Cisco Wireless WAN Reviews

I use this solution because I work for a Cisco partner. We use a lot of Cisco products and it makes it easy for us to position this wireless solution for most of our clients because they already have a Cisco base. It is very easy to propose it as an alternative.

The solution has all the features we need, but it is very expensive.

I have been using Cisco Wireless WAN for over five years.

The program is very stable.

It is scalable enough for most of our clients. We have many users and don't have issues or problems with scalability.

I don't have any complaints about the technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward.

If I were to give advice to others, I would say is this: I haven't had much experience with any other option. Or if you were asking me to recommend this solution over another one, I'll generally recommend the Cisco Wireless WAN, because that's the only one I know and have experience of. I would like to see better pricing. It would also be great if one of these wireless cards could support multiple service providers. On a scale from one to ten, I will rate this solution an eight. 

Flex-connect.

It helps to connect AP's in multiple branches.

There are a few software bugs.

Cisco 5500 Series Wireless Controller. We have used it for about 4 years.

No.

No.

No.

Customer Service:

It's the best available in the market.

Technical Support:

Also excellent.

Very straightforward.

In-house.

It's very reliable and can be used for long term purpose.

1.One of the reasons we selected this WWAN modem is the underlying support for all the high speed modules and speed which is higher than 100Mbps. 2.Can be used to easily setup a high speed ISP or mobile network 3.Another deciding factor was the support for large number of devices that can interoperate easily with Cisco WWAN card 4. Failover support. There is a secondary link which can take over in case the primary goes down. 5.It provides transparent handoff support for devices which are using older technologies. 6.Provides higher bandwidth to support high definition video calls. 7.Supports advanced features like quality of service (QoS)

While deploying the module, we had to struggle with the telemetry system server setup as it had some module compatibility issues with tracking system

Cisco LTE WWAN provides an easy way to setup an high speed, robust and secure network with speeds of 100Mbps and above. It supports a large number of network devices and can easily integrate with devices running on older technologies as well. We tested the HD video call feature as well and found it to be of very good in terms of video, voice quality and overall speed. We faced some module compatibility issues with Cisco WWAN while setting up the telemetry system server setup. Overall a good product and provides large number of features for providing high speed network.

This product is fulfilling our technological requirements to setup a high speed 4G environment in a large ISP / Mobile network. Easily manage and configure in existing network without any changes. This module provides automatic secondary link whenever the main link is down.

When I tried to setup in Cisco ASA 5500 series IPv6 network then I faced a module compatibility issue. Cisco will remove this obstacle in future. It is not possible to setup a GPS tracking system and telemetry system server with this module.

It's a good solution and it works very well. It has great integration with other Cisco products. It's good for the management team to only have one brand, one manufacturer of products. 

I like how the look and feel of the product are standardized to match other Cisco solutions. 

The pricing could be improved in future releases. It's quite expensive.

I've been using the solution for six or seven years.

The stability of the product is good. I haven't heard anything bad from customers, who seem quite happy with it.

The solution is scalable.

The technical support for the solution is pretty good. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The solution is quite expensive.

We use the on-premises deployment model. We're a Cisco partner.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.