I'd like to see no difference between point-to-site or site-to-site. For the Gen1 VPN Gateway, you can have a maximum of 30 site-to-site VPNs or 100 and 28 point-to-site. I don't see why site-to-site can't be 100 and 28 also.

In future releases, I would like to see the ability to inject BGP routes.

The product must provide a single sign-on. As of now, a shared secret is exchanged between both VPNs. It is quite compromisable. It will be good if a single sign-on feature is enabled in VPN Gateway or bundled with it.

The stability could be improved. The setup is a little bit complex. In the next release, I would like to see a new setup process.

I would like the solution to be more simple. If it were simple, we could remove other solutions, like tiering, and move to VPN for all of our requirements. VPN is much better to use because tiering is non-reciprocal, so we have to make a connection between the two endpoints.

Considering my use cases, I can fulfill my requirements using the product. The existing requirements of my company are pretty simple, and I think this product can meet those requirements.

The solution's pricing will always remain a challenge since anyone would want to get the solution at the lowest possible price.

I would like Microsoft to improve the pricing of the solution. Also, the technical support team could be more knowledgeable.

The connectivity should be faster.

Connectivity could be improved in Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway because it's not as stable, particularly when connecting a device tunnel. It's a good practice to connect up to twenty-five device tunnels to the solution, but that requires more stability, and the tunnels should remain connected whenever you're logged into your machine.

More configuration options could be included in Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway.

In the past, reliability has not been great. Deployment has not been simple. Getting it to run is a difficult process.

With one being the easiest experience and five being the most difficult, I would give the deployment process a three and a half out of five.

Make it completely routable, for example, if I have a gateway, I should be able to connect to whatever network I want on either side of the gateway, and the gateway should figure out which packet goes where. 

This is a traditional firewall or network gateway administration that has been removed from the Azure VPN and Gateway functionality, which should just put it back where it belongs, because as it is now if you have three networks, three different networks on either side of Azure, you have to configure one gateway per network.

They should release a less expensive version of the solution.

The solution can be improved by including a config map to separate some traffic from different bases on similar on-premise equipment that can offer this functionality.

Microsoft could work on having micro VPNs to integrate with mobile devices.

The marketing material in the portal is not very user-friendly. We faced some issues when trying to run a campaign. It was not opening. Some campaigns open directly on Outlook and others in Word documents. There should be one single framework, either Outlook or Word.

The cost could be lower. In the next release, Microsoft should add an option to schedule upgrades.

Their technical support could be better. If you don't have a support contract, it takes longer.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway could improve by providing IPS zero-day threat protection. For example, the IPS zero-day threat protection can monitor the user behavior to protect the infrastructure. The solution can only be used as a VPN, it is lacking features. 

I would like for them to improve the troubleshooting features. We have some problems with traffic and I can't identify where the problem is coming from. I have to open a ticket with support until it gets resolved. Microsoft doesn't offer enough tools to resolve the issue.