We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Ivanti Connect Secure based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)."We are using Application Security Manager (ASM) as a web application firewall, where there is a security signature to avoid a web level breach."
"ASM for WAF."
"The solution has good load balancing capabilities."
"F5 BIG-IP is used with good applications and functions as an application firewall with additional features. We will not use any feature or any service unless there is a business case and there is a need for implementation."
"There is a lot of documentation available."
"If I were to choose one key feature in particular, perhaps it would be the iRule feature. It’s a really versatile tool."
"Bandwidth optimization and capacity awareness of the bandwidth are valuable features. Its video streaming capabilities are also very useful."
"Stable and scalable network traffic management solution for applications. It has good performance."
"This is a very secure and stable tool."
"I like the host checker, which thoroughly checks the security posture of the machine before allowing access. I also like application-based access and its seamless operations."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of Pulse Connect Secure is its ease of use."
"What I like the most about Pulse Connect Secure is that it's user-friendly. It's easy to use. You just need to connect, and that's it."
"It's a very convenient and user-friendly application."
"The stability of the product is its most valuable feature."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Needs to provide a visual interface to follow a customer's activity (from client to BIG-IP to SNAT IP to the chosen server, then back). Today, we are still performing packet captures."
"Logging is a bit of a problem. Logging and monitoring are only in plain text. You have to search and you have to know what you are searching for to find anything. So of course, monitoring and getting alerts for abnormal situations is hard. There are no tools for monitoring and alerts"
"The initial setup can take a long time."
"Native support for containers should be added to future releases, as this is the future of load balancing."
"Currently, the product offers everything we need. I can't recall any features that may be lacking."
"For integration with other AWS environments, we do some tie-ins with some autoscaling groups. This has been challenging for us. We have had issues, where when autoscaling groups scale up, there are some instances which are not showing up in the proper size. Then, those IPs would get registered with F5, but never get released. Therefore, we are ending up with a whole bunch of ghosted IPs."
"The pricing model has caused some frustration. My clients implemented the solution and later wanted to upgrade the features but the pricing structure was complicated. There are other solutions with better pricing models."
"We need best-practice information. They have something called DevCentral and a blog. But we want something from F5 itself regarding how to tackle the false-positive configurations. If you go into detail with so many configurations it will find so many false positives from the moment it is enabled that it will quickly impact your applications, and it will not work."
"Connection-wise, Pulse Connect Secure could be faster, and this is its area for improvement."
"We want to switch to another solution because there are some challenges with the support from Pulse. The quality of documentation is also not good. It is sometimes very hard to find documentation that provides a solution and describes how all this works."
"User experience and after-sales support could be better. For example, over the last couple of years, when this COVID scenario was going on, there were multiple attacks on these types of solutions. SQL has been attacked numerous times, and there were a lot of vulnerabilities, and our customers had to update and upgrade the devices every two weeks or every month. This was a headache. It could also be more scalable."
"At the moment, Pulse Connect Secure is a pretty good solution, and I don't see any issues with it. Currently, I'm not aware of a new or additional feature that's needed in Pulse Connect Secure, but it would be good if the team could look at how the speed of connection could be increased. Though it's quite seamless and I didn't face any problem with the speed, it would be better to improve the speed and keep going forward, especially as the industry's changing and people would love connections to be a lot faster."
"Setup is complex. A few users had some issues with it."
"The stability could be better. There are sometimes bugs in the system."
"The product could use additional dashboards."
"The user experience has room for improvement."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews while Ivanti Connect Secure is ranked 3rd in SSL VPN with 25 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Ivanti Connect Secure is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ivanti Connect Secure writes "Beneficial multi-factor authentications, useful SSL VPNs, and simple initial setup". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and HAProxy, whereas Ivanti Connect Secure is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, OpenVPN Access Server, Ivanti Tunnel, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client and Symantec VIP Access Manager.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.
