, because no products could reach the perfect score of ten. Technology is fast-changing, so today's technology won't be tomorrow's technology. There's no technological vendor who could be ranked a ten, so my rating for this product is an eight.

The use case is basically for wireless authentication. We are also using Aruba clear path policy manager and we are providing our customers with free WiFi. We have our retail customers, where we give them free WiFi.

Their technological improvements and innovations are always great. They are up to market level. They’re always upgrading to whatever the latest technology is.

They are a bit of a monopoly solution.

It offers an easy initial setup.

The solution is pretty stable.

There are so many features. Even we are also not using the complete functionalities and features of Aruba. We need to explore more.

There are some issues we occasionally have. However, they are easily remedied.

Recently, HP acquired Aruba. There have been some changes in the licensing form. Platforms are changing. These kinds of things are slowly happening. However, it is not a problem.

The issue is that the delivery timelines have increased. That is not only for Aruba, even for all the partners; it is increased. That is something which they need to improve. The hardware takes too long to be delivered.

I’ve been using the solution for seven years.

The solution is pretty stable. There are some issues; however, it’s all pretty fixable. For the most part, it doesn’t crash or freeze. It’s reliable.

We have about 4,500 people on the solution. Everyone at all levels of the company uses it.

The solution is scalable. We started pretty small and we were able to grow as required. The number of people and the number of retail stores increase yearly.

We pay our partners for technical support. They handle everything.

We used to use Ruckus.

With Ruckus, we were in on the initial stage. We were facing a lot of issues depending on the management. With Aruba, we did a POC, and we were satisfied with that. That's why we moved to them.

The solution is simple to set up.

The configuration and everything it is pretty straightforward. We are using Aruba’s central console to manage the wireless. There are no complications, actually.

On the initial level, it took two months to complete the complete projects and everything.

In terms of maintenance, we are paying our partner for an AMC annual maintenance contract. We are paying yearly, and they are just maintaining our network. They're managing everything. We have around 20 people working on their team to support us.

We have a partner who is working on this with us, and they are the ones implementing the solution. They're managing our infrastructure also.

We are not calculating any kind of ROI as it's an infrastructure solution and therefore, we cannot calculate any kind of ROI here. It's used for the basic infrastructure.

We pay a yearly licensing fee.

I’m not sure of the exact cost. We are negotiating our pricing and can do so on a global level. When we were comparing it to others, we found it to be reasonably priced.

We’re end-users and work with Aruba partners.

This is an in-house solution and we use the latest version.

I’d rate the solution nine out of ten.

For new users, Aruba can be a good solution. The hardware portfolio is great. They have instant access points for small-scale businesses to medium size and even large businesses. They have all kinds of portfolios in their hardware catalog. Even for COVID times, they also introduce access points for the work from home. These kinds of things are there already in their portfolio. When we are plugging in their stack, we can leverage Aruba Central, Aruba Wireless, Aruba Switches, et cetera. It's easy to manage. Everything is managed under a central console.