We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Ruckus Cloudpath based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Access Control (NAC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Member Access Control and the ability to integrate all Cisco wireless, Cisco networking, switches, routers, and firewalls."
"It does a good job of establishing trust for each access request, no matter the source. It's also very effective at helping with the distributed network and at securing access."
"The best features are the scalability and the license structure."
"Our clients like Cisco ISE because they already use various Cisco solutions. It's easy for them to use this solution because they have an engineer with Cisco certifications."
"The solution is great for establishing trust for every access request no matter where it comes from."
"It has allowed us to pull in multiple authentication databases, then centralize them into a captive portal system."
"The most valuable features are the NAC and the bundles that are available with Cisco ISE, such as Cisco ACS being integrated."
"Since migrating towards doing wired ports over ISE with 802.1X and MAB authentication, our organization's security risk has been better. We have been able to establish better layouts, so devices can move and we don't have to worry about where they need to go."
"I find the solution to be very rich in features."
"The tool's most valuable features include the phenomenal functionality of DPSK. The ease of use, particularly when it is correctly set up, is remarkably simple. Tracking users is straightforward and dynamic. This allows us to identify where a user might encounter issues within the process."
"The ease of use is great, and the automation wizards can do a lot."
"The solution has good features for authentication, policies, and allowing users to self-provision devices for network access via their logins."
"Ruckus technical support is very good and helpful whenever we need them."
"The solution is easy to use, well designed, robust, and has good traffic capacity."
"An area that could be improved is the agent. The challenge now is that agent and most of the computers have changed. They could think about agent-less deployment."
"I believe that Cisco can improve the way its policies are built because it's a little complex."
"Difficult to figure out the protocols and nodes in order to implement correctly."
"The web interface needs improvement. The new web interface that they have is not as easy to manage and we find it to be very slow."
"There can be a little bit more integration between the controller management and ISE. There are two dashboards, you have the controller dashboards, and you have the ISE dashboard it would is a way to maybe integrate that into one. That would be great. It's not that bad. It would be easier if it could be combined into one dashboard."
"They should improve the documentation. There tends to be a lot of old text, or the new things aren't always up to what's been released on the code, and sometimes the documentation is inconsistent."
"There should be an easier way to do the upgrades. There are a lot of steps to get to the next version from the previous version which ends up being a bit of the headache with the upgrade."
"Deploying to a machine, as opposed to a dedicated appliance, can be a bit difficult."
"The solution could improve by adding more detailed information that customers have available on the dashboards."
"The hardest part we've had to deal with is trying to find some physical product recently as everything is going like hotcakes."
"The tool needs to support multi-vendor environments. Currently, my experience with it has been primarily within Ruckus environments. However, I haven't explored it for multi-vendor scenarios. It would be great to see newer builds that are multi-vendor capable of full integration."
"The scalability could be better."
"The setup process is a bit complex."
"I believe the solution is missing some great features which are present in other solutions like Aruba, UiPath, and Cisco ISE."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 137 reviews while Ruckus Cloudpath is ranked 10th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 6 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Ruckus Cloudpath is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Gives us that extra ability to assist the end user and make sure that we are making them happy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Cloudpath writes "Helps to onboard corporate users based on certificate-based authentication". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas Ruckus Cloudpath is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC and Sophos Network Access Control. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Ruckus Cloudpath report.
See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) 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.