We performed a comparison between Cisco DNA Center and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Application Assurance works very well."
"Has a good processing feature with a high level of accuracy."
"Cisco is a leading network company."
"The most valuable features were the monitoring, maintenance, and configuration."
"It gives us automation capabilities for pushing out the configuration to branch networks. It also provides visibility into the health of user network devices."
"The monitoring features are very useful for network engineers."
"The automation features are significant, reducing configuration time. This means outstanding functionality. By deploying the controller automatically, the rest becomes automated"
"The product gives a consolidated view."
"The biggest thing I liked about Ansible is the check mode so that we can verify, after we've pushed, that the config there is actually what we intended."
"The solution is very simple to use."
"This solution allows us to stitch a lot of different parts of the workflow together."
"It does not require staff for deployment and maintenance. It just works."
"It enabled me to take the old build manifest and automated everything. So when it came time to spin everything up, it was quick and simple. I could spin it up and test it out. And then, when it came time to roll production, it was a done deal. When we expanded to multiple data centers, it was same thing: Change a few IP addresses, change some names, and off we went."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don’t need an agent for it to work."
"The automation manager is very good."
"Managing our inventory is a big pain point. Right now, we have Satellite, but we can tie it in with Satellite, so we can actually manage things and automate the entire deployment stack, instead of trying to grab things from tickets, then generating Kickstart, and using that to get things in Satellite. That doesn't work well. We can do the whole deployment stack using the inventory share between Tower and Satellite."
"The solution's integration feature can be better."
"The solution’s security side could be improved."
"The weaknesses primarily involve pricing and the ongoing need for increased bandwidth and data throughput."
"Integration with analytic tools and API integrations would be ideal."
"The features of Cisco DNA Center and Cisco Prime could have more parity."
"The tool's deployment is complex. It also needs to improve its GUI."
"The task failure reporting or provisioning failure reporting could be a little bit better in the UI, with more information given to the user."
"The product has many features that do not work properly."
"It can use some more credential types. I've found that when I go looking for a certain credential type, such as private keys, they're not really there."
"The solution is slightly expensive, and its pricing could be improved."
"The solution should add a nice self-service portal."
"Performance has been an issue on larger environments, but it has gotten a lot better over the past two years."
"Networking needs to be improved."
"The tool should allow us to create infrastructure. It has everything when it comes to management, but it lacks the provisioning aspect."
"We are not using the Dashboard a lot because we have higher expectations from it. The default Dashboard from Tower doesn't give that much information. We really want to get down into more than if the job succeeded or what was the percentage of success. We want to get down to task-level success. If, in a job, there are ten tasks, we want to see this task was a success, and this was not, and how many were not. That's the kind of granularity we are looking for, that Tower does not give right now."
"The solution requires some Linux knowledge."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco DNA Center is ranked 1st in Network Automation with 36 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 2nd in Network Automation with 58 reviews. Cisco DNA Center is rated 7.8, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco DNA Center writes "Practical implementation of VXLAN is good and provides centralized control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". Cisco DNA Center is most compared with Cisco Prime, Aruba Airwave, SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager, Huawei eSight and NetBrain, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and SUSE Manager. See our Cisco DNA Center vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform report.
See our list of best Network Automation vendors.
We monitor all Network Automation 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.
