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

Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance vs Infraon IMS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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 Provider Connectivity...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
47th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (40th)
Infraon IMS
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
83rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (32nd), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (56th), Cloud Monitoring Software (48th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Infraon IMS is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance0.7%
Infraon IMS0.5%
Other98.8%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Pifu Lin - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Engineer at DYNASAFE TECHNOLOGIES PTE. LTD.
Addresses connectivity issues with real-time monitoring while offering good local support
I had prepared for COC and the client. I work as a vendor for a client using Flow Mount for network performance monitoring. I focus on resolving client-side issues related to Packy Performance and quality use. This involves addressing network device issues, specifically Cisco network devices One…
it_user1631601 - PeerSpot reviewer
GTM Manager at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Our process efficiency has improved by having all the information in one place, which has reduced manpower
The product is great. We integrated the ticketing tool with the monitoring tool. The agent ID creation is very easy when using this tool. It is so user-friendly. The user interface is good and also the pricing is great. The user interface is good, even a business user or layman can raise a ticket. They provide an all-in-one monitoring tool. If an issue happens, it gets integrated with the email, then proactively that ticket is being raised, which is good. The reporting is good. It is very clear. It is a customized report; however you want it, you can customize it. We use the solution’s role-based dashboards. The head of IT wants to use it so he can see holistically what is happening, e.g., what are the tickets being raised, what is a major issue, and what escalations are happening. There are different dashboards that are customized. For our head of IT, we made a separate dashboard. Then, for the executives, we made a separate dashboard based on time, like hourly or daily. All these reports were customized. While they didn't provide a BI dashboard, they provide a kind of graphical dashboard for whatever the issue is. Once you click on a particular ticket, it drills down to the issue, what it is and when the issue was raised. The drill down is good. It is more like a business intelligence (BI) tool. You can just scroll and zoom in. It goes deep into the issue. Once you click a particular dashboard, it will take you to the next page, then it takes you to the issue. Infraon IMS provides workflow automation for real-world use cases. This makes our work easier. It is just drag and drop (no coding) to build the workflows. For example, a particular ticket is being raised. It gets routed to three important IT executives within our team. From our team, it gets routed to the next level. The learning curve is good. Initially, there were no issues. As soon as the users saw the product, they understood what the product was. There wasn't any kind of training required for this product because it is very straightforward.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Network control when experiencing problems indicating "the network is slow"."
"We heavily use the "network analysis" section to dissect and analyze flows."
"It is about finding operational problems. When sites go down, we try to determine who is at fault. While there is not much finger-pointing, the solution is just trying to analyse when there is an outage and where do we start looking to fix it. The very nature of why organization chooses to use the solution is to accelerate the meantime to resolution and find where problems lie to get them rectified as quickly as possible."
"One valuable feature we have is real-time monitoring for connection issues."
"It is not that expensive of a solution and produces tremendous value."
"We have found this to be a very valuable toolset, and has paid for itself several times over."
"The response times, with the performance, are really interesting too, where you can see the packet loss."
"The solution’s UI and single pane of glass is good. The new dashboard is modern with its new design. The look of it is not pretty, but it is efficient, which is good. It is user-friendly; you can find what you need on the interface quickly."
"The most valuable feature is alerting. We get email alerts when a link is down that tell us which device is having a problem."
"It is a stable product; after the initial configuration, you don't have to tweak it much, and all systems of Everest IMS work perfectly."
"Our response time is within 30 minutes for any support. This solution provides alerts immediately, so we are within our SLA, giving efficiency to our support."
"Being an engineering product, the customization is easy for us compared to SolarWinds and ManageEngine."
"We use the solution to automatically trigger processes to help us resolve issues. The whole IT process has been automated, such as trying to map all the users and the escalation process. So, if any issue happens, we get an SMS and WhatsApp of the report. If there is a critical issue this has to be sorted out, like the entire data center being down, then there is an alarm."
"The role-based dashboards provide data points and charts and topology diagrams in a single window. It's like a spider web, where the application, connectivity, and everything is defined for each user of those applications."
"The backup, restore, and comparison features are all good."
"Their discovery is very quick and they have a CSV file upload mechanism that allows you to onboard five thousand devices a day."
 

Cons

"There should be an option to update and upgrade the solution to the new version without having to re-buy it. I have clients switching to other solutions. The old solution is great, but if you change your license to a new one, you have to almost re-buy it completely."
"Human resource costs can be high when dealing with connection issues."
"I would like to see some improvements in parts of their synthetic transactions, which includes all the latency, jitter, and throughput. I would like to see some Layer 7 analytics in there. I want to be able to do a DNS request, HTTP GET request, or even SIP call point-to-point or via registration."
"So scalability, at the moment, is pretty bad for us now, because our modus operandi have totally shifted."
"The Accedian Skylight user interface still has room for improvement."
"Because of the policies in Vietnam, we cannot connect the system to the Accedian cloud. It would be good if Accedian could provide a local cloud. In the next release, I would like them to focus on improving and adding more reporting features. This will help the operations teams."
"The licensing of the virtual pollers is problematic because they are attached to the physical ESX on which they are installed."
"If you want a new version, you go to the website. The hardest part is finding the link, where is that .bin file? Sometimes it's pretty hidden in a document... it's hidden in the release notes or in another file somewhere. And it's usually not on the first page either."
"This solution is available in SaaS. The reason why we have not gone to SaaS is they do not have a country-specific separation of assets."
"Technical support could use some improvement in terms of their response times and diagnostic accuracy."
"This solution is available in SaaS. The reason why we have not gone to SaaS is they do not have a country-specific separation of assets. There are GDPR and other requirements that might require country-specific sensitive information to be filtered as well as other things that need to be taken care of. Normally, if we need to do any compliance, like ISO27000 compliance, they don't have such a report within their system. This kind of report is missing from their SaaS. That is one of the reasons that we have gone to the on-prem version, where I am assured that my data is secure."
"I would like to have the option to add a new device or meet with the next release. Right now, it needs to be done from the backend which results in a heavy reliance on R&D."
"The graphical view of the topology does not show us all of the connectivity in our network, which is something that could be improved."
"There might be some features in other products that are currently not there in Everest IMS and can be included. I have not yet compared it with any other product."
"Email support is a bit slow. Once you drop an email, it takes time."
"We have enquired if there are any possibilities of monitoring non-IPBS devices."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is cheaper than other competing products, which is better for our budgets."
"It's not for free, clearly. But on the other hand, it offers very interesting functionality. We pay around €100,000."
"Pricing is a little bit expensive."
"The solution was previously well-regarded, but after being acquired by Accedian, the prices have significantly increased. This has made it challenging to sell the product due to its high cost. It is an expensive solution."
"It provides value and the cost is not huge."
"If you look into Riverbed, it's a licensing nightmare. You need to pay for every type of analysis... If you don't look into licensing, Riverbed and SolarWinds are pretty comparable. But if you look into licensing it would not be smart to go for either of them. On the pure, bare-metal basis, it's the same. But when you get the bare metal and a few basic licenses, then you need all those other licenses just to be sure that there's no issue... One of the great things about Skylight is you have them all, and you actually need them all."
"The price is competitive overall, depending on the type of customer."
"We understand there's a significant cost difference, but have yet to investigate fully."
"Licensing is calculated on a per-user basis."
"I think that the pricing for this solution is reasonable and varies by number of devices."
"The cost model is within our budget. I have less than 180 critical assets, but the moment that I have 1,000 assets, then the license model is totally different. I don't know whether they are capable of handling that kind of a load. They could revisit the licensing model."
"If you are looking for the best product with the best price, Infraon is the best product. We evaluated five to six products and finally felt Infraon was better because of the pricing model, especially because it was more flexible."
"We pay for a number of devices on the accounts and since it is on-premises, we pay the maintenance charges for the year."
"The pricing is reasonable, given the features that they provide."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
903,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Accedian Skylight?
Human resource costs can be high when dealing with connection issues. I require more tools to file and resolve these issues efficiently.
What is your primary use case for Accedian Skylight?
I had prepared for COC and the client. I work as a vendor for a client using Flow Mount for network performance monitoring. I focus on resolving client-side issues related to Packy Performance and ...
What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
It actually depends on the exact purpose or requirements. Some tools are better for only network devices while others are better from a cloud monitoring or APM monitoring perspective. You can check...
 

Also Known As

Accedian Skylight, Accedian SkyLIGHT PVX, SkyLIGHT PVX, SecurActive, Performance Vision
Everest IMS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Systems, Thomson Reuters, Bordeaux Metropole, CGI, Citadelle Regional Hospital Center, Lorraine Institute of Oncology, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Groupe BPCE, Group S, Splitpoint, Horus-Net, Audatex, Indexis, Province de Liège, EASI, Spie Batignolles, Faymonville
Airtel, BSNL, BlackBox Corporation, ACT, Geojit, Canara Bank, Federal Bank, Corporation Bank, Birla Corporation, CESC Limited, Mphasis, GAIL, Udaan, Cowrks, SEBI, PowerGrid, ION, Summit Communications, National Information Technology Center (Nepal), Bhutan National Bank, Servion T, Greenlam, Translab Technologies, CMSIT Services, Nelco, HPCL, Navitas Life Sciences etc. 
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance vs. Infraon IMS and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
903,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.