What is our primary use case?
For everything, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is used. We used it for our exchange server before migrating to Teams, and then for Skype. It currently operates several large broadcasting and streaming services.
How has it helped my organization?
Our jump server is quite large. To keep the high number of connections, we had to deploy it behind the F5. That saved us a lot of time and achieved our goal of having a stable jump server. When you put it behind an F5, you divide the connections between a couple of nodes, which was something we didn't have before.
What is most valuable?
We are using almost all of the features. What we like best about this solution is its stability. It is extremely stable.
What needs improvement?
So far, everything appears to be fine. I wouldn't be the best person to comment on something like APIs because I haven't really dug into a lot of APIs. However, I believe F5 falls a little short when it comes to APIs. But I'm not certain.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been running F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) for nine years. We haven't done an upgrade in three years. It is being used internally. We have a large number of internal services. We kept a few services, say two or three services that are being published, but it's primarily intended for our internal services.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is very stable. We are a broadcast company. We have streaming services running behind this box. This streaming service has been released, with 19 to 20 streams. We haven't received any complaints about these streams since the streaming service was deployed behind F5. Despite the fact that these streams consume a lot of bandwidth and have millions of sessions. We haven't received many complaints about them.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It reaches a point where scaling is no longer possible. Assume you have two boxes, and you want to expand. You can divide it into what is known as vices or virtual systems, but then you're stuck. This is where, NGINX comes in, in a better way, where you can simply scale up by adding more VMs or appliances without running into problems because you have an NGINX controller that controls everything. The users are mostly administrators and network engineers like myself. The number of end users is somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000.
How are customer service and support?
They were extremely helpful in both SLA and non-SLA cases. An SLA case is one in which assistance is required, and the assistance must provide you with a solution. Technical support was also helpful in non-SLA cases where I requested assistance, as well as in sharing guides and documents. I would rate the technical support a four and a half out of five.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We are using a combination of F5 and NGINX. I am still relatively new to NGINX. We recently implemented it in our environment. We are interested in NGINX. We would like to explore the NGINX platform. It has multiple platforms such as security, APIs, and application gateways. We are looking into it, as well as the LTM module of it. We are also interested in learning more about Kemp LoadMaster.
How was the initial setup?
Nothing goes as smoothly as you might expect, but it wasn't all that difficult. We had a few issues at first, but it's been running very smoothly since then. I wasn't present when F5 was installed. It has been nine years. However, I have completed a few deployments in one of the branch offices, and to be honest, it wasn't all that complicated. Because it was a new deployment, it didn't require any strategy, migration plan, or anything else.
What about the implementation team?
We do not use third-party vendors. Everything is completed in-house. This solution is managed by two network engineers, myself, and a colleague.
What was our ROI?
I would rate the ROI a three out of five.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I would rate the pricing a three out of five. There are no additional fees to the standard licensing fee; everything is paid once.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I was comparing products like Apache Web Server, F5 LTM, Fortinet FortiADC, Kemp LoadMaster, and NGINX Plus.
What other advice do I have?
It depends on the use case. However, if you are not interested in the application side, F5 would be useful. If you just want a load balancer that balances multiple servers, that's all you need. Not basic, but basic to intermediate material. F5 takes first place with no one even close to matching it. However, if you want to go deeper and more advanced, you should look into NGINX or any other vendor that has more options or more features. As a network engineer, I am totally happy with the product. I would rate F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) a nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.