Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs OpenText Network Node Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN
Ranking in Network Management Applications
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (2nd), WAN Edge (2nd)
OpenText Network Node Manager
Ranking in Network Management Applications
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Network Management Applications category, the mindshare of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is 2.4%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Network Node Manager is 4.4%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Management Applications Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN2.4%
OpenText Network Node Manager4.4%
Other93.2%
Network Management Applications
 

Featured Reviews

ND
Network Manager at HPCL
Faced complex visibility and policy challenges but have improved basic traffic routing control
I have found some other solutions more insightful and user-friendly as compared to Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN, but the basic SD-WAN functionality is good enough. I am using it only because it was done as a pilot project, specifically for my 60 to 70 sites. For the majority of the sites, I am using Fortinet's Secure SD-WAN solution and I found that more viable and more in alignment with my requirements. For example, there is not any Internet Service Database available in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN intrinsically. If I want to write a policy based on applications, I am not able to write it, at least in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Viptela deployment that we have done, and that is fairly easy to do in Fortinet. The second issue is the logging capability. I think the visibility that Fortinet Secure SD-WAN has is not even comparable. Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN does not provide that sort of insight or control as far as traffic steering is concerned. With respect to the SLAs, I barely know which sort of SLAs are violated in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN, so I do not have clear visibility on where the traffic is moving from at my spoke or hub locations. I believe Fortinet gives me a very clear picture of where the traffic is going. Overall visibility, whether it is data traffic or logs, is much better in Fortinet compared to Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. The complexity of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Viptela is noticeable and quite complicated to configure. If something breaks, you have to involve TAC and others to fix it. On the contrary, you can work with underlays. Even if your IPsec overlay tunnel is down, it does not impact your production. Thus, we find Fortinet's solution significantly better than Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN solution. I have used Application-aware Routing in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. However, I found it to be very complicated, especially regarding policy writing. For my breakout of VC traffic, we had to write a bunch of IP addresses for Zoom, Webex, and others. Presently, it can only identify Webex as an application, and I highly doubt whether there is any application identification for Zoom and other platforms, as we were not able to find it during our implementation. It is done through static whitelisting of the IPs, which is not a scalable solution since IPs can change at any time. Overall, the application-aware routing policies are not as flexible and scalable as the Internet Service Database feature of Fortinet provides. The struggles encompass policy writing, logging capabilities, traffic visibility, and complex configuration. There is also the issue of load balancing. We have faced considerable challenges with traffic load balancing between the links. Although the SLA targets are configurable, understanding how traffic flows is challenging, making troubleshooting exceedingly difficult. Overall, I find it a quite complicated solution with not that much operational usability.
Ahmed-Salman - PeerSpot reviewer
Performanc Monitoring and Application Architect at Hewlett Packard Enterprise
Reliable network monitoring and proactive analytics enhance decision-making with areas for configuration improvement
NNMi is an OpenText product and serves as the OpenText Network Node Manager monitoring tool. OpenText Network Node Manager is used for network monitoring of switches, routers, firewalls, load balancers, and all network devices. It can support any SNMP protocol. The advantages of OpenText Network Node Manager stand out because it can build the topology, Layer 2 topology, and Layer 3 automatically once devices are added, connecting them together, such as device one, for interface one, connected with interface one on another device. The integration capability of OpenText Network Node Manager is excellent because it integrates directly, and I can configure the integration to feed the CMDB, from where I can get all information from network monitoring into the CMDB, linking it with the infrastructure and correlating events. I use advanced fault monitoring and management features in OpenText Network Node Manager for topology and fault monitoring, as it can alert or generate an event if the value exceeds or falls below a predefined threshold for SNMP traps. The predictive analytics impact planning and optimization strategies because the product can be linked with another product for analytic analysis, allowing me to see the interface utilization trend and proactively take action if the utilization increases. The automated network discovery features and topology mapping in OpenText Network Node Manager have a positive impact. It supports a bundle with another product for NetFlow to monitor traffic, ports, protocols, and SLAs, and I can build compliance reports to address security vulnerabilities, such as identifying all devices using outdated protocols.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I like creating policies. This way, we can better utilize our WAN circuit and get better rates. Its GUI is user-friendly, and the CLI is also great."
"The scalability is the most valuable feature."
"With other routing protocols, we have had to send team members to perform installations and configurations. There is a lot of work involved. However with SD-WAN, once it is installed it is fully automated, and we can do all other tasks remotely. We don't have to send staff out to the client's location. It's very independent, and we can establish SD-WAN connectivity easily. It is secure as well."
"The solution provides good consolidation, centralization, and manageability for edge routers."
"It is really easy to deploy and use. It is also easy to use for failovers and designing solutions. The rollout is really quick. It is easy to adjust and roll out."
"The initial setup is straightforward and easy to deploy."
"The availability of services and combining different connections is most valuable."
"The centralized management is the most important feature. We can monitor what is going on at every location in our network with just one center."
"Our monitoring and network teams of less than 100 people use this solution. The availability and fault monitoring are good."
"It is stable for fault and availability."
"The best feature is the solution's entire credibility with all vendors."
"We do not have any issues stability-wise."
"A good enterprise-level solution."
"It's quite a mature solution."
"It is a scalable product."
"It gives us a good overview of what's happening in our networks and the devices in the networks."
 

Cons

"Some competitors are much faster in providing out-of-the-box solutions, more innovative solutions. In terms of innovation, in many cases, they're lagging behind."
"Since Cisco acquired Viptela, the stability of this solution has given problems since it is quite new."
"The solution could be a bit cheaper."
"Compresson deduplication should be added."
"It would be better if it provided more visibility. At present, we can't troubleshoot in real time."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"Some configurations or procedures could be more user-friendly. Adding a bandwidth management feature would make Cisco SD-WAN more scalable and less resource-intensive."
"It should also be much more affordable for a larger number of customers."
"The way the solution currently works means I'm not able to customize my own reports."
"The dashboards are not customizable and it's not user-friendly."
"Micro Focus Network Node Manager is not the best when it comes to drilling down for more visibility, especially regarding traffic."
"They should add AI options in the product's next release."
"Micro Focus Network Node Manager is not powered to drill down for traffic visibility."
"Only to improve the GUI."
"The solution should integrate with NAC servers."
"We have not had a good experience with technical support from OpenText. Many cases take a month to be resolved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When purchasing, there are so many features available that it's quite confusing deciding which to choose. And some of the devices force you to buy licenses you don't want."
"The cost is reasonable. I would rate the price as seven out of ten."
"The license consists of an annual fee."
"It's expensive. If you compare Cisco with Fortinet and Juniper, you'll find that Cisco is more expensive than other vendors."
"The initial cost is quite significant, but the investment is worthwhile."
"Cisco SD-WAN is more expensive than its competitors."
"It's costly. The cost is high compared to competitors."
"Cloud subscription management must be paid for, although this does not incur a perpetual fee."
"It is more inexpensive than other products in the market."
"I wasn't involved in the pricing, but I think it's quite expensive."
"The solution is priced mid-range compared to the competition."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The solution is quite expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Management Applications solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Performing Arts
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise44
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco SD-WAN?
When considering the most valuable features of Cisco SD-WAN, the decoupling of self-monitoring stands out significantly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco SD-WAN?
The pricing of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is rated between eight and nine out of ten, where ten is the most expensive.
What needs improvement with Cisco SD-WAN?
More or less, it's the same with Cisco in terms of complexity and pricing, so there's not much of a difference. They might want to consider incorporating features seen in Versa or other competitors...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Network Node Manager?
The disadvantage of OpenText Network Node Manager is related to configuration, which is straightforward since it is agentless and solely relies on SNMP protocol, and although it requires some effor...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Network Node Manager?
I remember working with OpenText Network Node Manager at my previous company. I am now working at a different company focusing on data center migrations and DR preparation. In my current role, I ha...
 

Also Known As

Cisco SD-WAN
Micro Focus Network Node Manager, Network Node Manager, HPE Network Node Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Doyle Research, Ashton Metzler & Associates
IPC, Exelon, VivaCom, 
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs. OpenText Network Node Manager and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.