Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform Reviews

I have been working on secure access service for the last one year on Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform. This product provides the security and networking capability to enhance network security and also provides advanced features in security across pan-India locations.

The main use of Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform is for networking and manages both network and security in one service. Both services are provided by one product. This product is SASE, secure access services. It also provides secure access to the internet and users and provides network security to individual users.

Recently, we have deployed Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform client in user PCs, user laptops, and some customer-end laptops. We have downloaded Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform client in the user PC and installed that Versa client. This client is integrated to Versa Cloud. The client is connected to Versa Cloud through the tunnel. There is a tunnel-forming process. Then, the user is securely accessed to Versa Cloud and Versa Cloud into the internet without any latency or any issues.

The best feature is that Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform provides both networking plus security features. Both features are provided by one product. That is the best feature.

I can tell you one feature in day-to-day work. The client securely accesses the internet without disrupting the network or any problem. In Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform, there is the Versa Client and Versa Gateway. The Versa Client is directly connected to the Versa Gateway, and the Versa Gateway is routing through the internet. The client is securely accessing the internet, which is a good feature because there is a direct tunnel forming from Versa client to Versa Gateway.

Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform Cloud provides the network capability to all pan-India locations, and in this product, it also provides advanced security features. It also provides the enforcement information such as the user's Windows operating system, the user's laptop, and the laptop serial number, among many other things we have to provide to the user.

Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform recently came into our organization. I have recently been working on this product for the last six months. This product is very smooth and easy to use and manage. Managing this product is also good. I really appreciate Versa network for bringing features and a product like this into the picture. I would recommend to Versa network to modify this product with new technologies.

I have been working on secure access service for the last one year on Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform.

I have not observed any challenges in Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform since I am working on it. I have not observed any issues or any challenges on this product. It is stable in my experience.

Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform is highly scalable in a broad network.

The customer support is excellent because there is 24/7 customer support, and they provide the support freely and also flexible support is provided by Versa TAC.

We have used the SD-WAN solution for the last two years. It is also good, but Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform is simpler to use and has a good management portal. I prefer this product more than the previous product.

I do not have an idea about the license, but I have an idea about the cost. The cost and setup of this product is in the customer's hands.

I want to tell you that there is one major outcome from Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform. Customer response is very good from this product, and the end-user responses are also good because there were no issues observed from the user and end-user. We have to achieve that outcome that is useful for the customer and supplier.

I prefer this product. Due to the fact that I have been working on this product, I have not observed any issues myself. I give this product a scale of 10 out of 10.

The accuracy and reliability of Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform is 99.9%. We are not observing any challenges or facing any issues during the production hour of this product.

I want to give the first step to start Versa Secure Client access to the customer. Firstly, you have to make a Plan of Action for your organization, or you have to make the infrastructure of your organization plan, considering how many employees, how many users, how many branches. Firstly, you have to make your architecture, and then you will have to purchase this product.

AWS Cloud has been provided by the organization. Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform client is deployed in the public cloud, which is Versa Cloud. I give this review a rating of 10 out of 10.

For BFSI and manufacturing, I usually recommend Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform.

The most valuable feature I find in Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform is multi-tenancy.

This is part of the feature list when discussing its Zero Trust Network Access.

It has benefited my customer's network performance. The underlay network has become very independent in the sense that we no longer need to position MPLS services. On the internet itself, we are able to give the best features as far as SD-WAN is concerned.

Even in MPLS, it was end-to-end encryption itself, but SD-WAN has further enhanced the aspect of security on the open internet link, which has helped my customers in protecting sensitive data.

The flexibility and application optimization is one feature which my customers have benefited from the most.

Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform could possibly be improved if they can integrate it with their own SD-WAN. SASE need not be a separate module as such. It can possibly be added as a value-add to the traditional legacy SD-WAN.

Integration with SD-WAN with SASE would be a good option as an additional feature I would like to see in the future. Rest, I don't think there are many changes which are required in the current state which Versa is in right now. Nothing comes to my mind immediately, at least.

I've been selling SD-WAN for about eight to nine years now while working with Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform.

The product has been pretty stable.

It is scalable.

At this point in time, I would rate Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform's technical support around eight out of ten.

Positive

I usually help my customers to implement the initial setup.

There are complications in terms of getting it implemented, but Versa professional services have been of great support to us.

Pricing for Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform is competitive. That should not be an issue.

I have utilized Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform's SD-WAN feature, and I think it's highly effective.

The real-time analytics and machine learning capabilities have not been fully utilized yet; that's something which our customers are exploring as of now.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 10.

I'm in sales, so I'm a seller for Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform. I usually recommend Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform for manufacturing and small and medium enterprise organizations.

I find Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform's features most valuable from the security perspective, wherein customers don't need to have multiple security devices, so one device can take care of SD-WAN capabilities as well as security features.

Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform's SD-WAN feature has benefited me significantly; the SD-WAN capability along with the security that has been offered is a lethal combination in my view.

So far, none of my customers have delved into much detail about Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform's threat intelligence capabilities because it's more of a focus on manufacturing and small and medium enterprise organizations, and the basic security and threat landscape is what they have been more keen on.

I assess Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform's real-time analytics and machine learning for improving threat detection as pretty common nowadays, so that is not a differentiator anymore.

I cannot think of areas where Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform could be improved as of now.

I cannot analyze additional features I would like to see in the next release of Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform at this point, because whatever functionality is offered at this moment is something that I have not been able to sell completely to the end customers yet.

They could promote Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform more because when we talk of SASE, it's Prisma that comes to the customer's mind, and if they can position it in a more aggressive manner, it will certainly help them.

The advantage that Palo Alto SASE has is because Palo Alto is a born-in-security organization, which gives it an edge; Versa is still conceived as more of a networking-related organization, so their footprint on security is still to be proven at par with Palo Alto in that sense.

I agree that Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform is not mature enough yet.

I've been working with Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform for one year now, and it's been one to two years overall.

I rate their technical support a ten.

Positive

I have not reached the stage wherein the ease of implementation of Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform could actually be judged upon, so I would not be able to answer this question.

As a reseller, I see their pricing as competitive.

We have other providers as well, but it's based on how the customer is getting aligned and what functionalities the customers are asking for; based on that, we position Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform.

I still feel that the functionality and features of Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform are much better than those of Palo Alto SASE, which is why I would rate them higher compared to Palo Alto.

Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform is the best option on the market at the moment.

I think the documentation and information over the internet about Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform are available in abundance, and I don't see much of an issue with that.

I have given this review an overall rating of 7.5.

The primary use case for Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform is application prioritizing and reducing dependency on MPLS to allow broadband connectivity. I am using advanced routing features in Versa.

The most valuable features of Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) are application prioritization, advanced routing features, and network gateway firewall capabilities. The platform provides centralized visibility and management, allowing for detailed policy enforcement across branches.

The cost of Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) is higher than other solutions available in the market. Additionally, there should be more technical materials and certifications available to improve awareness and skills in the industry.

I have been working with Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge Platform for one year. It is a new deployment for us.

The product is very stable with no complaints.

The scalability from a performance point of view is good, but from a commercial perspective, it is low. I would rate it as six out of ten.

I work with a partner, not directly with the OEM, which makes getting technical support on call very challenging. The quality of the support is average and there is often a delay.

Neutral

Earlier, we had a traditional network setup with Cisco routers and an MPLS network. Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge offered more advanced features.

The initial setup was very difficult and complex due to a lack of technical skills. Some technical skills and features need to be overseen by dedicated services.

A dedicated team with expertise is needed, as I was working through a partner which made things challenging.

I have not yet seen a return on investment because the system is OEM-specific and can't be easily repurposed or isolated.

The solution is very expensive, costing above one crore Indian rupees for our setup, which spans around twenty five branches.

My recommendation for those considering Versa is to improve the skill set within the industry and ensure more awareness about the technology. There needs to be exploration of other technologies available in Versa to benefit clients and make networks smoother. I rate the solution eight out of ten.

The primary feature that we find most favorable is its exceptional scalability. It proves to be highly scalable and versatile, serving a multitude of purposes. Whether it involves scaling applications, expanding the user base, or implementing various options for specific application scenarios, Versa Unified allows us to achieve these objectives seamlessly. In contrast, attempting the same operations with alternative solutions often presents challenges, making Versa a preferred choice in such scenarios.

The necessary enhancement pertains to the controller segment, specifically addressing the issue of frequent flapping when a link is left. In the case of Versa Unified, if a link experiences frequent flapping within an entire branch, it triggers instability. Hence, it is imperative that the overall routing system is not contingent solely upon the active dial branches.     

Certainly, there are areas that require enhancement, and the current focus is on improvements. Presently, I believe that the emphasis should be on enhancing user interface (UI) features, particularly over end devices. The issue arises when attempting to log in to Versa from other devices, as the UI is not device-specific. Consequently, guiding someone to log in to Versa antivirus becomes challenging. Despite the absence of issues on the website, the lack of a login scope impedes graphical representation of user data or databases. Since work databases support only a limited range of features, I recommend augmenting features for end devices to address these limitations.

I have experience with Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform.

Technical support is very good.

Positive

I would rate it 7 out of 10.

The most common use case for Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge is its application as an SD-WAN solution. Based on my four years of experience, the best use case is when customers need SD-WAN connectivity between branches along with a secure solution. Versa offers a comprehensive solution that combines connectivity and security. It suits customers who want reliable connectivity between branches and need a complete security package.

Versa also utilizes Secure Access Service Edge (SASE), which can be integrated with its SD-WAN solution. We have already deployed SASE alongside SD-WAN, allowing users to connect to the company's business applications in the office or remotely. This integration between SASE and SD-WAN is beneficial, as we have tested it with various customers.

Versa provides analytics, but the reporting features have some shortcomings. Improvements are needed in this area to enhance the analytics' overall user experience and effectiveness. Sometimes, issues or bugs arise when using AI for device profile provisioning.

I have been using Versa for four years.

Versa's stability is quite good for simple use cases, and I would score it an eight to nine. However, stability can depend heavily on the hardware used for complex deployments. Versa is compatible with third-party hardware, and we have deployed it using Dell and Lenovo products.

I recommend using Dell for better stability, which typically scores around seven to eight. In contrast, we’ve encountered issues with Lenovo hardware, often needing to return devices for stability problems, scoring it around six to seven. Overall, using Dell has resulted in much better stability for our deployments.

When deploying new branches, you can easily add new devices. Just provision the new device, and the setup is complete. While the deployment process is straightforward, ensuring proper sizing for the secure hub is important. If you plan to scale up to twenty or one hundred devices, you must use high-quality hardware for the hub. 

We work with small to medium-sized businesses and large enterprises, including those in the U.S. with over one hundred branches. Versa is a strong solution for these scenarios. We have successfully set up Versa for up to fifty branches. For medium to large businesses, I recommend Versa if the use case involves straightforward SD-WAN with added security. If the use case is relatively simple, Versa can still effectively meet those needs.

FlexVNF’s main competitors include Fortinet and VeloCloud from VMware. Both are strong contenders in the SD-WAN space. Fortinet provides a good match for security features, making it a solid competitor alongside FlexVNF.

The setup process is straightforward, allowing users to activate the system via email or a URL link. It’s simple enough that non-IT users can follow the instructions. There have been some issues, particularly when registering devices to the controller. We’ve had to open support tickets, which seems to be a common problem. While the setup is generally easy, occasional failures require assistance from support for troubleshooting.

Versa offers cloud deployment, meaning the controller is managed by Versa. While the devices can be on-premises, the controller operates as a Versa product in the cloud.

While Versa offers an on-premises option, I haven't deployed it yet. In my country, the cloud solution for the controller is highly regarded. Although we haven’t implemented the on-premises solution, Versa can also provide that option.

Versa has an API that could potentially support future AI integration, but the Versa team has not provided any updates regarding AI capabilities. Currently, no information indicates that Versa is suitable for integration with AI solutions.

Regarding pricing, Versa is competitively positioned in the medium price range compared to Fortinet and Palo Alto. Our customers are generally satisfied with Versa's pricing during renewal. Versa's renewal costs are reasonable, making it appealing for customers who plan to invest in the solution for six to seven years without facing steep renewal fees. In contrast, with Fortinet, we’ve noticed that renewal prices can be as high as purchasing new hardware. 

Versa’s approach to network optimization focuses on application-based steering. This means you can prioritize specific applications like Zoom or Teams during critical activities like conference meetings. Versa uses this application-based steering to select the best path among multiple links, ensuring that important applications receive the necessary bandwidth.

Rather than optimizing solely for the network, the applications are emphasized. You can decide which applications to prioritize, while others may receive lower priority. For instance, if some applications experience issues, you might still be fine with them, but it’s crucial to ensure that essential applications like video conferencing remain unaffected by network congestion. 

Versa is a great option if you have a simple solution using SASE, such as connecting branches and adding a security layer. Based on my deployment experience, I can recommend Versa for this use case. It addresses the needs of organizations looking to enhance security while maintaining straightforward connectivity between branches.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We are partnered with Versa via Colt Technology Services. We have two SD-WAN partners, Versa and VMware. My clients use Versa for remote work because it is an on-prem solution that is good at cloud security with its cloud web gateway.

Versa is a good centralized solution where you're setting up your infrastructure in a data center-type thing. Everything is built into a single box with Versa, so it's better if you want to reduce your footprint, have everything in the same location, and set software applications in a white box situation.

We've had the odd occasional stability issue with software upgrades, etcetera. They don't support certain other third-party applications, which can be a bit limiting at times, whereas VMware seems to have a bit better integration in terms of that.

We've been working with Versa Unified SASE for at least three years.

Versa is stable, but it requires a lot of new skills, which a lot of companies struggle to keep in-house these days. People don't necessarily have the built-in capabilities within the IT teams to deploy SD-WAN.

On the Internet side of things, the solution is quite easy to scale. You have limitations regarding each box's bandwidth, but it's quite flexible. You can do anything between ten megs and two gigs of total throughput. I suppose that is scalable, but you need a different box for each of them.

We have quite a range of customers from small, medium, and enterprise clients working with Versa. It is very scalable in that direction. We can do a single branch office with ten staff or massive organizations with thousands of people.

Customer support could be faster and escalate to more advanced levels of support.

Neutral

With us, deployment takes 35 working days. The number of engineers and architects required depends on how many sites you have. You need one engineer per site, as well as one solution architect. Sometimes having two is useful because they can bounce ideas off of each other.

We do the installations ourselves, and that's gone well without any issues.

Both Versa and VMware are cheap in terms of the router. I find Versa a little more expensive than VMware in terms of remote access and secure web gateway elements.

VMware is light in terms of the built-in security in the SD-WAN box. That's the main issue with them. If you don't already have a firewall, it can be limited on that front. I don't personally use the remote access features with VMware and Versa, and I couldn't tell you exactly how it goes. They seem to both be fairly on par with each other. If you're looking at remote access, both solutions are just VPNs back into the router. But with the secure web gateway solution, VMware has more PoPs worldwide, and that's quite useful. And if you've got international companies who perhaps have staff in each location, whereas with Versa, you need a larger presence than VMware in each location to justify having an SD-WAN router. With Versa, we have clients who, for example, don't have routers in Asia and America, but they use the remote access feature to VPN back into the data centers in the UK, and that seems to work. Whereas you could deploy a box, quite a light box with VMware quite easily at branch locations.

You could pick Versa if you're looking to replace all of your infrastructure on-site. It is very effective if you want to consolidate your firewall, analytics, and all that kind of stuff into a single box. It's got a great firewall that's built into there. It does most of the stuff that you need, such as built-in DDoS mitigation. It ticks many boxes for people who don't necessarily have the capability to do that. It is cost-saving instead of taking a separate DDoS protection or buying a firewall if you're looking at a dual hundred-meg type solution. The box probably won't cost you more than £150 a month at maximum, so that's incredibly affordable versus a full-state firewall because everything comes built-in.

Versa is good when you have a heavy branch when building office infrastructure. On the flip side, that's where I'd suggest VMware. If you have one or two main offices, and most people otherwise work remotely, or you have some small overseas sites with five people or something like that, that's where VMware comes into its own.

Our company primarily uses Versa FlexVNF for SD-WAN, and we also explore its security features so that we can secure our infrastructure with the flexibility of SD-WAN.

The regular processing feature of Versa FlexVNF is good. When creating a tunnel in Versa and providing internet access, it creates two separate tunnels for different types of traffic. This segregation is very helpful.

The solution's current customer support is not that good. So, they need to improve that. Also, the solution's UI is quite complex, so they need to simplify it.

I have been using Versa FlexVNF for two months. Also, I am a customer of the solution using its latest version.

Versa FlexVNF is a scalable product because it does not have any hardware dependencies. This makes it a versatile solution that can be easily integrated with any firewall. This integration further enhances the scalability of the product. The testing solution we used involved only three individuals. As our enterprise is not a core IT enterprise and we are supporting another application, only three people were involved in the testing. So, one person was from Versa, and two were from our side.

During the testing phase, Versa provided a dedicated person for support. However, I cannot comment on their operational support since I have only heard that their availability is not 24/7, and their support is not good. Since we have not got the devices operational, I am not the correct person to comment on it.

Our company has in-house applications, and we want to make them available for users. So, we want to always make it available, and we don't want our applications to have any downtime. Also, we want to control the traffic coming through our applications.

On one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy, I rate the solution's deployment process a seven out of ten. Considering our company's requirements, the deployment process took two days for us to design the deployment scenario. Since the department process was not hectic, it took less time. We have deployed the solution on the cloud and on-premises. Regarding the people involved in the deployment process, only two or three people were involved in the testing part.

It is neither cheap nor expensive. I rate the pricing a five out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

My recommendation of the solution to other users would purely be based upon the requirement of the users. If they are getting their requirements fulfilled, they can use the tool. Sometimes, I have seen users not wanting it for the connectivity facility it provides but for security.

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

We mainly implement this solution for SD-WAN service, a next-generation firewall, and UTM.

It has improved our organization because we use SD-WAN for optimizing connectivity, and it has helped lower our costs by replacing legacy WAN links with a modern WAN architecture.

The granularity when it comes to configuration and security features are valuable. It is more secure than its competitors.

The web interface can be improved. It is a bit outdated, so they need to make a more modern GUI. In the next release, they need to add capabilities to manage the LAN. Other competitors are moving towards the LAN and Network as a Service, and Versa is a bit behind in that.

We have been using the solution for two years, and we are using version 21.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

The technical support is good.

We used Nokia Nuage in the past.

I rate the setup an eight out of ten, and we completed it in-house.

There is a return on investment.

I rate the pricing a six out of ten, with one being the most expensive and ten being the cheapest. The price is mid-level, so they are not very expensive or very cheap. There are no hidden or extra costs.

We evaluated Nokia Nuage and Cisco, and then we chose Versa.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten. Versa is more suitable for customers who have large deployments because it doesn't compete well with the products suitable for small to medium customers. So they have a different product called Titan, and it's suitable. The solution is better for customers who have medium to large deployments.

I'm an IP access engineer and we are customers of Versa.

The product has a dynamic VPN feature for SD-WAN which our customers use for their network. Another valued feature is the application awareness with its VGA engine which enables visibility. Customers can see their network traffic with whatever application is being used. 

The solution lacks a mobile version where small, manageable platforms can be developed. Our customers sometimes want to collect analytical data on-premises, and we're unable to provide those features. Perhaps Versa can develop virtual appliances for site-available solutions, like analytics or management. Our customers would like to see a server VPN and mobile applications.

I've been using this solution for four years. 

We deployed the latest version last year but there were so many bugs that we quickly reverted to the previous version which is stable. When the vendor releases new features, we now test them and do a POC before implementing them.

The solution is scalable. We have 200 workers using Versa WAN solutions. They run the gamut from network admins to security admins, installation guys, field engineers, technical account managers, and more. They use the product to check endpoints or data analytics. 

Customer service is good. 

Positive

The solution is easily deployed on virtual machines, but the integration process takes time due to the service provider's requirements. The deployment is doable because the solution is developed for the service provider. It's a difficult question because the difficulty is service providers. We have to implement many systems to different platforms and if there are no integration systems, the development is simple.

This solution is relatively new in Turkey and despite them not increasing the license price, it's a relatively expensive solution. The solution has new features and if a company doesn't need those, they will find a cheaper option. We sell SD-WAN solutions as a premium VPN service, and the license is a little expensive for Turkish customers, but there is no real alternative.

We looked at some other solutions but couldn't find an alternative. We're now deploying Huawei SD-WAN solutions and will possibly deploy Cisco antenna because we are buying Cisco browsers but they lack sufficient security.