Cisco DNA Center Reviews

I am a solution architect. I design for the data center and I also write technical presentations.

Cisco is a leading network company. Every organization uses networks and data centers. The data centers are mainly on-premise enterprise environments.

Cisco has been used in our organization for 14 years.

From the recent DNA point of view, there are some stability challenges with Cisco, but very minor. 

I have not worked with Cisco technical support for over three years. From my experience, Cisco support is available. They have their own SMEs in each area. There is a gap in between the information shared between Cisco and the technical teams. Cisco should provide a clear view of what has caused the problem when they do the RCA. By providing more information, we can be more proactive and do the upgrades if it is impacting security compliance.

Neutral

We have been using Cisco for so many years that setup is straightforward. The DNA solutions are there and SD-Access is in place. With these, we have come to zero touch provisioning. Deployment is easier than it was five or six years ago. 

We have a large Cisco portfolio in our organization. We have a three-year license with them.

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

We use it to manage and monitor our branch network equipment.

It gives us automation capabilities for pushing out a configuration to branch networks. It also provides visibility into the health of user network devices.

There should be an option for automation of template deployment by using the stored data. It is not easy to save configuration information for lots of devices without using other tools. There should be a tighter, better repository of information that can be merged with the templates.

I have been using this solution for three years.

Its stability is good.

I haven't really got a view on that one because we haven't had a need to scale. 

In terms of its users, we probably have 15 people, which also includes our partners, who use it as well as manage it.

I have used their support. I would rate them a four out of five.

I didn't use any similar solution previously. 

It was relatively quick. I don't remember exactly, but it was probably in the order of a month or so to implement. 

We had help from Cisco themselves on Advanced Services, but from my memory, it was relatively straightforward. 

It is a good product. It does a good job. I can't think of any specific technical challenges we've had. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

I like the visibility, instant build, network, policies, and the ability to control access. I also like that you can visualize your whole network.

Cisco could improve the security side of their solutions.

We have been using this solution since 2005.

It's definitely stable.

It's definitely scalable.

The initial setup can be easy depending on the knowledge you have.

It takes one or two people to maintain the solution. However, it depends on the client and the type of service required. 

The licensing cost for Cisco DNA Center is not more than that of other solutions.

If I were to give pricing a score from one to five, I would give it a score between three and four.

We are happy with this solution; we cannot design data center switches without Cisco DNA.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco DNA Center at nine.

We are using Cisco DNA Center for four key major areas. The first area we use it for is for setting the policy for multiple devices and from one single point of configuration. 

The second use is for provisioning because we will have a lot of switches and access points. The provisioning has been very helpful for us. 

The third use is the assurance module and the fourth use is automation. 

We have not started the automation phase. We used it for policy, provision, design, and assurance.

Since using the solution three or four people can do what 10 people could previously. It has been a benefit to the organization.

We have many people from the team who manage a lot of devices. By using Cisco DNA Center, it has taken some of that burden away, we are impressed with it. We did the investment in CAPEX, but in the OPEX was very low. 

The unity of configuration is a benefit. Only one trainee was configuring all devices. It was very helpful for us because, if we have a lot of people configuring, it was confusing. We can unify the configuration through all devices and create a standardization for the organization. The automation is available but I have not started with it at this time.

I have been using Cisco DNA Center for approximately two years.

The scalability is good, it is quite extendable.

The support is close to us in proximity and very helpful. We have never had a problem working with them. 

Cisco DNA Center was a new technology for us, at the beginning, it was not easy to do, but Cisco did a lot of training with us to a level we could handle everything. The team is managing itself now without the assistance of Cisco.

After we received all the hardware, it took us around one month for the implementation and another month for training. The solution was up and running but we were training on that solution.

The implementation of the Cisco DNA Center was done internally.

My advice to others is if you are a large enough company to have the Cisco DNA Center technology, you must try it. It may be useless for small enterprises, but for the large enterprise, for multi-site organization, it's impressive and it saves a lot of money and time.   

I rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for network assurance and automation, network segmentation with ISE integration, and LAN automation deploying new devices out into the switching estate.

This was for a TSA project that we were doing for a client.

It relieved some of the operational burdens on the IT staff. It makes troubleshooting a lot of issues much quicker from a central single pane of glass, whether it's a switch issue or authentication issue with ISE, or a wireless connectivity issue. 

DNA center is very capable of being able to address well, identify the issue, suggest remediation steps, run remediation, run commands against a switch to check the proper connectivity for example, and also address all our remediation steps that the IT person could take.

Rather than having to log into the individual switch DNA center, you can basically run your commands, run your troubleshooting, all from DNA and attempt to remediate the problem.

I think that their LAN automation is a very good feature. It takes advantage of the plug-and-play capability from the catalyst switches. 

We'll do a zero-day configuration, which is a good feature. 

Also, wired and wireless assurance, client health, and network health are valuable, especially with the wireless sensors deployed. It can give you a good idea of what's going on in the RF environments.

The template feature is really good, you have free templates and then associate those templates to a tag, tag a device with a certain role, and just program devices that way rapidly.

It's pretty robust. The wireless assurance and telemetry, as well as the security and the segmentation capabilities, are outstanding.

They deploy rapidly. They are scalable throughout the entire organization. With just a few clicks, it really removes a lot of the human error that you would normally have with access control lists.

It takes a lot of the human element out of configuration.

You can create VRS and VNS and deploy those system-wide, application policies with a few clicks and segmentation with a few clicks.

With their provisioning status, if there's a failure in provisioning or in some type of task that DNA is trying to push out to a switch or whatever device, sometimes the task status errors or the provision errors are a little bit big. 

I think they could provide a little more detail to someone when a task fails. It's an error code that tells you that this task has failed, but it doesn't get too deep into why it failed. The task failure reporting or provisioning failure reporting could be a little bit better in the UI, with more information given to the user.

From the CLI you can get much more information from MagLevs.

Also, the UI could use a little bit of improvement. I know that things have gotten a lot better in version 2, but I haven't worked with version 2 yet.

A feature that I would like to have seen is the true debt disaster recovery, which is now available in the 2.2.1 version.

More detailed information would be helpful, but you can get that information from the CLI but not everyone is comfortable working in the Linux shell.

I have been using Cisco DNA Center for approximately two years.

The last version that I worked with was Version 1.3.3.6.

Currently, the latest is version 2.X.

It is very stable. I would rate the stability an 8.5 out of 10. 

We had an issue with the DNA center database. 

With the DNA center, you have to be a little patient. 

We may have been trying to ask it to do too much at one time, and it created a problem with the database that escalated to the business unit to get cleaned up.

That was really not so much an issue with the DNA sensors, it was because we had spooled up a lot of tasks and you have to be a little patient with DNA.

My impression of the scalability is all positive. 

It's highly scalable. DNA itself is deployed as either a single node or a three-node cluster.

We were deploying it in a single node state, but my impression of it is quite positive. I like it a lot.

DNAC itself is an orchestrator and its collecting audit assurance, and telemetry. The entire IT staff of the end organization will be using the DNA center. It's probably a staff of 15 to 20 people. 

In terms of endpoint end-users, that DNA is collecting assurance and telemetry from several thousand. It's being fully utilized.

I have had a fair amount of interaction with technical support. I would rate them outstanding. Their DNA team is solid.

I didn't use any other solution previously.

Standing up the DNAC appliance itself is pretty straightforward.

The deployment was a phased approach. We did three DNAC appliances across three regions globally. 

To stand up the appliance itself doesn't take long at all. It takes a few hours, but it was a phased migration strategy, one site at a time over a period of several months, we would do one or two site migrations a week.

There were an existing network infrastructure and a new network infrastructure that we were standing up in parallel to the old and then cutting it over on a weekend.

We have a handful of people who have access to the regional appliance made up of network admins and help desk personnel.

Once it's deployed and built out, it runs on its own. There is not much to with it unless you need to do a package or a software upgrade for the appliance itself.

There is no further deployment unless they are going to stand up a new site and integrate that into the DNA architecture. As it is now, everything is already up, which is what we did.

We did the deployment, the integration, and the site migration from start to finish. Then we do a low-level design and handover and workshops.

We have approximately 10 users that would have some type of operational role in DNA.

It's being highly utilized and leveraged in the organization.

We did not use a consultant or an integrator. I completed it myself. We are Cisco Partners.

This is taken care of before I am involved. It's handled by our presales engineer, and I work on the project delivery.

I do know that Cisco does offer some really good promotions for DNA Center to bring the costs down. But again, I don't really know the details of those promotions. I just hear about them and I know they're out there, but I don't have specifics on that.

Cisco DNA does not have a Cloud solution. It's an on-premises appliance.

They may stand up if they bring in another heritage. They may have some heritage or legacy sites that they may bring over to the new network.

We are multi-national. Our organization is based in London, New York, and Sydney. Our clients are all multi-national global clients.

We do have some regional clients as well, but we are well-positioned to serve multi-nationals across three regions.

My advice is to read the release notes thoroughly. Understand how to deploy, in a single or three-node cluster. Most importantly be aware of release notes and read the documentation.

Do your homework, read the manual, it's there for a reason.

Be patient when standing up a new fabric site. Don't do too many tasks at one time.

The biggest lesson that I have learned is to be patient. When you have a series of tasks that you need to do, don't initiate too many at one time, initiate three or four, allow those to finish, and then continue on.

From when I first started working with DNA, it's come a very long way.

From a programmability standpoint, it really is quite solid. I really like the LAN automation capabilities.

In terms of software-defined networking, I think it's an outstanding product. I would rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten.

It can assess traditional networks.

The automation features are significant and reduce configuration time. This means outstanding functionality. By deploying the controller automatically, the rest becomes automated.

When it comes to deploying wireless fields, integrating defaults into the DNS interface can be challenging.

I have experience with Cisco DNA Center.

In the dashboard, we observe that the integration with IT is functional. However, when inspecting the system, we encounter occasional errors in the desktop.I would rate it 8 out of 10.

I would rate it 8 out of 10.

Deployment is not difficult; it could take approximately a day to complete, assuming we have all the necessary information and the initial email from Cisco.

Maintenance can be challenging because we're unsure about the number of applications utilized in the studio.

I would rate it 7 in terms of pricing.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten.

The availability endpoint is in the Cisco DNA Center dashboard, which allows us to push configurations and address compliance issues to all devices on Cisco network from a single location.

Cisco DNA Center provides operational support, compliance support, security vulnerability detection, and automatic scheduling.

They should include UTM features in the product. 

I have been using Cisco DNA Center for five years.

The product is stable.

The technical support services need improvement.

Negative

Cisco DNA Center can be deployed as a server or an appliance. It is up to you to choose which one meets the requirements. DNA Center can manage various endpoints, automatically adding new devices to DNS and integrating them with other Cisco devices. To do this, the DNA Center must be able to access the Cisco website. Therefore, this box should have internet connectivity with support for the Cisco website. DNA Center will then fetch the 802.1x authentication and client deployment information from the website and automatically deploy it to the box. It will take at least one or two days to do with automated and manual. We need to check both sides so that it's covering entire devices. Its maintenance is easy as well.

Cisco DNA Center is a good product. There could be more features added to the dashboard. Overall, I rate it a ten out of ten.

We use the solution for location tracking. We have to monitor the traffic in our environment since we have more than 3000 visitors per day.

We can monitor all devices and get the required information using the product.

The solution needs to improve the dashboard. The dashboard is very difficult to understand for someone using it for the first time. We took around two months to connect our environment to Cisco.

I have been using the solution for six months.

The network team uses the solution in our organization.

When we struggled to connect our environment to the solution, we raised the issue thrice. However, the team was not able to resolve our issue. Finally, we figured out that we had to upgrade our wireless controller and install the proper certificate. I am not happy with the support.

Cisco should invest some resources to educate the users about the product. Overall, I rate the solution a six and a half out of ten.