We performed a comparison between Cisco ACI and Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Virtualization solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like features like policy control and micro-segmentation."
"The ability to integrate with other systems is the most valuable feature."
"One area where it has an advantage... is that you're able to reuse a specific integration. If you add another server, you can use a specific integration and assign it to another port."
"It scales very well. When you increasingly scale with it, it makes the product easier to work with."
"It's improved the static configuration of our data center switching environment. But it's added some challenges to our ability to operationalize it and make it easier for people to manage."
"The most valuable features include microsegmentation, L3 Out features, and the common tenant and tenancy model."
"It is a complete re-write of everything that you've ever thought of from a networking standpoint."
"Building the ACI Fabric is its most valuable feature."
"Network Security is one of the most valuable features of Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization."
"It is easy to manage, easy to maintain, and stable. If you set up everything alright, it will give years without any issues."
"Routing, switching, and wireless network security are the valuable features of Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization."
"The support system that they have in place is very good and they are easy to reach."
"Scalability is not a problem."
"The most valuable feature is its user-friendly management dashboard."
More Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization Pros →
"In the new version of 4.0, the management groups for updating the software is not the best way to do it. It was better in 3.2."
"For Multipod we need Layer 3 devices that support multicast. Customers ask: "Why can't ACI do that? Why do we need a dedicated Layer 3 device for this?" If they go for Multi-Site there is no need for that, ACI can do it. So Cisco needs to increase the Multipod features in ACI."
"The way the objects are oriented on it are not as straightforward as they should be."
"I would like for them to develop integration with AWS."
"We have had two calls with technical support. They are not the best. We opened a case to diagnose issues and it's taken weeks to get someone on the case and to move forward."
"The product needs to be more visible on the Internet and have the ability to be integrated into more software developments."
"The initial setup was fairly complex and it looks terrifying when you first log in. That's one thing about ACI. It takes a bit to wrap your mind around how it works. It's not overly complicated once you understand the concepts, but someone who has never worked with anything like ACI, will initially find it difficult to grasp the complexity of it."
"The ability for us to figure out the traffic flows, to enable some of the more segmentation parts of it, is really tough with what is built into ACI."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the cost. The SDN hardware especially is much too expensive, specifically 799 and 9000."
"There is room for improvement in enhancing compatibility with other solutions and vendors."
"The solution's orchestration part could be improved."
"It would be helpful if they offered modularized upgrades, such as additional memory or a faster processor."
"One of the things that can be improved is trimming all mobile numbers so that it aids in swiftly acquiring information for tablets or any necessary solution."
"This is a software solution, which is less stable than a hardware solution by definition."
More Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization Cons →
More Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ACI is ranked 1st in Network Virtualization with 96 reviews while Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization is ranked 3rd in Network Virtualization with 6 reviews. Cisco ACI is rated 8.0, while Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco ACI writes "Stable, easy to extend, scalable, and has a host-based routing feature". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization writes "Versatile, offering flexibility and scalability". Cisco ACI is most compared with VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, Nuage Networks, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Juniper Contrail Networking, whereas Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization is most compared with . See our Cisco ACI vs. Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization report.
See our list of best Network Virtualization vendors.
We monitor all Network Virtualization 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.
