"The SLB and GSLB load balancing are the most valuable features. They meet our need to do server-side load balancing and global site load balancing so we can distribute traffic, not only intra-data center, but inter-data center."
"A lot of our SSL management is done on the front-end side, so there is one pane of glass for a lot of our security certificates. It gives us visibility. It also falls under when certificates are going to expire. Even for servers that are coming down, we can see how that affects the traffic flow by using the services map."
"It helps with the efficiency of application deployments and data security."
"The ADCs are pretty straightforward and easy to use. There is a GUI base where you can go in and see everything, but they also have a CLI base where you can use a command and get the information that you want, very fast."
"The solution is user-friendly and the CLA troubleshooting is easier compared to other solutions."
"It's a very friendly solution, easy to configure and it's very flexible."
"Its visibility and login mechanism are the best parts. In addition to the great visibility it has a great dashboard and an easy to configure graphic user interface, a beautiful GUI."
"The interface and software features are the most valuable aspects of this solution."
"There is two-factor authentication built-in, but it could be more robust."
"In my opinion, they need to improve their cloud support. There is support for cloud, but not all functions are there, such as high-availability."
"There is room for improvement in the upgrading process. Sometimes we have to contact A10 for verification of some stuff."
"The user interface is not as pretty as it could be."
"The interface and integrated custom applications can be a bit difficult."
"There are competitors that have more features."
"We are starting to do a lot with containers and how the solution hooks into Kubernetes that we haven't explored. I'm hoping that they have a lot of hooks into Kubernetes. That would be the part for improvement: Marketing use cases with containers."
"I did not go with it because their APM module is a different product altogether. It's a common thing that companies do. They sell something and then they add on top of it as a different product. It is a type of marketing strategy. But when it comes to the overall management, it takes a lot of time to really look into it."
"In terms of improvement, the pricing and documentation need improvement. We have had problems getting the documents."
More Avi Networks Software Load Balancer Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
A10 Networks Thunder ADC is ranked 5th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 6 reviews while Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is ranked 10th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 2 reviews. A10 Networks Thunder ADC is rated 8.4, while Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of A10 Networks Thunder ADC writes "Using services map, we can map traffic from the front-end virtual server to back-end servers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Avi Networks Software Load Balancer writes "Great dashboard and GUI, but APM is a separate product". A10 Networks Thunder ADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix ADC, Kemp LoadMaster, Radware Alteon and A10 Networks Lightning ADC, whereas Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix ADC, HAProxy, NGINX Plus and Radware Alteon. See our A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs. Avi Networks Software Load Balancer report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
