Arbor DDoS is a scalable product. I rate the solution an eight out of ten for scalability.

We don't directly access Arbor DDoS. We are a customer of the solution. Our organization caters to a large customer base of 1,100,000 who utilize our enterprise services. These services are primarily accessed through an internet-based platform. So, DDoS is a very critical solution for us since all our services are internet-facing ones.

The scalability could be improved with a more granular approach. I rate it a six out of ten. 

Scalability is great, at least at the hosting level. Tier-1s may have bigger issues with scalability as far as actual filtering devices go. But they've gone to virtual machines now as well, where they're able to deploy these virtual devices in a way that they couldn't with hardware devices, and at a better cost.

If we can find another use for increasing visibility, we're always glad to help. One of the things that we've found in the past, from security incidents, was that different groups were seeing different issues at different times and nobody knew about it until everybody together came afterwards to discuss the problems or the issues that happened. So we're coordinating with other departments within our organization, not only to provide our feeds, but other feeds from other security tools.

If you do a good job planning and selecting a good Arbor box for your organization, you can scale at a fairly high level. For scalability, I give Arbor a four out of five, with one being unscalable and five being highly scalable.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. Around 50 people use the solution in my company. Also, I don't have plans to increase its usage.

It's quite scalable. It's easy to implement more equipment. I'd rate it a seven out of ten in terms of scalability.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I recommend the solution to businesses that operate medium to large-sized companies.

In terms of scalability, it's also excellent. DDoS attacks are not very scalable, but compared with other tools, in terms of mitigating those non-scalable DDoS attacks, it is better. In that way, Arbor is scalable. It is very effective when it comes to mitigating or dealing with DDoS attacks.

We have four SOCs deployed here, and my SOC has one lakh EPS (event per second) capability. It is a big network and we use the biggest telecom operator in India. We just deal enterprise and telecom traffic.

I am convinced with the kind of scalability Arbor brings in. The Cloud subscription, which is available as one of its features, makes the scalability limitless. This is something which makes Arbor stand out from the others, not only from the perspective of scalability, but also from the overall user experience perspective as well. It is critical to still manage within the limits of the customer and do all the mitigation that is required for them.

The solution is scalable, we have 3,000 users. 

The scalability needs to handle going horizontally, apart from the cloud, rather than replacing boxes.

Initially, the solution was not that mature. It has evolved and scaled better over the years.

Being a service provider on a small island, our environment is small in scale. Our network is small compared to other operators. We have 20 users internally: our NOC, IP team, and commercial team.

Arbor DDoS is scalable, both horizontally and vertically. It has good visibility making things quite obvious. There are some price issues with scalability, but technically speaking, the solution is fully scalable.

It's easily scalable. We could add on routers if we wanted to; we could add on more devices to handle more mitigations, or go to the cloud if necessary. If there was a large scale attack, we'd just use their scrubbing centers versus ours. It's very scalable.

It touches a relatively small part of our overall network: It touches our drain points to the internet. But it affects the entire network, which is quite complex. It's protecting our entire network. As our network expands, it can expand with us.

It is a scalable product. Its scalability depends on the bandwidth. It manages around 50,000 internet banking customers.

The product is scalable. I rate its stability a ten out of ten.

Because it is on-premise, it has limited capability. That's why in six months, we would like to move to the cloud. Moving to the cloud will also enable us to prevent biometric attacks. It will make it easier for us to protect all the throughput traffic.

Our client is a medium-sized company in Bolivia with around 3,000 employees.

If the network is expanding, of course, we would expect to need to add more equipment. We would need to expand our solution.

We had two customers from the government which came in, and they are super-important. Their services cannot go down. We had another solution from Arbor called Pravail. We had that installed for those two customers specifically. Their expected traffic is almost 8 MB, and their throughput is 12 MB. Any noise or malformed packets or out-of-sequence packets get filtered by the Pravail Solution. The bigger attacks will be handled by the TMS, the Threat Mitigation System.

Scalability is not a problem for Arbor.

Provides increased performance, scalability, and availability for Peakflow SP-based managed services.

It enables 25 simultaneous users/API per non-leader device. It scales up to ten PI devices and a maximum of 125 simultaneous logins, deployment-wide.

It is a scalable solution.For the cloud version the scalability is ten out of ten but for the on-premises, it depends on the sizing of the file. The solution is best for medium sized enterprises. All our clients are medium -sized enterprises.

It is quite scalable and effective. You can add new integration services quite easily. 

There are around 60 end users/customers of this solution.

We have not needed to scale the solution.

As I mentioned, we only provide support in the role of technical operators, so the question about plans for increased usage should be directed towards the operator. He is in a position to say whether he has plans to sell more equipment to his customers. While the desire to desire to sell is not at issue, the willingness of people in this country to pay for the security is. 

Arbor DDoS is able to increase your bandwidth. You can scale less than 50 percent, but if you are scaling above 100 percent it will not be flexible. You have to get a bigger appliance, which will be at a discount rate. It is scalability in the technical and commercial sense.

For my environment, there is no need for growing the platform. We currently have about 5,000 endpoints. But from what I've seen, and the way we deployed it, it looks quite scalable.

It's scalable.

The scalability depends on the box but we have never had any issues with that.

It's very scalable. It has a central management platform that manages all appliances, so if you have a few sites, you can scale it to other sites with new devices and you can manage them from the central management platform.

We haven't had any issues with the scalability.

Arbor is good for expansions or forecasts, and helps us as well. Their pre-sales team is very dedicated and focused and they just nominate the POC, who then provides the capability, descriptions and presentations to us.

Both solutions, Arbor Networks SP/TMS and APS, are very scalable.

The important point about Arbor Networks APS is that it is usually deployed inline, so you have to be aware of the number of switch ports available for each model.

Arbor DDoS is scalable.

The scalability is good. Configuration-wise, an administrator could create issues. But the product itself is good.

I have implemented it multiple times in industries like oil and gas, banking, and insurance.

Scalability is pretty good because you have the SP, which is a controller, and you can add TMS's based on your needs.

There's a problem when using Arbor, but it's mostly not related to Arbor itself, it's connected to scaling. What happens is, you will design a deployment and, after some time, you find that the deployment is not enough for the throughput of your network. Then you have CPU spikes, memory spikes, and some other issues.

Unfortunately, these devices are not scalable and we have to upgrade to the next model in order to increase the threat mitigation capabilities.

The scalability is really amazing. That was part of the equation for one particular customer. When they understood how the bandwidth can be shared between different branches of their backbone, that they could really grow by correctly re-routing traffic, they were really happy with the solution.

No issues.

We did not have scalability issues.

Most of our customers are enterprise businesses.

We have not faced any scalability issues since we have a very confined environment.

Its scalability is big. It is for large deployments of big organizations and service providers.

I didn't encounter issues with scalability.