We performed a comparison between Perimeter 81 and SonicWall Netextender based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"The solution has good performance."
"Scaling Perimeter 81 was easy to do."
"The setup is really easy...I rate the support team a ten out of ten."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It has provided a seamless gateway to much-needed platforms."
"Our operators can work from home without any problems."
"Providing access and security allows our company employees to work from home and remotely."
"Distributing the agent was very simple, allowing us to enforce security posture on our devices (i.e. S1, Disk-encryption, etc.)."
"The benefits are really built into the underlying protocol, however, Perimeter81 makes these available in a user-friendly way."
"It allows us to work remotely."
"The most valuable feature for the Netextender is the ease with which we can integrate it with SAML."
"The product has two-factor authentication."
"My company opted for this solution because it can individually perform. Basically, we don't require load balancers and all those additional feature sets or additional devices that might be required. The solution can handle the certificate, DNS queries, and all that stuff individually."
"The solution provides high availability."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"NetExtender works very well. I never had an issue with it, and it has been working well for me. In terms of management, you have good control over the destination. You can use NetExtender to set the policy and the static route for a client. You can modify it based on what your client needs or can access. You have good control over routing."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"It would be nice to have a notification sound when Perimeter81 disconnects, as I sometimes don't notice when the icon shows that it's disconnected, and I end up wasting time waiting for my browser to load a page that shows an error, usually error 404."
"I don't know if it is technically feasible, however, if the Desktop App could be used as a Web App or a Chrome Extension it would be very nice."
"One of our challenges is ensuring the security of our cloud-based operations."
"In order to have to bypass the login using the website, a good feature for Perimeter 81 to have is a login instance in the Perimeter 81 application. I'm using a Mac and we don't have that functionality."
"The platform still lacks relevant dashboards and the ability to customize them based on our needs."
"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
"I would suggest adding more networking and security features that allow more customization within their platform."
"Currently, I am not able to define a different country or location, which can result in negative experiences as the tool is being recognized by websites and this can make it difficult to access them or force me to disable the program temporarily."
"There must be a multi-factor authentication enabled or integrated by default with it in order to be integrated with NetExtender."
"SonicWall can be difficult for some people, but I don't find it difficult. Some companies provide a VPN client for free, but you have to pay for NetExtender."
"Right now, you have to load each license on to an appliance. You can't pool across multiple appliances. So, you end up having to do a lot of administrative work to recover if an internet provider goes down, and you cannot leverage it as easily into a DR solution."
"The Netextender application itself doesn't really look pretty, however, we can still use it. We don't care what it looks like. That said, if they did a cosmetic update, that would be fine."
"The initial setup of SonicWall Netextender is straightforward. The only issue we encountered was with relocating the VPN appliance. If we needed to move it from an on-premise to an on-cloud architecture, we had to start over and redeploy it from scratch. Unfortunately, it is not portable and any changes to its physical location often result in the need for a fresh deployment to ensure everything functions properly."
"The UI could be a little better."
"They need to rewrite the software to make it a usable product."
"The only concern I do have is with the zero trust, and the solution is not coping with the newer technologies as much as it needs to do on that particular factor."
Perimeter 81 is ranked 8th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 22 reviews while SonicWall Netextender is ranked 14th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 11 reviews. Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2, while SonicWall Netextender is rated 6.0. The top reviewer of Perimeter 81 writes "Great SAML and SCIM support with the ability to deploy site-2-site tunnels with specific IP restrictions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall Netextender writes "An affordable and stable solution that is easy to use and provides two-factor authentication". Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cloudflare Access and Tailscale, whereas SonicWall Netextender is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, SonicWall Mobile Connect, SonicWall Connect Tunnel, Fortinet FortiClient and Citrix Gateway. See our Perimeter 81 vs. SonicWall Netextender report.
See our list of best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.
