Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms Reviews

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms serves as aggregators and points of handoff for our complete IP MPLS network. We have 9906 platforms at the core with edges as 9000, 9904, and other models, and we are upgrading 9904 with 8Ks.

Currently, we are performing an apple-to-apple migration without adding any additional features. Later, we will enable segment routing and other features on this platform.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms has added significant value as a capacity upgrade. As an operator, we were at a bottleneck with the 9K platform, where we could not exceed 400G, whereas Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms can be upgraded to 800G interfaces, which has given us a substantial advantage.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms offers high-density ports, primarily 400Gs and comparable interfaces, along with segment routing capabilities.

While we have not yet implemented segment routing, as we upgrade the uplink and capacity of our uplinks to the operator and infrastructure, we have already upgraded to 400G+.

Integration was easy and we did not face any challenges. However, the line cards from 9K are not compatible with 8K, so despite supporting XR, the hardware is not like 9K hardware, and we cannot use offloaded line cards on 8K.

Configuration syntax could have been more similar to 8K since it has XR only. Some configurations differ from what was in 9K in terms of syntax. Since it is XR-based, similar commands would have been beneficial, particularly for EVPN, VXLAN, and related configurations.

We are currently using 9000K and upgrading 9000 with Catalyst 800, 8200s, and related equipment.

The transition and usage have been ongoing for approximately six months.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is stable.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms demonstrates good scalability with more line slots for line cards, making it highly scalable with additional options for adding extra cards.

Customer support from Cisco is excellent. Advanced Services support, TAC support, and all related services are outstanding. I would rate customer support at 10 out of 10.

We were previously on a 9000 platform. The primary challenge we faced was that the maximum uplink capacity of line cards was only 400G, which prompted our decision to switch to Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms to achieve higher capacity line cards.

During migration and platform upgrade, we dismantled the 9K and used the same space and power to integrate 8Ks. Downtime consisted only of physical movement of hardware. We faced no challenges with configuration and migration strategy, as the Cisco Advanced Services team was involved and we did not encounter any major obstacles.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is still in the deployment phase, and I cannot provide metrics yet as it is under assessment. Return on investment will likely require a minimum of one year to analyze. I can provide more feedback after using it for a couple of additional months, as we have only been using it for six months.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was reasonable with no major differences. However, pricing was primarily reflected in line cards and optical transceivers. Chassis costs were reasonable, but line cards and optical transceivers were somewhat expensive.

Before choosing Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, we did not evaluate other options or consult other vendors, remaining focused on Cisco solutions.

I would rate Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms as nine out of 10 due to hardware reliability and straightforward configuration and deployment. Migrating from 9Ks to 8K was very easy, and we did not face any major challenges during deployment. Configuration information was readily available in Cisco documentation, and we experienced no compatibility issues.

Regarding AI capabilities, we did not use AI agents or AI capabilities because our environment operates as a large operator network supporting numerous customers with Service Level Agreements. We did not enable AI currently, but we may consider it in the future with additional support and briefing from Cisco regarding AI capabilities.

Our primary concern is whether any service impact would be limited to a particular region or could propagate to other devices. As an operator, such issues could impact an entire region, which prevented us from deploying AI features.

My recommendation to others considering Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is that if your organization requires high capacity hardware exceeding 400G, I would definitely recommend Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms.

Currently, we are using the Cisco 5585 and the Firepowers, and the Firepower IPS, which comes as part of the firewall module, and the switching and the routing. For switching, we have the Catalyst and the core switch, the big one, which is 8800, and also 68 series.

I have experience working with Cisco products and Cisco solutions many times. I used to work on Cisco at the beginning, but nowadays I am on another platform. At this time, I am in a particular administrator position. From time to time, I am driving some standards of a Cisco product. We have UCS, ASA 5585, and Firepower.

What I appreciate about Catalyst is that it is so powerful. The advantage of Catalyst is that it is powerful and intelligent. Compared to other vendors, such as Huawei and others, Cisco switches are more powerful and very intelligent. I prefer Cisco because they can carry a heavy load and are sometimes scalable. You can purchase them for use on a small-scale network, and when the network grows, you do not need to purchase again. You can simply add some licenses.

We do use the application hosting capabilities of Catalyst because these represent best practices that I advocate for rather than always configuring on the command line. Configuring on the interfaces is preferable.

The application hosting capabilities have helped our operations because it is efficient and very forward-thinking. I recall that there is a shortage of Cisco engineers, but you can still teach someone from high school to configure Catalyst on the GUI interface, and it is easy to understand. It is very straightforward for me in terms of business strategy on how I proceed with it. It is beneficial for the business and user-friendly because on the GUI interfaces, you are working with something you can see, and you do not need to memorize all the configuration commands every time. You simply click on it.

I assess the comprehensive security measures of Catalyst in safeguarding my network operations as very intelligent. When you have network segmentation, you can apply securitization on the VLANs, and there is nothing difficult about that case. You can also apply role-based access. It is very intelligent.

The only improvement I can suggest for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is that in the AI era, it will be important to embed machine learning capabilities. It will be important to embed some agencies within that technology and ensure that the technology is able to manage the traffic coming from the agent and also from the robots. Nowadays, companies are starting to adopt new technology with robot agents. I believe that there will be a lot of traffic coming from those agencies. We need to understand the capabilities on how we can onboard them on our technology, on our network on Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms.

The last time I worked with Cisco directly was about five years ago. However, I am managing the team which is working with that product every day, so it is the same as if I am operating it every day.

When analyzing the performance of Catalyst in my network infrastructure, it is outstanding. After purchasing that technology, you no longer experience network cuts or disruptive network downtime. Our traffic flows very well. If you are changing the traffic from 10 megabytes to 100 megabytes, it is capable of carrying that traffic. Nothing is difficult, unless perhaps after five to ten years.

In terms of stability and scalability, it is highly scalable and highly reliable.

Implementing Catalyst as a gateway has not been difficult at all, especially because Cisco always provides an engineer to support us. Even if the chassis is broken, it is not difficult. Cisco engineers, the best of the best, those who have the CCIE certification, are there online to help you configure, assemble that, take out the module, the chassis, and replace it. It is not difficult at all.

I previously used a different product, specifically Huawei, and that is why we have managed to replace all of them in my company. We also used Akamai and IBM. Those switches, all of them, for some reason, do not come close to Cisco.

The setup of Catalyst is straightforward, and I find the deployment easy. Cisco has a good portal where you can learn each and every capability of the technology and learn how to set it up from scratch until production. Cisco advocates best practices and provides best practices documentation. You learn the technology itself as a Cisco product, and you also learn how the industry has been doing things. That education is much more important.

We bought Catalyst directly through Cisco and do not buy through other distributors because 90% of the time when we have issues, we go directly to Cisco.

I do not know much about the pricing, setup costs, or licensing. For the pricing, I always hear my manager complaining about the cost, but I do not know much. I am focused on the capability and performance. I am focusing on doing the job, onboarding the traffic, and making sure that things work well. When it comes to the package, finance, and other aspects, I have not been involved. However, Cisco products are quality. Even though they are expensive, they are quality. You are assured about the warranties and Cisco support for quite some time, perhaps five to ten years. What about the other products, which we can call cheap products? You are still going to have more issues. Why do we need to go for that? I prefer to go for Cisco, even though they may complain about the pricing.

The key differences, both pros and cons of Cisco in comparison to other technologies are significant. Scalability is one advantage. We are able to be scalable. In our companies, we onboard a small portion of the department and then enlarge that onboarding to the bigger version. I am managing 16 OpCos now, and when I am starting to onboard all the 16 OpCos, Cisco technology is able to carry over the load. The scalability is good, and the performance is very good. Additionally, it is still user-friendly at the moment. When coming to SFTP, the exchange of SFTP does not have challenges. There are very few challenges which I have encountered with Cisco technology. Compared to the others, you always get the bottleneck. For some reason, you need to pay for everything. Even the support is very hard because very few people are using it and very few people are certified on the technology. It is very hard to work on other products. If you are working with Cisco, Cisco itself is up to par and is giving the full support and everything.

I still work with the product, specifically with this solution, but I have low hands-on experience myself. However, I am managing the team which is hands-on. 90% of the time, even now, if you call my team, they will be configuring something on the switch.

I have not touched Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms for the SD-WAN. I recall the Catalyst, the 48 and 4 services, as well as the 6 services. I have never gotten to the 8000.

For Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, we are using it normally because it is a layer three switch. We are using it for the MPLS connection and BGP. We are working on doing some network segmentation and are doing a lot of other work on them.

I also mentioned that I use the UCS, the servers, and I also used the ASA.

My advice to other organizations considering Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms would be as follows: if they are going to grow bigger on their network and traffic, and if they want their network to be very stable, they must consider taking Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms. I would advise them to have Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms if they ever want to have stability, good performance, scalability, and reliability. I rate this solution 9.5 out of 10.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms serves as our main edge router solution deployed across all our sites and remote locations. The platform functions as the edge router for remote sites, serving as a main router and gateway while providing routing capacity with our ISP and other branches.

At one of our remote locations, we use Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms to build tunnels and interact with the external environment.

Additionally, we use Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms for our main routing purposes, handling both external and internal routing. The platform also enables multi-tunnel purposes, connecting the main routers of our main offices from all remote locations.

Since adopting Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, we have been able to leverage SD-WAN features on the routers, which provided an appreciable solution for our environment.

After implementing SD-WAN features, we achieved quite reliable uptime at sites where we previously experienced numerous downtimes, bringing the uptime to an optimum level for our operations. Upgrading features became quite reliable and quick, helping us reduce onsite visits.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms offers good reliability and stability, which is particularly valuable when it comes to WAN routing or heavy branch routing, along with high performance and throughput that handles massive traffic loads.

The GUI interfaces feature has helped my team immensely because we manage more than 100 remote sites. This centralized management system is invaluable when managing so many routers across multiple locations.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms features a high-end aggregation headend for data centers while leveraging the QuantumFlow Processor for massive scale with 40 or 100G interfaces. The platform offers multicore x86 architecture and extensive model supports, including container hosting.

I have not faced significant challenges with Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, but there is room for improvement in integrating more AI-driven automation factors or machine learning modules into the routers.

I rated it an eight out of 10 because of the latest demands regarding environmental constraints, AI and machine learning features, and a need for PoE modules, which could be seen as improving features.

Regarding Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms' AI capabilities, governance, and security, it is essential that these aspects are enabled as features based on licensing factors so companies can maintain their governance and security.

Integration with DNAC should resolve the remaining observations.

I have been using Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms for around three to four-plus years.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is indeed a stable product and truly an appreciable solution for any large organization.

The scalability of Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is good, and there are no issues with it.

Customer support for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is quite appreciable as they are available 24/7.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate customer support a 10.

Before Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, we used a different solution with an L3 switch for some remote sites, where we encountered problems such as bandwidth issues and high utilization issues.

I have seen a return on investment because we save both money and time due to the reliable product, which helps significantly with site operations and maintaining SLAs.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is quite acceptable because any product demands support as well as backend support and technical assistance from the companies selling their products.

We did not evaluate other options and directly opted for the solution from Cisco for Catalyst 8000 series.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms an eight.

I advise any organization looking for branch edge deployments or managing remote sites with smooth operations without overhead to choose this series.

Our use case for using Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is that we were establishing a new equipment room for the relocation from the old building to the new building.

The features I appreciate about Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms include its ability to integrate with Cisco ISE seamlessly, allowing for very easy integration with Windows AD for authentication, and the user credentials are integrated together with the capability to detect non-authorized devices. I can implement MAB for the printers to work together with the authentication, and our support team can easily import the list of MAC addresses for those printers and some of the IP phones, ensuring that they work very well. It also provides excellent integration with ISE for administrators to manage the devices.

For analytics and telemetry, I have exported the logs from Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms network devices and firewall devices to Splunk, which is now part of Cisco. I use Splunk to analyze the logs, checking device healthiness and receiving alerts to spot any unusual activity. If there are issues, such as switches or ports being disconnected, or if someone connects their own laptop to the bank's network, our ISE detects it and forces disconnection immediately, filing an alert to our email. This allows us to address the issue with the user and escalate it to management. On the analytics side, it significantly aids in performing security operations, with reporting generating monthly and daily reports that keep management informed about security and performance status. The monthly report summarizes data, such as the number of external attacks blocked by firewalls and attempts to access the bank's network through port scanning, enabling us to create statistics and build ban lists for blocking malicious IP addresses.

The price for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is somewhat higher compared to Chinese brands, though the difference is not huge. A more aggressively priced option would be better.

I would appreciate updates with new features and capabilities for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, as it would be good to know about future integrations.

I would particularly appreciate seeing new integrations and features related to AI in future updates, especially how Catalyst or Cisco will provide AI features integrated with their very stable product.

I have only worked with a Chinese bank product in the context of similar products to Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms.

I find Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms quite reliable, meaning it is also very stable with no crashes and zero downtime.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is very scalable, easy to expand, and will not cause trouble.

I appreciate the technical support from Cisco, as it is very helpful.

If I had to rate support from 0 to 10, I would give them eight points.

I have only worked with a Chinese bank product in the context of similar products to Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms.

In terms of installation, I find it very easy to install Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, particularly because many post-sales support companies in Hong Kong know how to work with Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms.

I will support Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms at any time, as I have used Cisco products for more than 20 years, finding them technically advanced compared to other solutions.

I do see a return on investment with Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms; however, if we cannot afford to buy it, realizing the ROI becomes difficult.

Quantifying ROI is very difficult; if I had to estimate, it would be at least 20 percent savings in time and money.

As a customer, the biggest advantage of Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms that I think of is its reliability, which makes me really confident to use it.

My setup is only on-premises; I do not utilize cloud solutions.

The application performance in our remote and branch offices remains unaffected as we have plenty of bandwidth available locally, without hitting any limitations.

I have not purchased Cisco products from AWS Marketplace; instead, I work directly with our Cisco SI to purchase the product.

I would rate this product an overall 8 out of 10.

Major use cases for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms are primarily for SD-WAN Edge devices, application-aware routing, and it combines routing and security since this is a one-box solution integrated with a firewall, IPS, IDS, and URL filtering, along with VPN IPsec and segmentation concepts.

When analyzing performance of Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, I'm looking at network WAN performance metrics for mission-critical applications, measuring metrics such as latency, jitter, packet loss, RTT value, and also using SLA-based routing for path selection. In terms of application performance metrics, Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms uses Deep Packet Inspection, focusing on application response time, per application latency, jitter, loss, and throughput per application.

In terms of analytics and telemetry, we are using NETCONF or SNMP polling. We monitor interface statistics, loss, latency, jitter, application performance, CPU, and memory utilization. If we have an IPsec tunnel, we're also monitoring telemetry such as tunnel health, alongside routing and control plane status using vManage or ThousandEyes.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is very user-friendly, and comparing with Fortinet and Palo Alto, Fortinet is definitely the cheapest, followed by Cisco, while Palo Alto is too costly.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is very easy to install and use; we've been using Cisco for three to four decades, and it is really good. It's user-friendly for everyone.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is quite affordable and not too expensive.

For troubleshooting, we are using vManage and ThousandEyes or CLI. We could improve in terms of step-by-step root cause analysis by integrating AI in vManage to assist users, especially remote IT users who are not full experts in IT technology, in performing basic troubleshooting tests.

I have seven to eight months of experience handling Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is a scalable product for me, and the same applies to my customers. Performance remains good and I do not have issues with performance. I would rate stability eight to nine out of ten.

We have both cloud and private environments since I work at Orange, known as France Telecom. Both are very scalable and stable. Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is a scalable product for me, and the same applies to my customers.

I find their support to be very good. In my last experience, while deploying a Captive Portal for a customer and integrating it with ICE, Cisco TAC support resolved a bug within a couple of hours, which was very important for my customer. I'd rate Cisco support eight to nine out of ten.

Positive

Cisco is completely in the past, but in the middle of some of the projects I'm handling, such as organic growth type requests, I'm dealing with Cisco SD-WAN as well.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is very easy to install and use; we've been using Cisco for three to four decades, and it is really good. It's user-friendly for everyone.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is very user-friendly, and comparing with Fortinet and Palo Alto, Fortinet is definitely the cheapest, followed by Cisco, while Palo Alto is too costly.

I do not work with application hosting capability in Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms. Implementing Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms as a gateway does not affect application performance across remote or branch offices.

In terms of SD-WAN, I work with FortiGate for security. I'm currently on Fortinet SD-WAN, which is a FortiGate. We also have a third-party IPsec tunnel to form an IPsec tunnel with the third party, including Cisco and Palo Alto, depending upon the third-party devices.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is mainly for VPN, and since I work at Orange, where we have different clients, depending upon the requirement of the different customers, if a customer is willing to migrate existing legacy networks to Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, Fortinet SD-WAN, or Palo Alto SD-WAN, I deal with these SD-WAN technologies including the security part.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is a very good product, and with this, we can do so many things, including integrating with the firewall, URL filtering, VPN, IPsec segmentation, and other capabilities. I would rate this product nine out of ten overall.

My main use case for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is that in our deployment, we use it only as a Meraki SD-WAN hardware platform for new SD-WAN sites, serving as the SD-WAN gateway for offices.

Providing a specific example of how I use it as an SD-WAN gateway for our offices is straightforward: the office consists of LAN and Wi-Fi deployment with switches and access points, all using Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms as the gateway to the outside. With that SD-WAN gateway, we connect our data centers with gateways in the hub, and we connect to internet applications using tunnels to our cloud security provider.

We have been using this new platform recently, transitioning from Meraki MX platforms to a mix of MX platforms and Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms using the Meraki software only.

The best features Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms offers include the cloud managed feature that helps the most because we are managing a very large deployment of SD-WAN sites. Regarding software updates, it is very convenient to use the power of cloud managed to roll out software updates whenever there are bugs or vulnerabilities, allowing us to do that quickly and efficiently. Although not directly related to the hardware platform, that is what we love about Meraki. So far, the hardware has been reliable for us, and since we use the platforms for SD-WAN access at any site, including business-critical locations such as factories or warehouses, stability is our number one feature. We are happy with that and hope to scale the bandwidth because the bandwidth requirement for the offices is growing, and we believe Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms will support this use case.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms positively impacts my organization because, although we were using Meraki MX for a long time with no new model from them, we were concerned about supporting the increasing bandwidth requirement for our sites. Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms helps with this, as we understand it is a newer platform with many optimizations under the hood that can be done to make it more powerful and able to support larger bandwidth requirements.

I believe Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms can improve by needing to support more bandwidth; we are reaching the physical capacity at some sites and need to support more than 10 gig, such as by having 25 gig interfaces for LAN and WAN if the software permits that bandwidth. Additionally, the firewall management requires significant improvement, as the current behavior resembles firewalls from 25 years ago; it lacks central management policies and objects that modern firewalls possess. We are aware that enhancements are coming and hope they arrive soon.

I have been using Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms for approximately one to two years.

Regarding the cloud managed feature, it appears very similar compared to what I had with Meraki MX; there is no significant difference in managing Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms from the dashboard versus Meraki MX. While the hardware is different, requiring a newer software version, the dashboard offers the same look and feel. For stability and reliability, so far, so good; however, given how we deploy in small and medium sites before moving to more critical sites, we still need to build greater trust by deploying Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms on our biggest sites.

The scalability of Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is something we still need to discover; we believe we will be able to use it at our bigger sites and data centers, but it is still something to learn.

I think we have already mentioned customer support; it is good to use the dashboard and portal to open tickets via a web interface, but sometimes if the issue is software-related and requires a developer to fix or write code, it can take a long time.

I have previously used traditional networking solutions such as MPLS, routers, and firewalls, and we have been using Cisco Viptela before switching to Cisco Meraki as the SD-WAN solution. We picked Meraki primarily for its ease of management, the great cloud manage feature, and its ability to roll out updates quickly while having fewer vulnerabilities compared to other SD-WAN vendors.

My advice for others looking into using Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is to first look at the features available on the platform because, in the Meraki form we use, there are not as many routing or firewall features compared to other vendors. Consider if zero touch deployment are key differentiators for your deployment size, as it makes a significant difference when deploying many sites. Also contemplate how you will operate your overall WAN or SD-WAN solution; if you have a small team and many sites, a centralized and simple platform with observability and built-in monitoring tools is essential. Lastly, assess the security aspects and the management of vulnerabilities; for us, when Cisco Meraki has a patch, rolling it out is easy, which has been proven beneficial. I would rate my overall experience with Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms a 7 out of 10.

My main use case for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is helping my customers with deploying the edge platforms.

A specific example of how I help my customers deploy the edge platforms involves migrating from their old routers to the new 8300 Catalyst routers with IPsec and GRE tunnels.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms offers various features including security, routing, and switching, with most of the features required for the aggregation layer.

I find the security and routing features of Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms valuable, and the security features such as GRE and IPsec with phase one and phase two configurations strengthen security posture.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms has positively impacted my organization because it was useful to migrate 25 years of different third-party devices.

The specific positive outcomes I have seen include smart licensing, faster convergence, and dynamic routing support, indicating improvements compared to those older third-party solutions.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms can be improved by increasing the port density and capacity because one drawback when migrating multiple physical interfaces is that we could not get enough or identical physical interfaces, so we had to go with the 9300 L2 switch in combination with the 8300 router.

I would suggest some automation platforms to speed up the provisioning and make deployment easier and more efficient.

Regarding Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms's AI capabilities, I think its governance and security need to be improved.

Although I have not had an AI experience with Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, I think its accuracy and reliability of output need more maturity.

I have been using Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms for about three years or more.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is stable so far, although time will tell.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms needs to be improved in terms of scalability, specifically physical scalability and throughput metrics.

I believe the customer support for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is good.

I would rate the customer support for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms a six on a scale of 1 to 10.

I previously used a different solution, as my customer had a very old legacy device from about 25 years ago that had to be replaced, and Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms from Cisco was the suitable solution.

I have seen a return on investment regarding time saved. Even though we had to spend time on provisioning, it was relatively easier to migrate approximately 2,000 lines of configuration.

I do not have direct involvement with pricing, but I am aware that we use smart licensing for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms.

Before choosing Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, we did not evaluate any other options.

I would rate Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms a seven out of 10.

I gave Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms a seven out of 10 because overall it is a good platform, although I would appreciate more throughput for the aggregation layer.

My advice to others considering Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is that it could be deployed in the aggregation layer, but this depends on the customer infrastructure.

My main use case for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is utilizing it as an edge device to connect the MPLS network with the LAN or WAN.

I can provide a specific example of how we use it as an edge device in our environment: our clients use Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms because we provide that type of support. We set up the device for our clients and they typically use it as a border router between the internet and their network or to connect with the MPLS.

Regarding how our clients typically rely on Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, it depends on the performance. Cisco is always a great choice. The great thing about Cisco Catalyst is the performance and how it can handle so much traffic and information at the same time, forwarding using CEF technology compared with other brands.

The best feature that Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms offers is its performance because it is a robust device.

When I mention performance and robustness, it stands out in my experience by how much information it can handle at the same time, depending on how the router can process and forward so much traffic simultaneously. Cisco is very reliable on that, especially this model.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms has positively impacted our organization by providing the reliability that Cisco offers. This brand and model has to perform and handle a lot of traffic at the same time. The impact on our company is that we can sell more of these devices and configure them because clients really trust them.

This reliability has led to specific business outcomes such as faster deployments and increased client satisfaction with network performance. We can deploy these devices easily.

I believe the only improvement needed for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms would be to have more information available. However, I cannot say that there is anything that needs improvement at the moment.

Regarding what could use improvement, I would say documentation always comes in great. Having more documentation and more specific cases with scenarios where we can check some issues would be amazing. More documentation on how to configure different components would be great. The interfaces and VLAN documentation, along with more examples of how to configure two different networks—such as one side using BGP and the other side using OSPF and how they work together—would be helpful. More examples of that would always be great.

For me, documentation is the main improvement needed for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms.

I have been using Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms for approximately three years.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is stable.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms scalability is good. I can scale using different modules.

The customer support for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is adequate. The TAC is fine. I am not going to say it is the best support ever, but I have not used it many times on this model. When I used it with different devices like ISE, it really helped me. With these ones, I have not tried this support yet, but I believe it is the same. Sometimes it takes a little bit, and sometimes they do not give a lot of information, so it is better to make calls and have meetings with the support team. I believe we achieve more results having calls than just sending emails.

I have seen a return on investment with Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms. A lot of clients needed it, and this year we deployed approximately ten units, which we purchased and then resold to our clients.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing is something that I do not handle. The sales department is responsible for all of that.

Before choosing Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, our clients usually evaluate other options trying to spend less money for greater performance. In these cases, Cisco is a trusted brand, and I believe the client is very comfortable working with Cisco. I do not have that information regarding evaluations of other solutions, but that is part of the sales team, not my part.

When it comes to the accuracy and reliability of output, especially with any automated or intelligent features I might have used, it is hard for me to believe that AI or intelligent features are going to solve so many problems because they tend to make mistakes. Sometimes trying to configure something by itself leads to more mistakes and makes it harder to solve the issue, although this does not happen all the time. I believe in the future this will be possible, but I am not sure when or how long that will take. Having a tool where I could just type one prompt would be great.

If I were talking to someone new to Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, I would want them to first learn how to configure it, how it works, its performance, the resources required, how much money they need to spend on it, what the limits are, and what the benefits are. They should learn all of that to understand if this is the best path or solution for their network. They should not expect it to do everything, but rather understand what it does and what it does not. I would rate this product an eight out of ten.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms provides secure WAN and edge connectivity between the venue network and external networks or sites in our environment. For day-to-day operations, I primarily use it for monitoring connectivity and interface health, checking routing and reachability. When issues arise, I review logs and alerts and troubleshoot connectivity problems. For example, if a site or service becomes unreachable, I check Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms interfaces, routing information, and logs to determine whether the issue is with the WAN connection, routing, or something downstream in the network.

An important aspect of my main use case regarding Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is visibility at the network edge for troubleshooting purposes. When we experience connectivity or performance issues, it gives us a place to verify WAN health, interfaces, routing, and traffic behavior before we start troubleshooting downstream switches. The value extends beyond connectivity to include centralized visibility and troubleshooting capabilities.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms primarily offers centralized manageability and visibility along with security features. I can troubleshoot directly from the edge by checking interfaces and logs, which makes it easier to manage the network edge.

Regarding centralized manageability and visibility, I find that it helps me in my day-to-day work to quickly understand what is happening at the network edge without having to check multiple devices individually. If a service or site is unreachable, I start checking Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms for interface status, information, and any relevant logs or alerts. This helps me determine whether the problem is on the WAN side or going up to the switches, access points, or any of the endpoints. This approach saves significant troubleshooting time and gives us a clear picture of edge connectivity.

From an operations perspective, the centralized monitoring feature allows me to quickly check the health of the edge device and interfaces, which reduces the time required to isolate an issue. This simplifies the overall network architecture.

I believe Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms could improve the overall management and troubleshooting experience. This platform has substantially more capabilities, but for someone working in network operations, an even more streamlined interface with clear visibility into all issues, health, routing, application performance, and security would make troubleshooting faster. I would also suggest simplified workflows for common operational tasks and troubleshooting.

Regarding documentation improvements for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, having step-by-step troubleshooting guides with examples would make it easier for operations teams to quickly identify the root cause. For integrations, broader and more streamlined integration with monitoring, logging, and IT service management platforms would also be useful. The main opportunities are operational-focused documentation, easier troubleshooting workflows, and integrations with existing tools.

I have been working with Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms for approximately six months, with my experience primarily focused on network operations, monitoring, troubleshooting, and understanding how the platform fits into the overall network environment.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is definitely stable in my experience because it provides consistent connectivity and reliable routing. I have not experienced any major stability problems with the platform in my day-to-day use.

From an operations standpoint, the scalability of Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms allows me to manage and monitor edge connectivity consistency as the environment grows. The platform provides a good foundation for scaling connectivity while maintaining centralized visibility and control.

Regarding customer support, I have not had to rely heavily on Cisco support specifically, as my first-hand experience is somewhat limited. In general, Cisco has a well-established support ecosystem with technical documentation, troubleshooting resources, and availability for deeper assistance when needed. The main thing I would like to see is quick response time and clear troubleshooting steps.

I did not evaluate any other platforms before choosing Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, as I was shown this one without comparative analysis. I do not have enough first-hand information to comment on competing platforms. From a general perspective, I know many alternatives exist, such as Palo Alto Networks, Cisco Edge solutions, and Fortinet, but I cannot claim that those were specifically evaluated by our organization.

I definitely advise others to use Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms because it immediately addresses the needs for routing, security, and bandwidth requirements. Additionally, you have the advantage of Cisco documentation and the ability to test configurations before deployment in production. I would emphasize the importance of implementing monitoring, logging, and automation troubleshooting workbooks from the start, as this delivers important value.

Additional thoughts I would share about Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms are that there should be more documentation, clearer security policies, and a clear picture of how to use them. I believe its strengths lie in the combination of routing and WAN connectivity. From another perspective, the value in good visibility and the ability to isolate connectivity issues before moving into the network is significant, though there is still room to improve the management experience, documentation, and integrations. Overall, it is a solid platform that ensures reliability and scalability for network edge connectivity. I rate this product an 8 out of 10.

My main use case for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is to use it as a router inside the cloud, facilitating BGP peering between that and the Palo Alto firewalls, and I have also used it as part of SD-WAN, serving as a vEdge for the SD-WAN devices or cEdge, whichever way you prefer.

A specific example of how I use Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms in my environment is that I use it as a router in the cloud to form VPN tunnels over the internet between the different cloud regions and to connect them into a fully meshed network, and I also use it in Azure to connect my different Azure cloud environments.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms has positively impacted my organization by offering a Cisco router that we can use in the cloud, which provides a more familiar environment for us as network engineers compared to using cloud-native routing infrastructure, and we use it for peering and routing from the transit gateways into our remote data centers when we set VPN tunnels from the cloud to the data center.

The best features that Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms offers include a familiar Cisco routing environment, and what I particularly appreciate about it, especially while using it more for Cisco SD-WAN, is its ability to make a change and do a commit instead of having every change immediately pushed to the device.

This feature impacts my workflow and day-to-day tasks by allowing me to make my configurations and commit them at a later stage, which I prefer because I can prepare my configuration and stage it rather than having to copy and paste everything at the time of configuration.

I do not think Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms needs improvement at all; I think it is a great Cisco product, and I have no complaints about it, as it works like a physical Cisco router, with more of the features being the same, though sizing matters if you want more throughput, but other than that, it works very well.

I have been using Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms since 2020, so that is about just over two and a half years, going almost to three.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is stable.

The scalability of Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is good because it is just a matter of adding new resources if you need a faster performing device or VM.

The customer support for Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is excellent. I would rate the customer support a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10.

I previously used CSR 1000V before Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms, and I switched because Cisco has discontinued CSR 1000V.

I have not looked into return on investment or any relevant metrics regarding time saved or reduced effort since I was only involved on the technical side and did not consider the investment, expenditure, licensing, or costs.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is minimal, as my manager took care of those details, and I never looked at them.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms because I was looking for a direct replacement of the CSR 1000V.

I would rate Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. The reason I give it the highest rating is that the features I discussed, including great throughput and familiarity with Cisco routers, stand out to me.

I have no comment regarding Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms' AI capabilities and their governance and security. I have not used Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms' AI capabilities at all, so I cannot provide an opinion on its accuracy and reliability of output.

Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is deployed in the cloud, specifically in AWS and in Azure. I use Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms more frequently in AWS compared to Azure.

My advice to others looking into using Catalyst 8000 Edge Platforms is that depending on what you want to do with it, it is a very good device to buy, especially for people coming from a Cisco environment who want to use a Cisco-native CLI for configuration.