LiveAction LiveNX Reviews

Our company used the solution to provide a good view of traffic movement and issues along the way. For example, the solution can look at a voice quality issue between point A and point B and determine the path, exact issue, and issue point.

Unfortunately, we did not receive the required enhancement support we so had to stop using the solution. 

The reporting abilities are valuable. 

The alerting feature is very good because it allows you to set MOS alerts at various network junctures or data points. The MOS level measures the quality of voice and video to industry standards. Some junctures or data points might be more important to monitor. For example, you might want to receive alerts when an MOS value is high in a CEO's office or for a VIP phone. 

Sometimes the solution does not register devices properly and that is a bug. 

Device utilization between links needs to be added. 

Improvements are needed for the syslog and NetFlow messages. 

The technical support is not great. 

I used the solution for two years. 

The solution is stable with no issues. 

The solution is scalable based on the license you purchase. For example, our license covered 100 device points. 

If enhancements are not required, then support for the product is good.

The solution was a new product so we wanted some enhancements. For example, we had some issues registering a device. We placed a support call and were hoping they would give us a timeline for resolving the issue one way or the other. But support refused to provide a timeline and that was where everything fell apart. The support system was not great and we rarely got support for required enhancements. 

Overall, technical support is rated a five out of ten. 

Neutral

We previously used Route Explorer which gave us BGP peering for all routers around the globe. 

The setup is not that difficult. Installation support was not great but our technical staff figured it out. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

The initial deployment took three months. At that point, the first piece of the solution was working.  

We wanted to use other features but couldn't get them to work so we approached technical support. Enhancements, product change requirements, and support requirements took an additional three months. 

The solution is fairly expensive compared to other products and there is not much flexibility for reducing costs. 

About five years ago, we were using Route Explorer but there were some shortcomings. We started exploring options and around that same time Cisco purchased the solution. Since we have a Cisco house, we were introduced to the solution as an alternative and opted to get started with a minimal license.  

The solution was not exactly a one-to-one replacement for Route Explorer, but gave us a very good view of traffic movement and issues. 

Before choosing the solution, it is important to rank your requirements from high to low priority. The solution has a lot of features but at a high price. If you will only use 30% of the solution to meet your requirements, then it would be better for you to explore other products. Find the solution that best fulfills your requirements. 

The solution itself is great. If I could use it properly, then I would rate it a seven out of ten. Unfortunately, support is a factor when determining usability or cost effectiveness. We did not receive the needed support so had to stop using the solution. 

For that reason, my overall rating for the solution is a five out of ten. 

We were using it for monitoring two of our business units. We were using it on a day-to-day basis to monitor performance, latency, and QoS modeling to ensure that we were properly modeling QoS. This was before pre-COVID when we were all in the office. This platform went away with the business units when those business units got sold. We were one or two versions before the latest one.

One of the valuable features is the ability to create CLI scripts on the fly to fix any issues. We were using it for QoS modeling to ensure that we were properly modeling QoS, and it basically said here is what you need to fix to get this QoS done, whether it is ACL or something else. It would either push or recommend. If you have the right credentials, you could also push.

It is very good if you are a Cisco shop. It gives you reporting, latency, and bandwidth utilization for your applications, so you can do good capacity management planning. There are a lot of pieces that LiveNX can give you. It is a total NPM solution for SD-WAN.

It is not as robust as other NPM solutions. For instance, there is a problem while labeling specific applications. It works well with well-known applications, but when you have to put in new applications that are not very known and set them up with names, ports, URLs, or some protocols, it is not as intuitive.

I used this solution for about a year.

We were one or two versions before the latest one. It was not as stable as it possibly could be, and we did have some problems with it, but that doesn't mean that we haven't had problems with others.

It was scaled for two business units that we had. We had 300 or 400 remote offices, and it was scalable. I am not quite sure about anything above that because we didn't have a need for it.

Their tech support is good once you get to them. They are hard to reach, and they're obviously not at the drop of a dime. You cannot always get someone from tech to call you immediately. They take a while to get back.

I wasn't a part of the initial setup, but from what I gathered, it was pretty much straightforward.

My advice would be that if you're looking to handle SD-WAN, then make sure that you have a great reporting system. If you're a Cisco shop, I would say that LiveNX is a definitely good product because it basically tells you what you need to do to change anything to make sure your QoS modeling is working properly. 

I would rate LiveAction LiveNX an eight out of ten for Cisco. Otherwise, I would rate it a seven out of ten.

We use LiveAction LiveNX for our infrastructure, supporting a range of customers.

It is a very sophisticated and highly functional platform. It is as good as the templates and configurations you build into it, so each customer uses a different aspect of the platform.

Overall, its analytical capability is really good. We're integrating it with a Cisco product called the Cisco SD-WAN platform, and that integration is good because it's an API-based integration.

The platform is easy to deploy, manage, and flexible. You have to be Einstein to work out how to use it, but once you get used to it, it is a pretty sophisticated platform. We look at how applications are performing in breakouts across all of our customer networks. In addition, our customers use the same platform so that they can run their reports.

They have some unique functionality but they need to create a more simplified UI. In terms of changing standard reports, it's sophisticated, and from a customer perspective, it's pretty daunting when they first look at it. LiveAction Live NX should look at standardizing some of those for their customers.

I would love to see the product developing more API integration with other vendor platforms because the problem is they're stamping all over the toes of those vendors that want to do their development. So their API integrations could be improved. For example, what they've done with the Cisco integration is brilliant. However, what they do with other vendors' integrations is not as good.

We have been using this solution for about 18 months. 

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. We've put it into our infrastructure because it can grow as users come on stream. It is technically infinite in terms of ease of upgrading, and it's a straightforward thing to do, so it's got all the plus points. It's not processor hungry and is perfect for our secure data center environments. There are many positive attributes, and it's the best of the best.

The customer service and support team is constantly growing. It is good when you get the right people, who are knowledge experts, but there is room for improvement. When we request help, it is quick, and somebody there is always prepared to help and go the extra mile.

We previously worked with a few vendor products, but LiveAction is very good. So we are using it for tight integrations, but now the functionality spreads across some platforms. Additionally, we have used various packages, but as we've deployed it, we've gotten used to its functionalities in many new business cases, which replaces some of the other tools.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The product is good but improvements can be made to its UI.