What is our primary use case?
Our primary use for Ixia BreakingPoint is stress testing. We are curently evaluating SDWAN solution. Ixia BP generate traffic and is simulating around 200 users.
We didn't want to hire hundreds of people to simulate user web access. ;-)
We bought the BreakingPoint to take care of it.
How has it helped my organization?
Ixia BreakingPoint has not improved the way our organization functions. It addressed one of our main concerns which was to generate realistic web user traffic in the scope of our specific use case.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable feature is Layer 7 traffic generation such as Facebook, Netflix, WhatsApp...
What needs improvement?
The quality of the traffic generation could be improved, to get closer to being accurate in what a real user would do.
There are some slight things to improve such as SNI (Server Name Indication) in traffic generator: the behaviors of the generated applications is not 100% accurate. We are working closely with the lab and with their support team to improve these features.
When we are simulating a user that goes on Netflix, we want to make sure that we will see the traffic of this specific user generated by BreakingPoint. The DPI should see Netflix 100% of the time. Today the accuracy of the traffic generator is not 100% stable.
For how long have I used the solution?
We have been using Ixia since December 2018.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Ixia BreakingPoint is pretty stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Ixia BreakingPoint is a lab product. There is no point to increase usage or going to scale with such product.
How are customer service and technical support?
Our experience with Ixia customer service has gone pretty well so far. We have dedicated support directly from Ixia. We have professional services that were part of the bundle when we bought the product. So far, so good.
If you previously used a different solution, which one did you use and why did you switch?
We bought Spirent CyberFlood. We are currently using both products.
We did not switch, we just bought both of them.
How was the initial setup?
We have the two main solutions on the market: Spirent CyberFlood. Ixia BreakingPoint is the other product. By comparison, the Spirent product was much simpler to handle and to deploy.
It took one or two days at the max to setup Ixia BreakingPoint.
What about the implementation team?
Our entire implementation took one day or two. We did it ourselves. We spoke directly with Ixia for the implementation. No reseller involved.
What was our ROI?
There is no return on investment in our case because there is no ROI whatsoever in the project. The idea is to deliver a technological demonstrator.
Stress test is a small portion of the project.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The license cost of the product is something like €10K a year. For three years, we would pay between €30-40K estimated.
This is a ROM and pricing is calculated per uses case basis.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
At first we bought Spirent CyberFlood. We quickly came to the conclusion that Spirent had some problems, with our specific setup, and decided to contact Ixia to evaluate their solution.
We are not 100% happy with any of these products.
What other advice do I have?
Make sure that you can heavily test the product before purchasing.
Testing will tell you if it works as expected with your lab setup.
The breaking point UI is little bit fuzzy compare to the Spirent Cyberflood.
On a scale of 1-10, I would rate this product a 7.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.