We performed a comparison between Cisco DNA Center and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It enables monitoring of various components such as access points, switch cards, and other elements within the company's solutions."
"The monitoring features are very useful for network engineers."
"The solution has the capability to scale."
"Cisco is a leading network company."
"We can monitor all devices and get the required information using the product."
"The most valuable features of the solution are all of its security features...It is a highly scalable solution."
"The most valuable features were the monitoring, maintenance, and configuration."
"We have many people from the team who manage a lot of devices. By using Cisco DNA Center, it has taken some of that burden away, we are impressed with it. We did the investment in CAPEX, but in the OPEX was very low."
"Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is quite stable. If you set it up correctly with the right configurations and there are no hiccups during installation and deployment, it will be stable. I'd give stability a rating of eight out of ten."
"I like the fact that Ansible is agentless."
"It increases our company's efficiency, automating all the simple tasks which used to take hours of somebody's time."
"Installing it is a PIP command. So, it's pretty easy. It is a one liner."
"The Organizations feature, where I can give clear silos and hand them over to different teams, that's amazing; everybody says that it's their own Tower. It's like they have their own Tower out there."
"There are new modules available, which help to simplify the workflow. That is what we like about it."
"It was easy to read and learn. It is a YAML-based syntax, which makes it easily understand and pick up."
"It has an easy-to-use interface. It is REST API driven, and it integrates with Active Directory. It provides the ability to grant permissions to other users who would not necessarily have those permissions via the GUI so that they could run other people's jobs. For example, you could have the Oracle team grant permissions to the Linux team so that they can use each of those playbooks or each other's code. It is called shift-left."
"From the recent DNA point of view, there are some stability challenges with Cisco, but very minor."
"Requires more focus on the digital side of things."
"The solution's technical support is an area with which my company's clients have a problem. Cisco doesn't provide good technical support unless a user has a big account that Cisco wants to retain."
"The features of Cisco DNA Center and Cisco Prime could have more parity."
"Integration with analytic tools and API integrations would be ideal."
"The tool's IoT integration should be better."
"When it comes to deploying wireless fields, integrating defaults into the DNS interface can be challenging."
"They should include UTM features in the product."
"The support could be better."
"The area which I feel can be improved is the custom modules. For example, there are something like 106 official modules available in the Ansible library. A year ago, that number was somewhere around 58. While Ansible is improving day by day, this can be improved more. For instance, when you need to configure in the cloud, you need to write up a module for that."
"It would be good to make the solution more user-friendly,"
"Additional features could be added."
"It can use some more credential types. I've found that when I go looking for a certain credential type, such as private keys, they're not really there."
"In Community, there's a lot of effort towards testing, standardizing, and testing for module development to role development, which is why Molecule is now becoming real. Same thing with Zuul, which we are starting to implement. Zulu tests out modules from third-party sources, like ourselves, and verifies that the modules work before they are committed to the code. Currently, Ansible can't do this with all the modules out there."
"It is a little slow on the network side because every time you call a module, it's initiating an SSH or an API call to a network device, and it just slows things down."
"Some of the modules in Ansible could be a bit more mature. There is still a little room for further development. Some performance aspects could be improved, perhaps in the form of parallelism within Ansible."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco DNA Center is ranked 1st in Network Automation with 37 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 2nd in Network Automation with 58 reviews. Cisco DNA Center is rated 7.8, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco DNA Center writes "Practical implementation of VXLAN is good and provides centralized control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". Cisco DNA Center is most compared with Cisco Prime, Aruba Airwave, SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager, Huawei eSight and NetBrain, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Automic Workload Automation. See our Cisco DNA Center vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform report.
See our list of best Network Automation vendors.
We monitor all Network Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.