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

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs OpenText Network Node Manager i comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 2, 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
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
94
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (2nd), WAN Edge (2nd)
OpenText Network Node Manag...
Ranking in Network Management Applications
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Igor Van Den Ouden - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables secure and flexible branch connectivity with application-aware routing
The valuable features of Cisco SD-WAN include its security policies and zone-based firewall that are applied to every site, as well as application-aware routing. Security is standard compliant, eliminating config drift that was prevalent before manual configurations. Application-aware routing offers flexibility in using different lines for traffic, depending on the policy implemented.
Qusai Abuomar - PeerSpot reviewer
Network performance optimization achieved with comprehensive visibility and effective event handling
The root cause analysis is valuable. The availability and event handling are also very good, as our team understands the events well. Overall, the tool helps maintain the health of the network. It provides visibility for the network device status, link status, and hardware status of devices such as switches and routers.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The cloud environment, including cloud security integration, is very valuable because of the many API integrations with the SD-WAN."
"The technical team is very competent."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"If I have to give a neutral view of all the SD-WAN platforms that I have known so far, Cisco is good in routing."
"The product helps to aggregate network links. The tool increases security and makes it possible for you to have remote workers."
"The solution is good to use and easy to handle and manage from the centralized location or from the cloud."
"You can easily scale the product."
"Cisco SD-WAN's best features are the development of network links, application control, and bandwidth monitoring."
"The best feature is the solution's entire credibility with all vendors."
"Our monitoring and network teams of less than 100 people use this solution. The availability and fault monitoring are good."
"A good enterprise-level solution."
"It is a scalable product."
"We do not have any issues stability-wise."
"Overall, the tool helps maintain the health of the network."
"Most valuable function would have to the internal causal engine and its root cause analyzer which keep us updated on critical errors and incidents in our network environment."
"If you install one node on Network Node Manager and want to scale it up, it's pretty easy to create more nodes."
 

Cons

"This solution should include a fully functional firewall at no extra charge."
"We don't have any issues with this solution other than the price."
"The initial setup is complex and can be improved."
"The integration of Cisco SD-WAN with cloud solutions could improve. For example, if any of the applications are hosted in the Amazon AWS cloud we can use a virtual transit gateway for integrating Cisco SD-WAN."
"It is expensive."
"I would like them to add some more SD-WAN ports. We have seen one implementation where there were four ISPs. Currently, we have a maximum of two ports for ISP in this device. Therefore, we cannot connect directly, and we need other switches. There should be some option to have more than two ports for SD-WAN."
"Its license model needs to be improved. They always make the license model too complex. There are too many license models and too many options. They should have a flexible license model. They can improve a lot of things in terms of scalability, templates, and automation, mainly automation for onboarding a number of sites. If you want some new features, it can take quite a long time. If you want a feature and it is not yet developed, you need to have the support of the business units to have the feature developed. If the feature is not on their roadmap, it can take quite some time before you get the feature."
"The solution needs to be more flexible around legacy devices."
"As the technologies evolve, also these solutions or the monitoring tools should evolve to cover the progress in technology, including capabilities related to monitoring of virtualized devices today, as the DNS is on the table in this way."
"The deployment architecture and installation part needs improvement."
"We have not had a good experience with technical support from OpenText. Many cases take a month to be resolved."
"Micro Focus Network Node Manager is not powered to drill down for traffic visibility."
"We had some issues with some of the features, some modules are not meeting expectations."
"The resources utilized could be a bit higher, and that is one of the challenges that isn't optimized"
"Reporting. Even though this is available in separate software (iSPI) there is potential in making the reporting more SLA-aware and more intuitive."
"Micro Focus Network Node Manager is not the best when it comes to drilling down for more visibility, especially regarding traffic."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"80 percent reduction in WAN costs. There are no MPLS or P2P circuits left in the organization."
"It's expensive. If you compare Cisco with Fortinet and Juniper, you'll find that Cisco is more expensive than other vendors."
"The solution is quite expensive so it is important to enhance its cost efficiency."
"The license model is too complex with too many flavors and options. You might not be able to see it from an end user's point of view, but from a telco point of view, their license model is too complex. They should have a flexible license model. If you want to have good pricing, you need to buy it for a two-year, four-year, or five-year license immediately. Some other vendors have much more flexible license models."
"Cloud subscription management must be paid for, although this does not incur a perpetual fee."
"It is going to be on a yearly basis. There are no additional costs."
"We can only buy three-year licenses, not monthly. The cost seems high for us, especially since we're in Vietnam, which isn't a rich country. But we still like the product because it is good."
"The cost of Cisco SD-WAN is high and has room for improvement compared to competitors such as Fortinet which has similar functionality."
"I wasn't involved in the pricing, but I think it's quite expensive."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"It's an expensive solution."
"It is more inexpensive than other products in the market."
"The solution is priced mid-range compared to the competition."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Management Applications solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
43%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
4%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
The durability of the switches could be improved. In the past, Cisco devices had a longer lifespan. Now, they change frequently, making it difficult to obtain long-term support.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Network Node Manager?
They should add AI options in the product's next release.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Network Node Manager?
We use the product monitoring network infrastructure, interfaces, and devices.
 

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 i and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.