It is scalable, but it is not an area that I work with.

There are more than 1,500 domains protected on the WAF, and it's quite scalable.

It is scalable. We can serve data to any number of users. We can serve data from 10,000 to 10 million page users. It is always stable.

It is scalable. When we have big events happening in India such as IPL, G20, or elections, we need to scale up the channels because we get a lot more traffic. We have never faced any issues. From the customers' perspective, we are receiving very good feedback. There is no buffering or other issues with streaming.

I don't think that it is a scalable tool. I can say that it's optimized. I can't comment on whether it is scalable, but I know that a huge amount of data goes through it.

There are a lot of people using the solution in my company. In our company, around ten people use the tool, but globally it has a lot of users.

The tool is scalable. Around 400 people use the solution in our organization.

It is highly scalable. Akamai as a company is using emerging technologies, so it is definitely scalable.

It is quite good. We tested it, and we have seen the scale that it can handle.

The solution has strong scalability. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

Akamai Web Application Protector is a scalable product.

More than 100 people are using the solution in my organization.

Akamai Kona Site Defender is scalable. They offer the most scalability in the marketplace, and there's no problem with scalability.

The scalability is very good. 

Akamai sees one-third of all web traffic. In terms of scalability, it can be scaled to any size you want.

I am confident that it can handle all of your traffic and then some.

It's being used fairly extensively, any new internet-facing applications are going through Akamai Kona. Whether we extend the usage really depends on whether it's going to meet some of the quality objectives with web application firewalls.

The solution can scale extremely well. That's not a problem at all. If a company would like to expand the solution, it can do so with relative ease.

Being a cloud-based service, it scales up and down as per your needs.

We have between 10 and 20 users, who are engineers and integrators, and we are satisfied with it.

As a software it is very scalable. We don't have a problem with scaling the product or scaling the capabilities. This is more of an enterprise construct, so we provide it as a service which means there are not many users, everything is defined as code. For anything that requires a CDN, we'll use this construct and it will scale according to the enterprise.

From a managed service perspective, improvements can be made when you have to deal with multiple customers/environments.

Single customer environment: You may need to compromise in some features. For example, when deploying very large environments, that have different technologies underneath. (Ten or more sites.)

Multiple teams: There is only one security configuration that can hold several WAF policies and it can be shared among all sites. Each site can have its own site configuration. It can configure different aspects, as compared to the security configuration.