We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Get our free report covering Fortinet, VMware, Versa Networks, and other competitors of Cisco SD-WAN. Updated: January 2022.
563,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Cisco SD-WAN alternatives and competitors

Core Network Manager at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 20
Excellent integration capabilities, good UI and offers great security features
Pros and Cons
  • "Overall, it's nice and very user friendly. That's what makes it so successful. They give you complicated features but with a very simple user interface, and that's been a big success for them."
  • "The support needs to be improved."

What is our primary use case?

We mostly implement this product for our clients.

What is most valuable?

There are many great aspects to the product. 

It's flexible. It's possible to have it on a universal CPE. The CPE is a small server or device that can be installed on the client's premises which the FlexVNF software can be installed onto. It doesn't have to be a vendor-specific CPE. This can help users reduce costs. Other solutions don't offer such flexibility.

One of the interesting things about the solution, which is not an easy feat, is that they offer a multi-tenancy solution at the CPE level.

They also allow for the integration of their solution as a provider with other security vendors, like Fortinet, Palo Alto, and Forcepoint. With other vendors, they stick with their own security appliances or images. This solution, however, really does try to integrate with everything.

In terms of support, they are very focused on SD-Wan technology. They are not working on multiple technologies. This ensures your business is very focused. It allows you to be very focused on your support and ensures your level of support will be very high. The customers will be satisfied with the results. 

The development is fast because they are only focused on one direction. Of course, SD-WAN not only means that you are optimizing the routing and the speed of the internet but also it allows you to optimize the security. Users can have better, more advanced security features. 

They are focusing on integrating their security features right now. They are growing quickly in this direction. That means they're giving a lot of attention to the security within the product. It's making it a more complete product without forcing you to just use Versa.

Overall, it's nice and very user friendly. That's what makes it so successful. They give you complicated features but with a very simple user interface, and that's been a big success for them.

What needs improvement?

The support needs to be improved. 

The interface does still need enhancements to make it even easier to operate in the future. They have complicated policies that need to be applied.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for about one and a half years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

If the setup is done properly, the solution is quite stable. There's no need to worry about bugs and glitches. It doesn't crash.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is easy to scale. The solution has considered various roadmaps and focused on future growth for organizations. Some features may not be active just yet, however, they are in the roadmap.  They are looking at, for example, delivering Ethernet over two or three layers, over the internet, which is very interesting and is, in my opinion, revolutionary.

The solution benefits huge companies, more so than smaller ones. Currently, various product features are capable of fulfilling any big enterprise requirements. They are trying to get the certifications from international security communities like Gardner. Their focus is more so on the larger scale organizations and they are trying to compete with companies like Cisco, Palo Alto, etc. Since it is meant for bigger companies, it can get pretty big itself.

How are customer service and technical support?

Their support is okay, but they need to grow it out faster. They need a better mechanism for getting quick responses to clients and to hire more people on the support level. The gold standard is Cisco, and they should try to be more like that. 

They have a very focused product and because of that, they need a very focused support staff. They should have different people who are specialized on different aspects. They don't have to spend a lot of money to do this, they just need to ensure they have the right people in place to answer questions.

It seems a bit unfair to judge them in totality, however, as I just had one instance with them so far. 

How was the initial setup?

The solution's initial setup is complex in that it's not plug-and-play. You won't face zero-touch provisioning with this solution. Instead, there will be a staging process. It requires certain commands and you need to run it on Linux or Unix.

The solution has some issues with staging, and, if you compare it to other products, you'll see other vendors are much more straightforward. Zillow Clouds and Meraki are two good examples of a straightforward setup.

For myself, I have a technical background. These things are interesting for me, and I'm happy to do it, but on the commercial side of things, the customers don't really want to deal with difficult setups. Usually, however, it's the partner that provisions for the client, so the client never has to really deal with these issues. If you are a partner or a supplier, you'll end up doing this part yourselves. So, for those that know the product, it can be considered straightforward.

After that, users will enjoy a lot of features. 

It only takes about one hour to deploy the solution. I handled the POC myself and I've done some extensive training. I didn't feel comfortable in staging Versa devices. This was a problem. For comparison, if you would like to stage a VeloCloud device, it may take from you 10 minutes, whereas Versa could take about an hour.

If you are facing complications, you need to spend time understanding them before doing the provisioning. It will take some effort to understand the staging process, but it's worth it to take a step back. 

What about the implementation team?

I handled the POC myself and I've done some extensive training, so I was able to handle all the provisioning and staging. We found we struggled a bit with our engineers figuring out how to write everything correctly. Unlike other deployments where it's a very straightforward couple of clicks, if you make a mistake in provisioning there is a receipt required, and you need to call the engineer from your Versa vendor to help troubleshoot problems.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

In the end, it's not only about cost. A lot of big enterprises don't care about the cost. They care about having a single point of contact to take care of their security and internet routing optimization. Having one support ultimately reduces costs, as there would only be one maintenance contract and one device.  

What other advice do I have?

We have a lifetime implementation. We're using the latest version of the solution.

It's a good product for high-end and large enterprises, but smaller enterprises might not be a good fit.

I'd just advise that especially surrounding the initial setup, a new company needs to ensure they have the right support in place. Companies need to make sure their SLA's are very clear so they can get the support they need from the outset and into the future. Compare companies and be clear about the requirements and you will have an easier time.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I'd give it full marks, however, I do believe that they can continue to improve on the existing product in various ways. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
ISM Network Architect at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Great QOE, good stability and pretty straightforward to set up
Pros and Cons
  • "They have a lot of built-ins. There are so many applications defined inside the solution. It makes it so that we don't have to create some policies. Each and every application is already defined in it."
  • "The solution doesn't offer failover between their own devices. If I want to, I should be able to put the two devices at the side, so there can be a failover."

What is our primary use case?

I work for a supply chain and we have a site where we want to offload the internet traffic and get to the application, etc. Some of the cloud applications go out directly and automatically through the SD-WAN device to the internet, so it is local and does not go to the MPLS. We can load balance those applications.

What is most valuable?

Their QOE, or Quality Of Experience, is the most valuable feature. Basically, VeloCloud measures the latency and the chatter and everything on a voice application, and it just routes the traffic or duplicates the packets according to that chatter. 

They have a lot of built-ins. There are so many applications defined inside the solution. It makes it so that we don't have to create some policies. Each and every application is already defined in it.

What needs improvement?

The solution doesn't offer failover between their own devices. If I want to, I should be able to put the two devices together, so there can be a failover. 

They need to come out with a new device, such as a 510 LTE which would have LTE capabilities.

On the 610 devices, they're saying they're going to have LTE in it. They don't have it. They don't even have a POE feature inside the VeloCloud devices. Therefore, if I want to set up a POE, just the one device with everything in it, I actually don't have a POE support on it.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for about six months now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Stability-wise the solution is quite good. It's reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's not buggy at all.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is giving us problems at the moment. We want to put this as, for example, a primary MPLS, with internet secondary, and cellular tertiary. The LTE device doesn't even failover between them, however. Therefore, there is no scalability there.

How are customer service and technical support?

We don't deal with technical support, due to the fact that we have AT&T. Since we deal with AT&T, we don't deal with them directly. Therefore, I can't speak to their level of knowledge or responsiveness.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Our company is actually many companies. At another subsidiary, they are doing a POC with Cisco. Cisco is providing them with better pricing. On top of that, they have good availability and failover capabilities on LTE. The Cisco router can do the secondary subnet on the same VLAN, which VeloCloud cannot do.

They have a lot of features we technically need to have but don't on VeloCloud.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup isn't too complex. It's pretty straightforward.

In terms of the deployment, we designed everything properly, and due to the fact that we took the time to design it correctly, it didn't take a long time. Strategy-wise, we have AT&T as our provider. That said, we have set up a reference architecture in such a way that it just copies every site, according to our site size and the requirements.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

If you compare VeloCloud to, for example, Cisco, the pricing is almost the same. However, Cisco offers more features that are integral to the way we need the solution to operate. In that sense, it's better value for money. For example, now we need to have an extra LTE modem outside of VeloCloud, and it's going to add to the cost, which ultimately makes it more expensive.

What other advice do I have?

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

We are not using the newest version of the solution. They already have a newer version, however, we have everything outsourced to AT&T, and they have not upgraded the new version on it yet. The version we have on the VeloCloud is 3.4.3, and the newest version, which, from my understanding, is four, and is already out there.

The greatest advice I have for potential new users is this: when you do deploy the VeloCloud, it's pretty straightforward. However, the only thing you have to remember is to make sure that you have the site requirements in terms of the primary and secondary circuits. For us, the last mile circuit is always a requirement, so we have a tertiary as a cellular. That way, even if the primary and secondary go down, you are okay. Also, you need to make sure to size your VeloCloud equipment or VeloCloud model according to the size of your needs.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution at a nine.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
SD-WAN Sr. Product Manager at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Easy to use features, good support, and has the ability to maintain a session when you lose an uplink
Pros and Cons
  • "It has good reporting and analytics, that most people can understand without too much difficulty."
  • "Security is an area that could use some work."

What is our primary use case?

It's a horizontal use case of replacing the WAN. Typically, they are replacing the MPLS.

They are also trying to save costs and reduce complexity.

What is most valuable?

Nuage Networks is easy to use.

It has good reporting and analytics, that most people can understand without too much difficulty. 

The features are what I believe to be one of its strengths. Cisco frequently has 800 features, but customers only use ten of them, and Nuage has fifty for example that can all be easily used.

One of the many benefits of Nuage Networks is VoIP. It will maintain a call session even if you lose an uplink.

What needs improvement?

Security is an area that could use some work. When compared to Versa, it has full Layer Seven security built-in, whereas Nuage is sticking to a stateful firewall model and allowing other vendors to do sassy, with them simply being the SD-WAN underlay of sassy. I believe they are a little behind in their thought process.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've worked with Nuage Networks for seven years, the last two as a product manager.

Nuage only has one version of SD-WAN.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Nuage Networks is a stable product.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have not investigated scalability; however, I am aware that they have clients with thousands of sites, indicating that Nuage Networks is a scalable product.

How are customer service and support?

Technical support is good. 

On a scale of 1 to 5, I would rate them maybe a 3.5. I would say that there is some room for improvement there.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I am also familiar with Meraki SD-WAN.

It has a very enticing user interface. They've done a fantastic job with the interface, They have enhanced the appearance.

An interesting fact is that Meraki's offering isn't a true SD-WAN. A true SD-WAN has an SD-WAN controller, an orchestrator, and it doesn't have those things, but Nuage does.

One of the things that I believe most people don't ask and don't realize until they are in that situation is that if I have a VoIP call and I lose one of my uplinks with my Meraki, I will lose that VoIP call. With a true SD-WAN, you won't. It will failover and you will maintain that VoIP session. This is something that Cisco, and Meraki do not advertise, but if you ask their SE, they will tell you.

The VoIP is probably one of the larger issues, and instead of true SD-WAN, all they have are L3 VPNs. All they have done is put a wrapper around it, so you don't have to configure it. However, it is not true SD-WAN if there are one or more controllers and the overlay and underlay are separated. I believe that if people truly understand what SD-WAN is, they will be able to look beneath the surface and say, "That's not what that is."

Meraki is easy to set up. It's actually quite high on the setup, in my opinion. With the caveat that it is not truly SD-WAN.

It's a stable solution. I have no issues with the stability of Meraki SD-WAN.

Meraki is a scalable product.

The technical support is excellent.

Nuage is very competitive. Cisco has never tried to be a price leader since it launched. It's not one of the market forces that they try to be a price leader.

If they want a true, automated failover, I would suggest asking some pointed questions.

I would rate Meraki a seven out of ten.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is easy.

If we don't have to install circuits, we can have a new order ready in two weeks.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Nuage Networks is very, very competitive going up against other vendors such as  Meraki, Viptela, Velocloud, or Versa. I would say, from our cost perspective, they are extremely competitive.

What other advice do I have?

We sell this solution. I am the product manager for Nuage Networks.

Nuage does not sell directly to the public; instead, they sell through service providers.

One of the issues that people get hung up on is that when they look at the Gartner Magic Quadrant, but Gartner rates them in the lower-left only because they don't give up their numbers because they sell through service providers. Sometimes people dismiss that, without doing their homework.

I would recommend at least considering this solution, as an option.

It's a very good platform.

I would rate Nuage Networks a nine out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate
IT Manager at a retailer with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 10
Easy to deploy, easy to manage, and helpful for network stability and reliability
Pros and Cons
  • "The WAN aggregation feature is the most valuable."
  • "Its functionality is a bit limited in some areas as compared to a Cisco solution. It is not as granular. It doesn't have the manageability, feature set, and capabilities of a larger or an enterprise-level solution. It just needs a more robust feature set and granularity."

What is our primary use case?

It is a primary router for the network. It is a cloud solution with on-prem routers. Basically, we got a router here, and we utilize our network connections to get to Cato Network's cloud. We route our traffic through their cloud for security and everything else.

How has it helped my organization?

It helps with network stability and reliability.

What is most valuable?

The WAN aggregation feature is the most valuable.

What needs improvement?

Its functionality is a bit limited in some areas as compared to a Cisco solution. It is not as granular. It doesn't have the manageability, feature set, and capabilities of a larger or an enterprise-level solution. It just needs a more robust feature set and granularity.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution since June, that is, about six months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Its stability is pretty good so far. I had a couple of minor issues here and there, but not too bad.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is hard to say because we don't have a lot of demands or requirements for that. We're not a large shop, so we're not looking to expand so much that we would have to replace them, upgrade them, or push the boundaries of the current system. It is expected to last us for a while at this capacity and configuration. We have 200 users, and it is just a typical office warehouse environment.

How are customer service and technical support?

They are good and responsive. They solved all the issues.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Palo Alto.

How was the initial setup?

It was pretty basic. It is easy to manage.

You require one experienced IT person for its deployment and maintenance. It wasn't complicated for me, but I've been around. Somebody new to IT or a desktop support guy won't be able to deploy it. Somebody who is a network person and has a good network or IT experience can deploy and manage it with little or no assistance in a company of our size.

What about the implementation team?

We had support from Cato Networks. They helped us with the deployment, and they were good.

What was our ROI?

It is going to give a return on investment. We have AT&T, Comcast, and a couple of others, but AT&T stability was hit or miss, and it would go down. The ability for this system to handle outages on one circuit out of four meant that we didn't have any downtime because of one of our circuits going down or having a performance issue. It kept our network up, whereas our previous solution, even at the cost of it, had to fail over, and even when it failed over, there were manual things you had to do for the other issues, which caused the downtime.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

You pay yearly based on the speed of your network. If you increase the speed of your network, you increase the cost for your throughput. It is by bandwidth for the most part and then licenses for VPN. There is some per-seat licensing for VPN access, but the majority of it is minimal. It is like $30 a year per client. The rest is based on how much bandwidth you'll use. You pay for that upfront for the year, and if you have to increase it, you increase it, and then they let you send more data through. There are no additional costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We looked at other SD-WAN solutions, such as Fellow Cloud, Palo Alto, and Cisco. There were a couple more in there. Price, capability, and ease of deployment and management made us go for Cato Networks.

What other advice do I have?

It is worth looking at for a small to medium size environment, but it has got to fit your situation. We don't use it for what it was really made to do. It just has one feature that affects us, so we use it for that. In all honesty, it is not something that we are really using to its full potential.

I would rate Cato Networks an eight out of ten. It is fairly new, so there are some things that it should do, and they're working on it. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Network Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
Scalable, extremely reliable, and has a good user interface
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution is extremely reliable."
  • "The pricing could be a bit better, especially when you consider how they have the most basic offering priced."

What is our primary use case?

In most cases, we use the solution as a firewall to access the internet. For example, we use Cisco Wireless for our clients to have access to the network and we use within the same solution the FortiGate Firewall for them to access the internet as well.

What is most valuable?

The solution offers very easy usability. 

The product can scale well.

The solution is extremely reliable.

The pricing and licensing models are pretty good. 

The user interface, both the web and CLI versions, are very good.

What needs improvement?

The solution overall is quite good. It works how we need it to. I can't recall seeing any features that are lacking.

We haven't had any breaches in our organization, however, I have read in journals that there have been some issues.

There may have been some bugs after an update, however, that has since been resolved. We saw a few bugs in the web field and when we ran an update it was resolved in the new version. 

Some resources must be accessed via web fields. We were not able to access them at first. However, it was a simple task to fix it and that has since been resolved.

The pricing could be a bit better, especially when you consider how they have the most basic offering priced.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution since I started at my current company. I began my employment here about a year ago or so.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is quite stable. It doesn't give us issues. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash on us. It doesn't freeze. It's reliable. Fortinet has created a really reliable solution.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We've found the scalability of the solution to be very good. If a company needs to expand on this solution, it can do so with ease.

We have between 2,000 and 3,000 users on the solution currently.

We do plan to continue to use the solution going forward. We have no plans to change anything.

How are customer service and technical support?

I've never contacted technical support. Having never dealt with them, I can't speak to their responsiveness or knowledgeability. I don't know enough about them from any kind of personal experience.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I also use Cisco wireless solutions. Our company uses both simultaneously.

How was the initial setup?

While I did not participate in the main part of the installation, I've discovered from deploying small FortiGates such as FortWiFi 60E, that it's good. It's not too complex of a process. It's pretty straightforward. It's easy.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We've found the pricing to be fair and the licensing model is quite good. It's a reasonable cost. It's not too expensive.

That said, I do feel they could work on the pricing policy a bit.

Right now a license to use some of the simpler features like web filtering or antivirus, you have to pay about 80% of the hardware price to have a license for a year. That's a bit too much for such basic features.

What other advice do I have?

We use a variety of Fortinet products. We are using mostly FortiGate 200E and we have some of FortiGate 100E and the FortiWiFi 60E.

We are not using the latest version of the solution at this time. We have version 6.0 and it completely meets our requirements. When we will have to update it we will do so. However, that is not so necessary right now. We will not update it until we need to.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations. It's been a positive experience overall.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Get our free report covering Fortinet, VMware, Versa Networks, and other competitors of Cisco SD-WAN. Updated: January 2022.
563,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.