VMware VeloCloud SD-WAN Reviews

There is a cloud gateway feature that centrally locates every space, which you don't get with Cisco. The cloud gateway is a very good feature for scaling purposes, etc. It's a very simple feature. In fact, everything about VeloCloud is quite simple, including the concept of the circuits, and, from a  technical perspective, it's not as challenging as Cisco VPNs. They have VPN 0, VPN 1, VPN 2, VPN 3, but they're very simple in that approach — the concept of circuits. Overall, I think both products are good. 

Cisco has begun to push its SD-WAN code within all of its ISR routers. This has made deployment quite challenging. With VeloCloud, deployment is much easier because they include all of their own hardware.

Cloud-based, it's okay because they roll up the device and provide you with a link for access. In regards to in-house, when you want to deploy the orchestrator, it becomes very difficult. Currently, I don't see any such good documentation compared to their competitors, like Cisco, etc.

Also, If you look at Cisco, just Google it and you'll get every detail: what to do, what specific system, what server, how much RAM, how much storage, all the details — it's just much easier.

If a customer has an optimization solution within their network, then you have to be very careful when designing — optimization and all. This can make your design very complex. If the customer has an existing optimization solution, then you have to be very careful when designing any part of the SD-WAN solution — Cisco or Velo.

They should provide us with the flexibility to scale up.

I have been using this solution for two and a half to three years.

VeloCloud is very stable — it's a very good solution.

I have not done a scale with something like 6,000 to 7,000 sites; however, if you look at the pure design, phase-wise, then you have to be very particular about new designs. Velo is purely based on design. I don't think the SD-WAN is that new and scaling that amount of sites requires a simple design rather than a complex solution.

With Cisco, we were working on a huge scale — I think it was around 1700 sites for that customer. After 900 sites, it started having problems. The controller was not sending the new site updates to the hub and it was not reflecting in the routing table; however, in the end, it scaled, but there were some challenges that we had to overcome.

There are not enough people within their support team. I would give them a rating of three out of five.

They have to improve, they have to be quicker and understand the types of problems customers face. 

The initial setup is straightforward. The initial setup is very simple compared to Cisco. Cisco claims to be Zero Touch Provisioning, but I think they have a lot of complexity surrounding that Zero Touch. With VeloCloud, you can generate and send emails, and the receiver just has to connect to the device, open up the email and the configuration improves. In this way, I think Velo is good with Zero Touch Provisioning.

Deployment time really depends on what you deploy. If you want to roll out a small site on a single device, then the designing and the policies are all done — it's a really quick job. Your circuit and site will rollout quickly, everything will be up and running roughly within two to two and a half hours. If you're looking at a complex site, then of course, the complexity increases.

VeloCloud is a good solution. They are only lacking in regards to the in-house version. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give VeloCloud a rating of seven.

We use VeloCloud as our SD-WAN solution.

The most valuable feature is the dynamic multipath optimization. This is something that other competing products do not have.

Zero-touch provisioning makes it very easy to set up.

The single path optimization features are useful.

There is no security included, which is something that should be improved. For example, they should at least include basic firewall capabilities.

I have been using VeloCloud for six months.

The stability of VeloCloud is good.

Scalability-wise, this is a good solution. We have a large company but our group makes up just a small part of the network, with perhaps 50 users. This includes regular business owners and home users.

Prior to VeloCloud, we used Fortinet. However, the SD-WAN is not as good, which is why we switched over.

The initial setup is really easy.

Once you connect the appliance to the internet, you manage the policies and that enables SD-WAN.

The pricing is very comparable to Fortinet.

This is a product that I like. For anybody looking for an SD-WAN, this is a really good option, and probably one of the best. My only real complaint is about the lack of security. If security is their primary goal, then I would suggest implementing Fortinet instead. On the other hand, if SD-WAN is the primary concern then choose VeloCloud.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The solution offers ISP support for customers.

I love the solution because of its many features like cluster and cloud VPN.

The solution needs improvement for the security features and should include two firewalls. Cloud VPN can’t support any link. The solution needs to also improve the availability of centralized internal management. 

It needs to have debug detection and Deep Packet Detection features as well. 

The documentation for VMware is also hard to find.

I have been working with the solution for three months.

I am using the solution in a virtual machine and cannot comment on its stability. However, I think that the solution is stable because, in Libya, ISP uses this technology and many customers use it.

The solution is scalable and very important for quality view.

I worked with the solution in virtual Azure and it is complex. However, I think in the real scenario, the deployment should be more flexible.

I have evaluated Cisco SD-WAN and Fortinet SD-WAN. There is a need for more features in these solutions.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. The product is intuitive and easy to use. The solution is suitable for both medium companies and enterprise ones. I would recommend it for customers who have many branches.

VMware SD-WAN is used for security and virtualization.

The most valuable feature of VMware SD-WAN is security. Additionally, the integration and configuration are easier to do than with other solutions, such as Cisco.

I have been using VMware SD-WAN for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

We have approximately 200 customers using this solution.

The support from VMware SD-WAN is knowledgeable.

I rate the support from VMware SD-WAN a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of VMware SD-WAN was simple. However, it took six days to complete.

We use a third party to deploy the solution.

The price of VMware SD-WAN is less expensive than some solutions, such as Cisco.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate VMware SD-WAN a nine out of ten.

We primarily use VMware SD-WAN for connectivity.

VMware SD-WAN is a complete solution.

I would like to see more features added to increase visibility.

I have been working with VMware SD-WAN for one year.

We are working with the latest version.

VMware SD-WAN is a stable product.

VMware SD-WAN is scalable.

We have 45 users in our company.

The initial setup is easy.

VMware technical support assisted us with the implementation of this solution.

I would rate VMware SD-WAN an eight out of ten.

We use VMware SD-WAN for network security.

I have found the dynamic multipoint protocol(DNPO) most useful because it can tell you which is the best circuit to use for different types of traffic.

The security of the firewall should be improved. It would be a good idea to have a standalone product with better security.

In an upcoming release, they should have firewall rules.

I have been using VMware SD-WAN for approximately three years.

The solution was stable.

VMware SD-WAN is highly scalable.

We have approximately 600 users using this solution in my organization.

The technical support is exceptional. I would give them an A+.

We were previously using Cisco Meraki.

The deployment was straightforward and took a couple of months to complete.

We have approximately six engineers that support VMware SD-WAN.

There is only a standard fee for the solution.

I rate VMware SD-WAN a ten out of ten.

We use VMware SD-WAN primarily to connect branch offices to our data center and to connect users to the application. Users could be in any place, working from home, in remote locations, and branch offices. Applications can be anywhere in the cloud in IaaS, in the platform as a service, on-premise, and at private data centers. The deployment process of SD-WAN is to connect securely so users with the application can perform well.

There is a feature called DMPO (Dynamic Multipath Optimization) which is good. Here in Latin America, the quality of the internet is very poor. So what DMPO does, well, in a branch office or in a work from home environment, we can have bad quality internet links, but with the IT team, SD-WAN or VeloCloud, the DMPO makes the link a Smartlink. For example, if the link is presenting packet loss, the VMware solution applies a remediation algorithm. For packet loss, DMPO introduces packet cloning so we send the packet twice. We recover all the packets despite the link having packet loss. If we have two or three internet links, we can also summarize all the links together so, this basically increases the packet capacity. It also decreases the timing of the VeloCloud Gateway.

VeloCloud Gateways are instant and deployed globally so we can create a DMPO tunnel on-premise to a VeloCloud Gateway and then serve SaaS applications. At corporate headquarters, there are three internet links, but employees were experiencing poor quality of Microsoft Teams. So all the Microsoft Office 365 traffic was sent from the location to a VeloCloud Gateway. The VeloCloud Gateway tunnel is protected by the DMPO, so users have a better experience. With Office 365 applications like Microsoft Teams, OneDrive and Azure, the DMPO features increase the performance of the applications because it can remediate bad quality links.

The solution doesn't have CLI (command line interface), but it's not needed because the graphic user interface is very nice. You can do everything, but when we are troubleshooting, we can't execute commands as fast as we'd like because the graphic user interface is very slow. So although the solution has a CLI, VeloCloud doesn't. I'd like for VMware to introduce CLI. The solution also needs stronger routing Broadcom support because we cannot deploy VeloCloud in bigger enterprises that have that kind of complex browsing protocol.

VMware does not work well if the enterprise has a very complex routing environment.

I have been using VMare for 2 years.

VMware works perfectly for most small and medium businesses with simple and basic routing, but not for large enterprises that have complex routing environments.

I would give VMware SD-WAN a nine out of ten.  

Deploying SD-WAN is very easy. When we deploy it on-premise, we need to get SD-WAN or VeloCloud X. When VeloCloud X affects any kind of form factor, it needs to to be a hardware box, it could be a server or it can virtualize in any Hypervisor like Hyper-V or IBM in order to support any kind of form factor. To deploy it in the cloud with Amazon, Google Cloud Platform, or Azure, the features are configured in a central manager called SD-WAN Orchestrator. Then the device is shifted to the location and it only needs one internet connection. When the device connects to the internet it downloads the configurations necessary and that's the SD-WAN deployment process.

I have deployed this solution, but just for a proof of concept. This solution is cloud-based. 

VMware SD-WAN could be improved with more automation and more integration, but each vendor could use these improvements. 

I have been working with VMware SD-WAN for a few months. 

This solution is as stable as most firewalls. VMware is a reputable vendor. 

I have never contacted VMware's technical support. 

The installation is a straightforward process. You don't need very many people on your tech team. 

I implemented this solution myself. 

You need to pay for a license to use this product. 

I rate this solution a six out of ten. I would recommend this solution to others who are considering implementation and I have about 10 customers who are using this solution.