We performed a comparison between Cisco FabricPath and Juniper QFabric based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two LAN Switching solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's very stable."
"The setup is straightforward."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"FabricPath's best features are routing, OSPS, ethernet, and performance."
"The most valuable feature is the central management where the customer can receive all the alerts."
"The most valuable features are the lead time and the high quality of the product."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to migrate VMs between data centers."
"The fact that the solution is on the cloud is its most valuable aspect. If you are on the cloud, you can manage your network from anywhere, any place. It's very good."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is easy to use and has good performance."
"It is known for being agile, flexible, and cost-effective when working with various vendors."
"The vendor maintains the product well."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the fabric backplane having upwards of 160 GB of communication. It is a top-of-the-rack solution where you have your directors sitting in the main area and then you have your nodes expanded out to your multiple cabinets. It has a very good design and could be your server backbone."
"It's user-friendly."
"QFabric supports redundancy and includes all of the enterprise and service provider features that customers would want in data center or service provider network."
"The 40 gig backbone InterConneX was valuable for our use case. It is even faster now. QFabric has spine-leaf technology or topology, which basically makes every single hop only one hop away in terms of connecting from one device to another. It is a pretty good and robust solution. It works pretty well in terms of scalability, and their technical support is amazing."
"Lacks sufficient integration with SIEM."
"The solution is costly."
"The solution should offer better reporting."
"The documents could improve for Cisco FabricPath. There are times when the relevant information is not present in the different sections of the documents, such as deployment. The documents should be more detailed and enhanced."
"I would like to see better interoperability with other IT solutions."
"In terms of the series, I find that the integration with other teleconferencing applications needs to be more seamless. I have suggested to Cisco that the endpoint device should allow joining calls from Microsoft Teams, Zoom, and other teleconferencing applications. Additionally, I appreciate the recent inclusion of breakout sessions in the Cisco Webex application, which enhances its relevance in the networking field."
"The solution is complex to set up."
"Layer 3 does not have higher availability."
"The disruptive upgrade was an issue for us."
"I do not use GUI's very much for switch stacks. I am always in the CLI. However, I do know that Juniper in the past has lacked on their GUI's, but they have been working on it."
"It works too much on rebooting and there is some memory leakage."
"It would be nice if Juniper provided the system integrator with training, similar to that of Cisco."
"The pricing structure could be more budget-friendly."
"Improvements could be made to QFabric's life cycle management, particularly in maintaining stable versions and extending product support."
"Having support for all OpenFlow versions would be beneficial."
"The stability needs to be improved."
Cisco FabricPath is ranked 8th in LAN Switching with 22 reviews while Juniper QFabric is ranked 9th in LAN Switching with 10 reviews. Cisco FabricPath is rated 8.2, while Juniper QFabric is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco FabricPath writes "Makes multi-layer networking easy and increases network efficiency". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper QFabric writes "Performs well, is easy to set up, and the vendor maintains the product well". Cisco FabricPath is most compared with Cisco Nexus and Arista Campus LAN Switches, whereas Juniper QFabric is most compared with Cisco Nexus. See our Cisco FabricPath vs. Juniper QFabric report.
See our list of best LAN Switching vendors.
We monitor all LAN Switching 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.
