Auvik Network Management (ANM) Reviews

We primarily use Auvik for network discovery, visibility, management, and minor monitoring.

The solution's alerts led me to discover network aspects I wasn't aware of.

The SNMP discovery features are impressive; few products are as robust in their abilities, and it discovered objects I didn't think it would.

Auvik's management and monitoring functions are straightforward to use, though I'm tech-savvy, and this ease of use is important.  

The product increased visibility into our remote and distributed networks, and that's paramount to us.   

Auvik is a helpful tool for keeping device inventories up-to-date, which helps with delegation if the organization has the staff. 

Auvik keeping device inventories up-to-date saves time, as it's much more advantageous than having to do a facility tour in person, manually checking all the devices and adding them to s spreadsheet, for example. We do that for auditing purposes, but the solution makes keeping devices up-to-date much more manageable.  

The trial could be longer, especially for attracting small and medium-sized businesses like us.

The pricing model could also be improved, as the unlimited selection isn't unlimited. The billing work on the build devices and components, and I've tried to set up the solution in a few different configurations, resulting in multiple build devices each time. Therefore, I question the cost-effectiveness for a business of our size.

We've been using the solution for over a week on a trial basis. 

The solution seems stable, though I haven't been using it for long enough to fully evaluate that. 

Auvik seems scalable, and the initial deployment was straightforward. I can see how it would be difficult in a complex environment with multiple locations.

I have never had to contact tech support thus far.

We didn't previously use a different third-party solution; we use what we built in-house or what's available as part of our equipment.

The initial setup was very straightforward; it took me less than an hour to deploy Auvik on our network. 

Compared to other solutions, Auvik is much faster to set up; it was almost immediately available for use following deployment.

For small businesses with many devices, the tool is potentially unaffordable. Auvik Networks Inc. is competing with other companies offering very expensive products. Still, there's a gap in the market and potentially a lot of lost revenue for smaller customers, especially those with complex IT environments.

Auvik would be worth the money if we continued past the free trial if we were a bigger enterprise. From a value perspective, automation and related features could be very valuable.

There are a few solutions on my list to evaluate, but I still need to get around to them.

I rate the solution seven out of ten. 

I haven't had long enough to evaluate Auvik for its automation capabilities or to determine if there has been a reduction in our meantime to resolution. 

We are a managed service provider, so we use the solution to monitor our customers' network environments.

Auvik provides a single integrated platform for network monitoring, but we integrate with other platforms for ticket generation and another dashboard we use, BrightGauge. 

The alert generation is excellent; we need to be able to look at a customer's network and see if there are any issues we should be aware of, like emergencies and offline devices. Auvik provides this and alerts us to issues before the customer calls about the problem. We had a case where a device failed, the solution notified us right away, and we were able to use the automatic backup configuration, which we restored to a replacement device.

The monitoring and alerting are the most valuable features. 

The automated configuration backups are another excellent capability. 

Auvik provides excellent visibility into our remote and distributed networks, which is especially helpful when onboarding a new customer. The solution offers great insight into the network we're taking over from a single pane of glass. This gives us situational awareness, allowing us to address issues, find credentials, configure, and correctly monitor network elements.

The solution's monitoring and management functions are more challenging than needed; the interface is sometimes unintuitive and confusing. That may be because I've never had formal training with the tool, so it can be difficult to navigate sometimes. This can be frustrating, as I sometimes need to go back to square one and follow multiple steps to get back to where I've just come from. For example, to access a list of devices I was just looking at because there isn't a direct path back.

I've had some issues where the solution repeatedly discovers a device I don't want to manage and alerts me about it. This is probably me not using the tool correctly, or it could be Auvik recognizing the device in different ways.

The solution sometimes finds networks and devices it sees, but I don't know where to begin looking to try and find out where it could have seen these from. Therefore, I want to know the path or details about the discovery, where the tool discovers a new network, and what way it takes to get to it and find that it's available to scan.

I also want Auvik to identify itself differently on networks because we have some firewalls that identify it as a potential risk, not only because of what it's doing but also because Auvik can present like a foreign intrusion into the network, which scares some of our customers.

We've been using the solution for almost two years. 

The stability is excellent; we've never had a stability issue.

The tool scales well, though we have yet to push its limits. We can manage multiple customers, and it's a tenant-based solution, so Auvik is as scalable as we need it to be.

I never had to contact tech support. 

We used MS Power Automate to monitor some of the devices we now use Auvik for, and Auvik does a better, more thorough job. We've also used the Kaseya VSA platform for monitoring. Still, Auvik is geared more towards the network, discovery, and monitoring aspects, which works better for us than other platforms.

I wasn't involved in the initial deployment, though I've been involved in the deployments to some customers' networks. In terms of maintenance, there are specific tasks we carry out as part of our obligations as an MSP around monitoring Auvik, but we don't need to do any maintenance with Auvik itself.

I'm an engineer, so I'm unfamiliar with the cost of Auvik and the other options on the market. My advice to those concerned about pricing is to do their homework and compare all the offerings. They could also demo Auvik to see if it meets their needs and justifies the cost.

I rate Auvik seven out of ten. 

A monitoring solution like Auvik is essential for any MSP, but other contenders exist in the marketplace.

Regarding reducing repetitive, low-priority tasks through automation, we're not currently using the solution for that. We could benefit from this area, but we have yet to leverage the capability.

As far as helping to keep device inventories up-to-date, I imagine the solution would help, but we don't use it for inventory.

As to whether the solution reduced our mean time to resolution (MTTR), I don't have access to those reports, but it's unlikely it impacts our resolution time. We don't continually monitor Auvik or have a staff member dedicated to working with it full-time. If we took advantage of the automation, I can see how the tool would reduce our MTTR, but we're not currently leveraging it as effectively as we could be.

My advice to others evaluating Auvik is they will need the hardware to run the collector at customer sites.

We use it for alerts, to a degree, but we mostly use it for networking, monitoring, and triage.

Originally, what really was good about this particular solution was its ability to give us an alert, should something be down, based on simple networking such as pinging. There are a lot of other solutions out there now, but Auvik was, originally, the main source of our networking alerts and it automatically gave us tickets so that we could triage issues.

In a specific service situation where we have a failure, Auvik can save us a lot of time because it can remotely give us a picture of where the communications have stopped in an environment. It gives us the opportunity to put the eyes of a more senior team member on it, someone who is more experienced in networking, to assist somebody who is onsite to determine where the problem is likely to be occurring so that they can solve it much quicker. Many hours are saved for a higher-tier technician because they don't have to be physically onsite. They can use this utility to assist somebody who is there and helps reduce our MTTR.

Another benefit is the reduction in time spent doing repetitive or low-priority tasks, thanks to the automation. By also alerting us when an issue has self-resolved, it saves us the time of triaging an issue when it's not necessary to investigate it. It's helped us be more proactive, and at the same time, has given us an overview of things that have self-resolved.

The visibility we get is vital to my team. Any type of clarity, communication—even background monitoring—are all important. There are a lot of other tools, including SIEM and monitoring tools for networking, that are more advanced and have a better outlook on what's going on. But all the communication, information, and metrics are important for us to get a better picture, even when we're looking back to try to figure out client stability and hardware needs.

And Auvik has probably had an effect on our IT team's availability by helping us know about a client's problem and enabling a proactive approach to resolving it. If, for example, something is going up and down, up and down, we will get an indication of that via the alert system and the way it notifies our ticketing system, giving us trends. That gives us the opportunity to be proactive because we can resolve a problem before it becomes a complete outage.

When you have the alerting set up properly and you have the integration set up properly with a ticketing system, the end result is that, if you have a service desk triage team to determine who gets assigned a ticket based on the criticality of the situation, everything works together. The alerts notify us by creating a ticket. A ticket is then triaged by my service desk team, and they send it to a responding team. Human interaction is necessary in our design, but it does help that Auvik has a lot of automation in it.

Port mapping is probably the most vital purpose that I use it for. My team has a lot of different needs and they will use it for monitoring server performance issues and the like. But the most important functionality for me, over the years, has been port mapping when I'm trying to figure out where a network has stopped responding.

And as an MSP, we have an overall client management portal through Auvik, so we can get to everything from one spot. That's important when we are looking at solutions for clients, giving us some sort of unified reporting and access to clientele.

It's also pretty good when it comes to visualizing network topology if you take the time to manually make sure the access to individual hardware is configured. On an automated level, it helps to some degree, even for sites that are not fully configured or maintained. It's pretty helpful. And from an experienced-networking-engineer standpoint, the intuitiveness of the visibility is pretty good. From what I've seen from my entry-level technicians, their first response is that it's a bit confusing. But I don't think this is really an entry-level program.

It requires a lot of hands-on maintenance when it comes to cleanup. That's probably the biggest problem I've had because I don't have a dedicated resource to manually clean up stale records. I have a customer where it shows 4,000 devices because of the duplication of devices that I have to clean up.

I have recently found that the way that they bill, based on what they detect and what you're managing, is not self-cleaning. It requires that somebody intervene to resolve that. I'm a little challenged with the cleanup of devices for a client and the need to manually maintain it. A lot of manual cleanup is necessary.

We have been using Auvik for over five years.

I don't think I've had any outages with Auvik. I have to give it a 10 out of 10 for stability.

It has the ability to scale, but with the number of billable and managed products in mind, and the fact that it takes so much manual cleanup to get it properly situated for a larger client, I would knock the scalability down to about a seven out of 10. We have to manually figure out the billable devices and manually clean up configurations all the time, making it less scalable.

We deploy it to any client that has advanced networking. If they have multiple sites, that's where the design is most effective: larger clients that have multiple sites, even a dozen sites. We utilize it for networking that has switched stacks or multiple locations.

The communication with their technical support has been pretty solid. They usually respond quickly.

Positive

When it comes down to it, sometimes we require direct access to networks. We used other utilities like N-able products. Other types of programs like that would be useful. Otherwise, you're doing port scanning, either from the switches themselves or from third-party utilities on individual sites, from whatever server or access you have to the site. It's much better in that respect.

Prior to N-able, we used basic utilities, launched individually at customer locations, such as Nmap and Wireshark, where we were looking for network activity and details. All of them were manual applications that were installed and run at the time of need, instead of automated reporting.

I don't know why we moved to Auvik specifically, but we review products regularly. We probably had a presentation by the vendor and then there was agreement that it was the best way to move forward. But we utilize it at the same time that we use many other products for network monitoring.

If Auvik is properly manually managed by my team, there is value from it. If it's just left to run and not manually configured, monitored, or adjusted, then we don't see value from it.

From a client perspective, pricing is always an issue. Nobody wants to pay more than necessary. You need to be aware of the number of billable managed products, because they will greatly increase the cost of Auvik, based on your clientele and what you're managing.

I don't think pricing and licensing are communicated well by the Auvik team, as far as billable products go, until you get the bill. Once you get the bill and you realize you're being monitored for a bunch of things you didn't necessarily want to manage or control, you then have to take the time to manually reduce those managed products so that they're not part of your cost. It's clunky and not quite what I had hoped for.

Overall, I think it's been much better than other utilities I've used previously as far as giving me an overview of switch stacks, switch connectivity, and access to networking.

Maintenance is very manual. It's not the agents that require installation updates, it's the general interface. The configurations, or the inventory, have to be cleaned up manually and that's a lot of work.

My advice would be to keep an eye on billable products, most importantly, and be prepared to assign a resource who is dedicated to cleanup and configuration.

We use Auvik as a dashboard in our service desk department to monitor the network status of our clients, as it helps us with real-time connectivity. We use the solution for our service desk and applications and infrastructure team, including all the managers, so we have it across almost the entire technical support team.

Auvik improved our monitoring and awareness of our networks and helped us be more proactive in dealing with issues as a company. It gives us a clear understanding of what's happening on networks and what goes wrong, and the solution provides detailed data about events.

The solution helped reduce repetitive, low-priority tasks through automation, which saves us a considerable number of hours between all our clients.  

The product positively impacts our IT team's visibility into our remote and distributed networks globally. We have more awareness of our networks, a visual representation to aid us, and more detailed information when something goes wrong.  

Auvik increased our IT team's availability through automation, especially around alerting. Previously, it could take 15 minutes to figure out what was happening with a downed device, but Auvik detects an issue and automatically alerts us through the ticketing system. It tells us exactly why a particular switch has gone down or when a specific firewall loses connectivity. We know exactly what the problem is right away, which saves us a lot of time.  

Auvik helps keep our device inventories up-to-date, which saves us a lot of time because it provides us with serial numbers, IPs, and other device information which we would previously have had to find ourselves. It helps with firewalls, access points, and servers; all the device data is kept up-to-date in the background, and that's excellent. For a new client for whom we haven't documented any devices yet, that's 15 minutes saved per ticket or logged device, which adds to a significant time-saving. 

The solution provides detailed device information, including serial numbers, configurations, IP, warranty status, and when the device was purchased. This is very helpful when it comes to replacing old devices.

The visual layout of the network provided by the product is a nice feature, almost like a family tree for the network.

I'm impressed by the way Auvik helps visualize the network mapping/topology, which is one of the features I like most. It isn't 100% accurate, but it helps us understand the network by displaying different components with different icons, like APs, machines, switches, and servers, and the connections between them.  

Auvik allows us to do SNMP checks and load separate accounts on all the devices. 

The monitoring is excellent because it helps us stay proactive all the time. 

Using Auvik's monitoring and management functions is straightforward and comfortable, and we have it integrated with our billing system. If a device on the system goes down, has an alert, or packet loss, a ticket is automatically logged into our ticketing system, which is very convenient. The management side takes a little getting used to, but with training and after a few days of experience with the product, it isn't too tricky, so it's pretty user-friendly. 

Automatic configuration backups would be an excellent feature for network devices and access points. The solution could take a backup of the configurations weekly and store that, which would be very nice.

We have been using the solution for three to four months. 

The solution is very stable; we didn't have any issues with the dashboard, ticket logging, or anything like that. 

The deployment team manage the scalability, so I don't know about that. 

We have about 40 end users in total. 

I never encountered any issues requiring a ticket to technical support.

We previously used PRTG, and it wasn't ideal. I don't remember precisely why, but it was either too expensive or didn't give us the desired results, so we switched to Auvik.

I wasn't involved in the deployment, but our applications and infrastructure team found it simple enough, and they like the solution too. From my perspective, it didn't look like a complex process; it seemed seamless.

I don't work in the finance department, so I'm not familiar with the pricing details; however, I know some clients declined Auvik due to the pricing, so they found it expensive. Other clients have adopted it, so they think it's worth the cost.

We evaluated another solution I don't remember the name of, but Auvik was on the cards for quite some time, so we ended up going with it. 

I rate Auvik eight out of ten.

I advise those considering Auvik to thoroughly read through the alerts if they have a ticket, and they'll know what the issue is.

As we are early in our integration with the solution, we have yet to integrate with much, just our ticketing and billing system.

We have seen time-to-value with Auvik.  

It is our primary monitoring tool for devices.

We have virtual machines running the Auvik application. The collectors are also installed on the virtual machines.

The benefit is that it is our primary monitoring tool. 

To some extent, Auvik helps us put out fires with its backup connectivity, before end users even know that there is a problem. If we can access devices faster, then it helps resolve issues before they are noticed.

Monitoring: It lets us know the state of our business and statuses.

Discovering by IP range is okay.

We have backup connectivity in case of some failures. So, it has been of some help. Our mean time to resolution has been decreased by half an hour.

Sometimes, it is easy to use. Sometimes, it is painful to add something and get some of the features running. For example, we had a problem adding interfaces to the monitoring. When some features are not yet deployed, sometimes we struggle with configuration problems, adjusting it in the proper way.

There have been some problems with the implementation of the monitoring. Because we can't monitor as we would like, we aren't introducing anything more to the platform at the moment.

It needs flexibility for the pooling of information. Because it is fully automated, it is pooling everything from the device from a given category. There is no way to exclude things that are not important or if you want to temporarily remove them to see statistics of other things. For example, we get about 100 MB from Auvik. We are unable to limit this. We would rather stop monitoring something, since some features will always give you alerts, because they shouldn't be monitored. However, it is impossible to exclude them, e.g., the internal interface. If somebody disconnects the device from the internal interface, we get an alert. So, this is something that is really painful for us. More flexibility would solve most of our issues.

We can only see the global picture, not the detailed one. This is something that we don't have in Auvik.

I have been using Auvik since I came to the company, which would be less than a year ago. I think it was deployed in our company about two years ago.

It is stable. We are well-informed about planned maintenance from Auvik.

It does not require much maintenance to keep Auvik running.

We need to install many instances in each network, which is kind of a problem. A collector needs to be installed for each network. This causes problems with the scalability, especially if you have a network divided by firewalls.

I am using Auvik mostly when there are alerts or something is wrong.

We are monitoring around 40 devices.

Auvik's support is pretty helpful and fast in their response. 

This was the first monitoring tool that we used.

I was only using some obsolete systems five to seven years ago. Auvik's setup is much easier than it used to be for those.

The initial setup was straightforward and easy. The portal is pretty simple and self-explanatory. The process of deploying does not take long. Basic functionality takes about 40 minutes to set up. If you want more features, then it will take more time.

Auvik was first configured for the virtual environment. Then, we created instances for it.

Evaluate whether it is suitable for your purposes and network, in terms of scalability and flexibility, versus using other features, like disaster recovery or emergency login.

We haven't discovered a lot of devices with Auvik.

It is based on the identified networks. Though, it is not scanning all interfaces, e.g., if you don't have the appropriate subnet. You need to define the range by, e.g., IP devices, then it will scan that range and update the topology automatically. However, it is not an out-of-the-box automatic discovery.

It is worth having two instances on two different parts of the network to have more reliability on a network level.

I would rate this solution as a seven out of 10.

We are an MSP. We use Auvik to monitor our customers and to get up/down tickets. We get alerts from the SIEM, so we use it to make sure where those clients are in the SIEM. If we get an alert that something is sending 5 gigs, we can use it to make sure it is on the network or not on the network. We use it for alerts as well. That is mainly about it. We also give network maps to the customers to use.

A lot of our clients want compliance. There is active monitoring of the system, and it is just easier to get a network map. It is easier to see all the clients that are on the network. If somebody needs to know who is using the x subnet, we can search for it and send it off to them. It is pretty easy in that respect for most of our customers.

Auvik Network Management makes it a little bit easier to troubleshoot network issues. If we get an alert saying that there is a high interface usage, or something is very high, I can click right on the switch and look at it. I can see which port is being utilized. I can see the total utilization on the switch. If I need to, I can terminal into it and turn it off or turn it on.

Auvik's network map along with its dashboard gives us a close to real-time picture of our network. It is not in real-time. It is close enough to real-time. If I want to see how much traffic is going from all the clients to the server over the course of a day, I can see that. However, if I want to see a broadcast storm or if we accidentally created a loop or something, it gives me the tools to find it, but it does not explicitly tell me that we created a loop. In terms of visibility, if I click around, I can get about 90% visibility for investigating things.

We have been able to more quickly identify issues in the network. We did not do documentation on clients before. It is now easier for us to get the documentation done because we can see that there is a switch here and there is a switch there, and get it done. For new clients, I can plug it in and put it in the network. I do not have to walk everywhere. These are the nice, immediate, and tangible benefits that we saw.

Auvik Network Management has helped to decrease our mean time to resolution, but it is hard to quantify the time savings. Sometimes, you have to dig in. It at least cuts 30 to 45 minutes off of getting into the server, logging into the switches, pulling all the switches up, etc. I can click from one to one to one.

I like the quick mapping. I can put a customer in, and I can put the Auvik monitor in, and then probably within about half an hour to an hour, I can see most of the map. I have to tweak things here and there with the switches to get it to read correctly for credentials, but it is very quick. I can see the network pretty quickly.

There are a few things I would like to change about the interface, but in general, compared to a lot of other products, it is a little easier to use. It is a little hard sometimes to find MAC addresses and a couple of other things without getting a couple of clicks in, but in general, usability-wise, it is better than the ones we tried.

I would like more customizable alerts. I can put all the firewalls. I can put all the switches. However, especially with our firewalls, I would like to create an SNMP alert when there has been a change on the firewall, such as a rule change or a configuration change. We want to use it as a part of change management, but we cannot because we cannot get alerts. The alerts are basically whatever Auvik has. We cannot create or at least submit a ticket to get a customized alert, so we have to rely on our SIEM instead to do that alert. It took months. We had to get them to create it for us. That would be one thing I would like to see. There should be more customizable alerts or an easier and more accessible way to get customized alerts in some fashion. We really need those alerts. Otherwise, it mostly works for us.

It would also be nice to be able to customize some parts of the interface so that we have the information that is most important to us, and we could display that in some way.

Overall, there should be more customizability. It does what it does, but trying to change anything about it is a little difficult. We would save more time if we could put certain things on the front dashboard and are able to pull it up and go, "I want the switch and the firewall monitored on these ports." If I am trying to do some testing, I should be able to just put them there on Auvik and pin them instead of having to go to each one of them individually.

It has been about a year and a half.

It is definitely stable. We do not have too many crazy outages or anything like that. The platform is pretty stable. I would rate it a nine out of ten for stability.

It is pretty scalable. It could get a little dicey, but it is not on the Auvik's side. It depends on the implementation. I would rate it an eight out of ten for scalability.

We have ten people who work with Auvik. Our clients are mostly medium-sized organizations. We have about a dozen or so large enterprises, and we have about 300 medium-sized organizations and another 300 small-sized ones. 

I never had to call them. My colleague did call support to talk about the alerts. They did answer pretty quickly, and we were pretty quick to tell them no. They were helpful and quick the one time we called them. We do not really call them.

The documentation that they provide is pretty good. The deployment information is pretty detailed. They have the options for Linux, Windows, and even Unix. I do appreciate that. It is pretty good.

We used Domotz for a while, and we then switched to Auvik. We ran into similar problems, but the dashboard of Domotz was not as accessible as Auvik.

We also used Observium. It is an open-source one. Observium did everything we wanted to do, but it was way too in-depth. It is an actual open-source developer one, so it is not easily accessible to the average person. We used Observium for a brief period.

The time to value of Auvik is not very long. The platform is pretty quick. There are good instructions online. It was almost immediately.

I am pretty sure it is all on-prem. At least I have not deployed one that was in the cloud.

The deployment is pretty straightforward. It is super easy. The instructions online are usually pretty good. I do not have any problems with it. It is pretty easy and straightforward.

For small customers, it takes a couple of hours. For large customers, with ten switches and a couple of firewalls, it can take four or five hours. Auvik itself usually takes 20 minutes. If we have access to the server, we can just boot up Windows or Linux, and it is done.

In terms of maintenance, we do get alerts when the collectors go offline. Sometimes, they just fall out, and sometimes, the network does some weird things. There is a small amount of maintenance but nothing crazy.

We have definitely seen an ROI in terms of time to resolution and time to work on things. It has definitely shown value in that sense. It has saved us about half an hour on a ticket. We get about 30 tickets a year per client. That saves us 15 hours over the course of a year, which is 3,000 to 4,000 dollars.

Auvik allows us to spend less time on the setup and maintenance of the solution and issue resolution.

Relative to others, it is affordable. It is not terrible. The Performance licensing is a little expensive for what you get, but the standard licensing is fine.

Observium was free. It is open source, so you cannot beat that. It is open source, so it is free. 

Domotz is probably a little more expensive. I never got into that because that was a little bit before me. I used it a little bit but did not get into the pricing structure too much. It seems pretty comparable.

Technically, there are critical devices that are monitored by Auvik at no charge. We have to pay for servers. We have to pay for network devices and firewalls. We do have some PCs that we want to make sure do not go down. This free monitoring is nice. It does not add too much value. We want to see the workstations and where they are at. It would be weird to be charged for that.

It definitely does what it is supposed to do and what it is advertised to do. If people want to use it, it would be fine. For MSPs, it works great because the pricing structure is pretty good, but singular individual or giant enterprises would probably go with an in-house solution, such as Observium, for some of the alerting. In general, for MSPs, it is great. The pricing structure is great, and it is definitely usable.

Auvik has not empowered our entry-level technicians to solve more tickets on their own because we do not give it to our entry-level technicians. In our case, it is specifically for our network team. Our entry-level technicians do not handle any of the network. It is something we want to do with them, but as of now, our entry-level technicians do not use it.

Overall, I would rate Auvik Network Management an eight out of ten. Customizable alerts would be good. It would also be nice to be able to customize some parts of the interface. There should be more customizability. 

My company is a managed services provider managing network infrastructure for multiple clients. We use Auvik to monitor firewalls, routers, or switches. When network devices go offline, get instant email notifications so we can investigate the issue. We also use it to manage devices directly through a web browser remotely.

Auvik makes everything more manageable. The alerts come in overnight, enabling us to look into the issue as soon as possible. We haven't experimented with Auvik's automation features. The primary benefit for our organization is network visualization and monthly reports for our clients. If our clients want to know what happened during the month, we can just gather that information and send it to them.

The network map has all the devices organized by the core, distribution, and access levels. Everything is evenly lined up, so it's easy to look at and it makes everything a little easier on our team.

The device inventories help us on the auditing side. Our customers want to know about changes in interface usage and quantity. For example, if we have some switches that are typically off and others on, we can track the changes in usage and all the inventories we manage. If we have the inventories off the bat, it saves us a few hours because we don't need to count manually. Auvik also reduces our resolution time by about 30 to 60 minutes.

I don't have much experience with on-premises solutions, but the cloud is much easier to use because it's available anywhere, so it takes less time to connect. 

The instant email alerts Auvik sends are valuable because every second counts when a device is down. Everything is in a single pane of glass, so it's easy to use and manageable. 

When everything is centralized, it becomes easier to use and coordinate among team members. There's one panel that can show everything. It's easier to train others to use the platform in terms of managing all the passwords for various microservice accounts. It's all there if we need to check the configuration of files. We don't need to go through multiple levels of access.

The network map is interactive and has all the details, so that's essential. The statistics and reporting features are also crucial. When we create reports, we have all the data, including a graph of network usage, bandwidth, etc. 

Auvik could be better integrated with our ticketing system ConnectWise Manage. We tried integrating Auvik to create tickets, but working to implement a more granular classification system based on priority. The important thing is that we get the alerts, regardless of priority, but that's something that can be improved.

I have used Auvik since I started my current job. It has been about two and a half years.

I can't recall any significant issues with stability.

I'm impressed with Auvik's scalability.

I rate Auvik support eight out of 10. I used their live chat once when we had an issue with a firewall that had two instances. We were doing reporting and needed to get the statistics for that month. Once, it failed over to the second secondary device of that firewall, so we could no longer get the information from the firewall that went offline. Auvik support helped me merge statistics from both into one. They resolved our issue on time. 

Positive

We use other network solutions, depending on client preferences. We have another one called Zabbix that might be used for more granular use cases. It's up to our management to decide. We compare the features of Auvik and Zabbix and pick the one that fits the client's business requirements. 

I wasn't around for the initial setup, but I've installed agents. When we install an agent, we turn off the Linux box and install it, then it's good to go most of the time. Another person on our team is the architect, and I am the person who deploys the agent on each server, switch, router, or firewall. There are various steps, but it doesn't take much time. After deployment, the solution is very low maintenance.

Auvik takes less time to do the reports, respond to alerts, set up the agents, and directly access devices, so its time-to-value is good.

Pricing depends on the client's budget and needs. Is it worth it to pay more to save time setting things up? Zabbix is an open-source solution, but it takes much more time and expertise to set up, whereas you can set up Auvik quickly. 

In terms of results, Auvik lets you see everything in a single pane of glass and the reporting is more accessible, so you save time in the long run. That's what I would tell someone if they're exploring their options for network monitoring.

I rate Auvik eight out of 10 overall. It's low maintenance, provides prompt alerts, and requires less expertise. Everything you need to set Auvik up is in the documentation, including guides for configuring network switches and routers. 

Auvik integrates well with various vendors, including Microsoft, Cisco, etc. It's well-documented. Go with Auvik if you want fewer headaches. 

We're an MSP, and we support small to medium businesses from end to end, including printers, servers, and networks. We use Auvik to manage our clients' infrastructure. Our customers include companies running factories and hotels.

The ability to manage access points provided by Auvik is a big one for us; it's much easier to track down cable breaks and the specific switch where the lost connection to the access point is. We serve hotels with over 300 access points, so this functionality is essential.

The solution helped reduce repetitive, low-priority tasks through automation, especially regarding tickets. Ticket logging is now automatic, which helps us immensely. A hotel guest is no longer left without a connection for an hour and then complains to the duty manager, who logs a call with us manually. We can see an issue immediately, and start resolving it, which has saved our business a significant amount of time.    

Auvik positively affected our IT team's visibility into our remote and globally distributed networks because we can see all our different devices from a centralized view. It's much simpler and easier to have all our network components visible from one place. This visibility is 100% critical; our customers pay us and expect us to have visibility over the network.  

Auvik reduced our mean time to resolution and significantly reduced the number of issues we face, so we rarely need to resolve anything.   

The solution also helps our projects team implement new technologies into the environment and manage all the teething issues. 

The network mapping is an excellent feature, as each device is represented by a different shape or object, which is great for helping us, our staff in training, and our customers understand how the network is structured. Seeing the bigger picture helps immensely, as we provide remote support; we're not boots on the ground.

The solution provides detailed device information, including serial numbers, lifecycles, and differentiation between devices, which is another excellent feature.

The monitoring and management functions work fine, and we have no issues with them; it integrates well with our remote system. Auvik sends alerts and creates tickets in our ticketing system, which is fantastic for us because we see an alert come in and pop onto Auvik to start our investigation. The ease of use is essential, the easier, the better. We have a lot of customers, and each one wants to feel like they've received five-star treatment. The quicker we can resolve an issue, the better our customers feel, and the easier it becomes for us to get paid.  

Auvik is fantastic for helping to visualize our organization's network mapping/topology; we've used different monitoring solutions, but nothing can give us a network diagram like Auvik. Previously, we made network diagrams manually, a time-consuming, painstaking process. As soon as we had to add or swap out a switch, we would have to edit the diagram. We used Microsoft Project for that and had to pay for the functionality. It was so much effort for minimal reward. With Auvik, we put in little effort and get a lot of rewards. The network visualization is intuitive enough overall.   

It helps keep our device inventories up-to-date; it features a collector that gathers detailed information about the network, which makes management easier. We can see what's online, decommissioned, or coming onto the network when it's not supposed to. This functionality saves us a significant amount of time.   

I want the network map to be faster and more responsive. 

I've been using the solution for almost a year. 

The tool is stable enough for now. Once a lot of items are on the network map, it can get sluggish, but other than that, it's pretty stable.

The solution is scalable, and we have many customers there. As far as I know, we can add as much as we want.

I never had to contact Auvik's technical support. The solution has excellent documentation, so I can always go in there and better my knowledge.

We previously used multiple solutions, including N-central and PRTG Network Monitor. We switched because Auvik allows us to have more devices, different devices, the ability to differentiate between them, and detailed information that the other products could not provide.

I wasn't involved in the deployment, but in terms of maintenance, the solution requires some upkeep. When devices come and go, we have to remove them manually, but it's still straightforward to see what's going on on a network level rather than having to be there in person.

I don't know how much the solution costs, but the fact that we've moved almost all of our customers over to it means it must be worth the value. Our platforms are costly, but we switched to Auvik, so the company must see it as cost-effective.

I rate Auvik nine out of ten. 

The solution does not provide a single integrated platform simply because we use many different platforms. Auvik is outstanding because it provides the most information and has the most capable feature set. Still, we have many requirements within our business that Auvik alone cannot cater to.

The cloud is the future when comparing Auvik's cloud-based solution versus on-prem network monitoring solutions. On-prem can be nice, as it can be a little faster, but we have to be in the cloud now. Having one place to go, one platform, is too valuable, and it's much better.  

I advise those evaluating the solution to play around and use it before implementing it. I recommend the platform.