Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches Reviews

We use this solution for our network in an on-premises deployment. We also provide this solution to some of our customers.

We have twenty-one switches that control our data center, MPLS, and access points.

This solution is easy to use.

There is a rollback feature available after you commit the configuration.

Juniper is the best when it comes to the core layer.

If you are using Juniper as a router then the stability is better.

In the technical team, we have six users. In terms of end-users, we have more than sixty.

We have large, medium, and small customers who use this solution.

I have created only one ticket for technical support. The support was quick. 

We also use HP switches.

I have used Cisco switches, but they do not have a rollback feature after you commit the configuration.

The initial setup of this solution is easy, although it takes a long time.

This solution is cheaper than Cisco or HP switches.

The stability of this solution should be improved. We have a customer that is using Cisco switches, and they don't need to reconfigure it as often. It is less complicated to update or reconfigure, and we have had problems with needing to do so more than once.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are using multiple EX4200 Virtual Chassis Stacks in an on-premises deployment.

The way we have it configured is that it is our core switch model that holds up our entire infrastructure.

The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability.

The ease of management through the command line interface is very good.

It would be nice to have a more available list of modules that you can get for this solution. One of the hardest things that I've found when I go looking for modules on those switches is actually finding a thorough list of them.

The stability of this solution is rock solid. The only time we've had an issue is when one of the redundant power supplies shorted out. I don't think that this was the fault of the solution. Rather, I think it was due to a failed power line, perhaps a spike in power.

This solution is extremely scalable. We had to add a new line module and we were able to do it while it was hot, so we didn't have any downtime.

This solution makes up the core of our network, so everybody in the company relies on it. We're predominately web-facing, so it supports our public-facing infrastructure. It is difficult to estimate the number of users that it supports.

We have been in touch with Professional Services. They are excellent, and they're always on time.

The responses are timely and they're very knowledgeable. If they're unsure then they will quickly consult other team members. The engineers that are dealing with it won't just sit there and try to figure it out themselves. They'll engage other members in their environment as quickly as they can. They get the issue resolved, so it's great.

We were using a solution from Cisco previously, but we were having issues with those, which is one of the reasons that we switched to Juniper. From what I can remember, the Cisco solution was not able to get the throughput that we required. Also, we required the ability to do hot swap-overs of the devices.

One of the main things with Cisco is that any of the changes that you made were instant, whereas, with Juniper, we can actually stage the changes before we apply them. Also, for the Cisco product, it was a really, really expensive product range. 

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

The deployment took one day at each of two different sites.

I was on-site for the deployments, but we had a consultant come in and do it for us.

The maintenance cost is approximately €2,000 ($2,200 USD) per year, including support, for our entire fleet.

We evaluated other options including some by Cisco and HP. 

If you're looking at this solution from an ethernet switching point of view, we don't use any of the in-depth features. We selected this solution for its reliability and ease of management on the command line.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to plan it out in advance. Other than that, they're relatively straightforward. There are no major issues or items that I could call out as a problem. It's just a case of making sure that you plan our your deployment before you start.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for the internal network, covering our entire office.

The deployment model we are using is on-premises.

What I like most about this solution is that it is secure.

They need to have more marketing in Egypt.

The technical support in Egypt needs to be improved because I was struggling to get technical support.

Having documentation provided in Arabic would be nice, but not necessary, as most everyone speaks and understands English well enough.

I would like to have customer support on the ground.

This solution is stable.

This solution is scalable.

We have approximately twenty users, most of them are engineers.

It was very difficult to get technical support, here in Egypt.

There is no local support available.

Previously we used Cisco. From my understanding and from what I was told, it was complex, hard to handle, not customer familiar or customer friendly.

The initial setup is straightforward and it's easier than Cisco.

We did not implement this solution through a vendor, we had one of the team members do it. It wasn't that difficult.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The primary use is as a datacenter, as aggregation and access switches. They are also used in wireless nodes in the core switch segment receiving all last mile services, as in optical fiber.

Juniper supports all our connectivity infrastructure in our datacenter, supporting optimal availability and performance for services.

The Virtual Chassis, because you have a centralized administration of a set of switches which makes the operation more efficient.

Support prices and licensing scheme need to be improved to allow some features to be purchased at lower costs, for example, RPM.

We previously used Cisco.

We evaluated Brocade.