Juniper Session Smart Router can be improved by simplifying onboarding for traditional network teams and providing better documentation for complex deployments, as well as improving the GUI for operational workflows and better migration tooling. Having cloud deployment templates would also be a great simplification. More intuitive troubleshooting visibility would help enhance the experience with Juniper Session Smart Router. Additionally, reducing the learning curve for policy modeling and strengthening third-party ecosystem integrations would be valuable.
Juniper Session Smart Router could be better in several areas such as the steep learning curve because the session-based model is different from traditional networking. The UI could also be more functional and intuitive for day-to-day operations. Troubleshooting can be complex because of the deeper session level, and there is a documentation gap in some advanced sessions and a smaller community ecosystem compared to other SD-WAN vendors.
Juniper Session Smart Router could improve its documentation to become more competitive. It has very little documentation, and you have to rely mainly so much on support to do something, which I feel should not be that way. Otherwise, functionality-wise, I feel it is perfect. It is way high and expensive; that is why most of my clients on the lower end, I cannot suggest Juniper. It is too pricey. Of late, I am seeing them changing the interface; the UI is changing, and that is a good thing. But still, I feel you can standardize the syntax to be in line with the rest of them.
Senior Solutions Specialist at a comms service provider with 201-500 employees
Real User
Nov 13, 2023
Juniper Session Smart Router could be better in terms of software performance. Sometimes, there are glitches, especially with MTU issues that affect application communication, although this seems to be a common problem across various SD-WAN solutions, not just Juniper. Another thing that could be improved is the setup process. It would be great if configuring the SSR could be simpler, like making firmware updates to the 128 version without the need for complex linking with interfaces. Also, reducing the delay in reflecting interface changes on the GUI would make the user experience smoother.
The UI of the SSR conductor is the main part where improvements can be done. Today, for every configuration step, you have to do a series of clicks. What we are missing there are wizards. For example, I have two applications, and I want one application to be prioritized against the other. In such a case, a wizard for assigning policies to a service without configuring each step by hand would be very helpful. There should be an overhaul of the GUI of the conductor. The functionality they have got in the Mist portal should be baked into the conductor itself. It would be really great, but as we all know, that won't happen. Besides that, there are so many things we are discussing with the engineers and the product management of 128T or Juniper. I'm pretty sure that every feature that will come in the next half-year or three-quarters of a year would be influenced directly by us.
Juniper Session Smart Router offers real-time analytics, zero-trust segmentation, and simple deployment, providing efficient and secure connections. Its tunnel-free secure vector routing sets it apart in the SD-WAN market, enhancing scalability with Mist Cloud integration and application-aware AI operations.Juniper Session Smart Router is recognized for improving network management through its blend of edge-to-cloud stack capabilities, application-aware AI, and seamless integration with Mist...
Juniper Session Smart Router can be improved by simplifying onboarding for traditional network teams and providing better documentation for complex deployments, as well as improving the GUI for operational workflows and better migration tooling. Having cloud deployment templates would also be a great simplification. More intuitive troubleshooting visibility would help enhance the experience with Juniper Session Smart Router. Additionally, reducing the learning curve for policy modeling and strengthening third-party ecosystem integrations would be valuable.
Juniper Session Smart Router could be better in several areas such as the steep learning curve because the session-based model is different from traditional networking. The UI could also be more functional and intuitive for day-to-day operations. Troubleshooting can be complex because of the deeper session level, and there is a documentation gap in some advanced sessions and a smaller community ecosystem compared to other SD-WAN vendors.
Juniper Session Smart Router could improve its documentation to become more competitive. It has very little documentation, and you have to rely mainly so much on support to do something, which I feel should not be that way. Otherwise, functionality-wise, I feel it is perfect. It is way high and expensive; that is why most of my clients on the lower end, I cannot suggest Juniper. It is too pricey. Of late, I am seeing them changing the interface; the UI is changing, and that is a good thing. But still, I feel you can standardize the syntax to be in line with the rest of them.
I did not find any problem with Juniper. Regarding improvement, we still need to see what it can do.
Juniper Session Smart Router could be better in terms of software performance. Sometimes, there are glitches, especially with MTU issues that affect application communication, although this seems to be a common problem across various SD-WAN solutions, not just Juniper. Another thing that could be improved is the setup process. It would be great if configuring the SSR could be simpler, like making firmware updates to the 128 version without the need for complex linking with interfaces. Also, reducing the delay in reflecting interface changes on the GUI would make the user experience smoother.
Juniper Session Smart Router can improve the integration for Wi-Fi devices and add additional Sassy deployments.
The UI of the SSR conductor is the main part where improvements can be done. Today, for every configuration step, you have to do a series of clicks. What we are missing there are wizards. For example, I have two applications, and I want one application to be prioritized against the other. In such a case, a wizard for assigning policies to a service without configuring each step by hand would be very helpful. There should be an overhaul of the GUI of the conductor. The functionality they have got in the Mist portal should be baked into the conductor itself. It would be really great, but as we all know, that won't happen. Besides that, there are so many things we are discussing with the engineers and the product management of 128T or Juniper. I'm pretty sure that every feature that will come in the next half-year or three-quarters of a year would be influenced directly by us.