No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco DNA Center vs Junos Space Network Director comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 DNA Center
Ranking in Network Management Applications
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (33rd), Network Automation (2nd)
Junos Space Network Director
Ranking in Network Management Applications
21st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Network Management Applications category, the mindshare of Cisco DNA Center is 7.6%, down from 22.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Junos Space Network Director is 2.5%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Management Applications Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco DNA Center7.6%
Junos Space Network Director2.5%
Other89.9%
Network Management Applications
 

Featured Reviews

Mahir Öztürk - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Engineer at NGN Bilgi ve İletişim Hizmetleri
Client history has helped resolve past network issues more efficiently
I mostly use the client history feature of Cisco DNA Center. I didn't use the real-time monitoring capability of Cisco DNA Center because I primarily used it for client history regarding issues and problems. I don't use it for real-time monitoring. If there is a problem, I can inspect the situation and see what is happening, which is beneficial.
Ibrahim Reda - PeerSpot reviewer
Network and Security Engineer at CITG - Continental Information and Telecom Group
High scalability network management with centralized control and an intuitive interface that provides efficient monitoring and configuration capabilities
A centralized platform is crucial for efficiently managing all of our switches, which were previously handled individually, leading to significant challenges. This unified dashboard simplifies tasks like simultaneous switch upgrades, streamlining the process. It enables us to create reports that monitor site statuses, including uptime and downtime, which helps us evaluate each site's monthly uptime and assess its revenue potential based on operational time.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of Cisco DNA Center are wireless assurance and visibility."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco DNA Center is the AI (Artificial Intelligence) that provides us with valuable information."
"It enables monitoring of various components such as access points, switch cards, and other elements within the company's solutions."
"It is very versatile in terms of analytics."
"We can monitor all devices and get the required information using the product."
"DNA Center is scalable."
"People like to use the dashboards to get an overview of their network."
"The advice I would give to other people who want to use Cisco DNA Center is to go for it, particularly if they have Cisco infrastructure, though these days integration could be an issue."
"The most valuable feature is the technical support, as it is better than others."
"The most valuable feature is the management from a single pane of glass."
"It allows me to do more of the basic firewall features, like traffic management and others, in a single pane of glass."
"For edge switching, this product is fantastic."
"A centralized platform is crucial for efficiently managing all of our switches, which were previously handled individually, leading to significant challenges."
"Junos Space creates one pane of glass managing your switching, routing, and security infrastructure as long as you have the modules for it."
 

Cons

"There should be an option for automation of template deployment by using the stored data. It is not easy to save configuration information for lots of devices without using other tools. There should be a tighter, better repository of information that can be merged with the templates."
"It's a very good product, however, it comes with a very high price."
"We encountered issues with their response times, which had a big impact on our workflow."
"The initial setup is straightforward except for the issue that this solution is incompatible with switches or access points from other vendors. That is very bad."
"In terms of the clustering part, there are some concerns."
"The product doesn’t have good monitoring capabilities."
"The network, data center, and SD-WAN are all being treated as different services, but I would like to have only one solution to manage all of them."
"From the recent DNA point of view, there are some stability challenges with Cisco, but very minor."
"I would like to see Space created to fully functional, where it's got multiple modules, particularly SD-WAN working on Corporate, or maybe become part of the Orchestrator portion."
"I would like to them include network real-time performance and come up with a dashboard report."
"The upgrades are very time-consuming and difficult, and they often have to rebuild the product."
"I feel like it's been taking a back burner to other things, and I think that they're trying to go different routes."
"Its interface should be improved and enhanced to offer various functions, with flexible pricing"
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing agreement is for three years."
"The price could be better. It's a very expensive tool."
"The licensing cost for Cisco DNA Center is not more than that of other solutions."
"The tool's licensing may not come across as something that may be friendly for users."
"Cisco DNA Center is too expensive."
"We have a three-year license with them."
"The price of the solution is expensive. The hardware is licensed on the device, but the hardware on the server is expensive."
"Cisco DNA Center is expensive."
"This product is set at a good price point."
"Typically, Juniper is more expensive than Cisco in initial costs, but overall, the long-term licensing fees that you're going to pay for Juniper versus Cisco is going to be less."
"We would like the price to be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Management Applications solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Outsourcing Company
19%
Construction Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise24
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco DNA Center?
After evaluating other solutions, we will provide feedback.
What needs improvement with Cisco DNA Center?
The deployment of Cisco DNA Center was complex due to the fact that on the data center side, we have a Juniper infrastructure, which created some complexity, though not significant. The deployment ...
What is your primary use case for Cisco DNA Center?
In my organization, we currently have some Cisco devices such as access switches, and we also have infrastructure, but that is not part of our responsibility. We do not manage that infrastructure. ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

DNA Center
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
St. Catherine's University, OneNet, University of New Haven, Frederick County Public Schools (Maryland), America's Test Kitchen
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco DNA Center vs. Junos Space Network Director and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.