Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform Reviews

We use Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect for three use cases.

We have deployed it in a bank customer for a VPN over the internet for a backup to the MPS. 

We use it for managing satellite microwave and fiber connections with different latencies in the same location.

In a multi-branch enterprise, we used the solution for two links on each site with other links together all aggregated in one network.

The most valuable feature of Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect is the boost.

I have been using Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect for approximately five years.

The stability of Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect is very good and quiet.

Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect is scalable.

I have many clients using Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect but they do not know they are using my service.

The support from Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect has declined since Aruba acquired them. The knowledge and speed of the agents could improve.

I need to transfer units between customers. Most of the issues that I have with the support are with licensing. It is difficult and always takes time.

The initial setup of Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect is straightforward. The full setup of one customer network on the 14 branches took us approximately 48 hours. This includes the installation of hardware, other solutions, and the installation switches on the branches

We used an integrator for the implementation of Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect.

There is an annual license required to use Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect.

As an integrator, I recommend Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect. However, it does depend on the use case.

I rate Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect a nine out of ten.

Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform offers a centralized cloud system to manage routers. 

The tool is easy to configure due to the existing pre-configured templates. It is easy to manage compared to legacy systems, which takes time. We can complete a site within 30 minutes. The tool's best feature is outdoor onboarding. You need to bring the box to the site with the internet. It is a simple plug-and-play. The solution offers a zero-touch procedure. 

Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform needs to improve integrations with other vendors. 

I have been working with the solution for five years. 

The tool's stability is subjective, sometimes not stable 100 percent. Overall, it is stable. 

Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform is stable. They have a range of products, and we can get recommendations from Aruba's support to choose the right product. My company has 40,000 users for the solution. 

Aruba's tech support is fantastic, and they are good at troubleshooting. They are also cooperative. The issue gets resolved faster since they work together in teams. 

The product's installation is straightforward, and the GUI is easy to understand. We can deploy about ten sites within a day. The first step of deployment is information gathering. The next step is to come up with a design. After the design phase, we will preconfigure the tool and send it to the site, after which it is plug-and-play. 

I rate the Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform a nine out of ten. 

Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform is best suited for multiple environments that need better connectivity. You can optimize its bandwidth and give better connectivity in terms of packet losses. 

The tool's most valuable feature is bandwidth optimization. 

I expect automation in the Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform's next release. 

I have been working with the product for one year. 

Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform is stable. 

The tool is scalable. We have customers who have deployed it in over 3,000 locations. There are two customers in my territory. 

We have a dedicated distributor. 

You need experience to do the deployment. It is not complex. We did the deployment within a week. You have to deploy the product in both locations and configure it. 

You can get both yearly and monthly options in licensing. It is not expensive. 

I rate the Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform an eight out of ten. 

We use the Aruba platform for connectivity for our enterprise to run our business operations.

The platform is very user-friendly. It allows clients to manage their network and view bandwidth, application performance, and application bandwidth usage across all locations. The platform's many features made it easy for us to transition from SD-WAN.

There were issues, but now it is improving.

I have been using Aruba for four years.

The product is stable. There were issues related to box management, but it is now stabilized.

The solution is scalable and suitable for enterprise-level business.

We initially faced challenges with the platform in 2018 and 2019. The underlying GNS technology was relatively new and not fully equipped to handle the complexities of our environment. However, the platform has been steadily improving. They have resolved over 50% of the reported bugs, and the platform is becoming more stable and reliable. Initially, we were operating with a single network feed, which presented many challenges.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward, requiring two engineers for onsite and remote each. The deployment typically takes less than an hour. However, installing Cisco ENC devices, such as the 5403 or 5400, can be more challenging and require additional troubleshooting.

The solution is easy to maintain.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We have one of these files servers in each of our branch offices. It hosts our Oracle database, which is replicated from our main site to the DR site.

It also hosts our VMware vSphere solution.

The file and data reduction capabilities are very good. Without it, we have a great deal of network congestion.

The monitoring integration is good. Generally, the compatibility with other products is good.

We would like to have better features for path selection. For example, if we know the network is going to go down then we would like to set up an alternate route for data packets in real-time.

The firewall should be enhanced because the one that is included is very limited in terms of features.

In the organization, Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect has been used for approximately six years.

This is a stable product.

This product has scaled according to our needs. We have approximately 200 users.

The technical support is very good and I am satisfied with it.

We don't speak with the vendor directly. Rather, we deal with a distributor and we have a good relationship with their support team. We can call and reach them at any time.

The pricing for this product is good.

As Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect is nearing end-of-life, our license with it is expiring and we are procuring a new solution.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I worked on some projects in Panama and Mexico. I did a large project in Mexico making equipment with at least 80 to 85 branches. We used Orchestrator and EdgeConnect Service Provider.

First and foremost, it enables the customer to deploy high availability connections. This kind of solution enables them to deploy these HA connections for policies mostly automatically. It's a more automated approach than with other vendors.

In the case of bandwidth, Silver Peak has a feature that enables the appliance to perform with one of the extensions. They have comparisons and notifications that enable the customer to contract fewer bandwidth links. It returns our investment because they have the ability to make a data link. They can push it. They can even eliminate their MPLS links, push it, and download more links, which makes it cheaper.

In terms of the most valuable features, I'd say it is Silver Peak's deployment. It's the main advantage. I think it is easy to understand and deploy their technology because they use a certain technical approach that they call overlays and underlays. With these two principles, they make use of the technological advantage of their platform.

They are also good in their routing feature. They have all the flavors. They work with other flavors for routing. I think they are good in this field.

I like this solution and I work well with it. But they have to implement more security with it. The security, mainly their firewall functions, have to be included in the firewall features.
They have to work on their integration with other vendors, like Versa does, integrating some little appliance inside of the boxes with a firewall feature. I think that they have to work the other way. It's not within their firewall feature.

The only thing I can point to is their lack of security integration.

In terms of stability, the solution is mostly stable. Once you deploy with Silver Peak, you mostly forget the customer because there are almost no support calls. The customer almost never reports any issues or problems once the program is deployed. It's stable and it's easy to manage.

My impressions are that it's good, it's scalable. Most SD-WAN vendors have to be scalable because when they scale the data center the vendor has to have that ability. In this case, when you scale from three to four to five, seven, eight, 10 service provider connections, you have to deploy the solution in an automated way.

In this case, Silver Peak has some approaches. They have integration with other technologies like Cisco, VCCP, PDR, and VRRP. They use some protocols in order to fix the scale issue. This applies to all SD-WAN vendors. They all have the same issues when talking about the scale.

They have very good technical support.

I know they are growing in the Latin American market but when I was working with them, they were lacking local support or at least the support that can manage cases in the region, taking into account that most customers have some problems the language.

In this case, Cisco has local support teams in the region, they have a good tech center in Costa Rica, and they have tech centers in South America, too. The same with Fortinet. Fortinet and Cisco are well-positioned here.

Silver Peak has a good approach to Cloud managed solutions. They do lack some integration in the security field because the EdgeConnect devices have invalid basic firewall features. But in this case, I understand Versa has a more integrated solution that includes security with the detection and so on.

I know that Fortinet and Cisco Meraki have firewalls integrated into their SD-WAN devices. I can say that Silver Peak is struggling with this feature. But in the SD-WAN feature itself, I think that Silver Peak is the easiest to use, to deploy, and to manage. There are only two basic components, including their Orchestrator, which is their brain, their main connection point.

Silver Peak's devices, compared to Cisco Meraki, are the most practical to use and deploy and have less interface. I work in two or three parameters with financial customers, mostly banks. They use Silver Peak for interconnecting their banks with the main location and integrating their many Service Provider links into one single box.

It's easy to deploy and easy to manage. They have fewer elements than all the other vendors. They have only two elements, their dashboard, and their appliance.

As an example, with the last five last branches, it was implemented in two days.

Implementation depends on a per-client basis. In Latin America, I can tell you that most networks have mixed topologies and they have mixed vendors in their network. They have mixed policies and no customer is able to talk to another. They have some misunderstandings between customers even in the same country. So when it comes to deploying SD-WAN policies in Latin America, they have to work hard in the design because this design will facilitate the deployment. In most SD-WAN projects, the bulk of the work is in the design part. The key is the design.

Because of this, I became involved with the designing. 

Unity EdgeConnect is very simple. They have an appliance for all budgets and prices. I think that they are very competitive in their pricing. I compared their price with others and it was well-positioned.

They have very understandable price points. Their pricing is per manage group. If you want to deploy another specific solution, like cloud-managed, then you have to have some other licenses that you can apply which are also very understandable and simple.

Our clients do indeed see a return on their investment with Silver Peak.

I know all this from my searching among other vendors. Cisco is the most complex - they have many elements involved. Cisco Meraki is basically simple. It's super, but they have some features that they are working with right now. They have some limitations, too. I think Fortinet has some limitations, too, mostly in the way they work with the high availability and the packet server connections.

My main advice regarding the SD-WAN product is to do research the customer's topology well. A good understanding of the customer's policies and the customer's implemented technologies, their topology, is important. It is important that they have a good design because the design is the key to success in this kind of space.

It is same when we were working with WAN optimization. You have to do good research before implementing a product. The key is still the same.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate them at eight. 

What I learned from working with them was that their approach is to simplify the deployment and their overall solution. By eliminating many elements from the equation, you have a better understanding of the solution and then a better managed solution.

The most valuable features of Silver Peak VX are we can register our customers and they can receive free training and all the solutions features.

There are some functional limitations that could improve.

I have been using Silver Peak VX for approximately six years.

The license could improve for Silver Peak VX.

I am satisfied with the solution overall.

I rate Silver Peak VX an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is as a WAN accelerator.

This solution has many great features, including:

• I really love the auto-tunnel creation feature.  
• The deployment modes that it has allows it to fit into any architecture, whether it be a Layer 2 environment, or a Layer 3 environment, or support for BGP, etc.
• It allows me to set QoS policies and then route policies.

Overall, what I find most valuable are its flexibility and deployment.

I would like to see better documentation for the integration of STDP traffic acceleration. That's one of the major things that people do not have good documentation for, and do not know how to deploy. Maybe a feature deployment guide is something that they can create.

More specific knowledge base articles would be of benefit. They have a CLI guide, but it does not come handily when it is time to deploy.

When it comes to features, there is no documentation that lists the details concerning them. They need to create a feature guide. For example, if somebody wants to know if a feature is supported, or what the benefits of it are, or what the loopholes are that they should be aware of, there is no documentation for that.

Reporting is something that they can improve on. Specifically, I would like a bandwidth monitoring tool. They have brilliant graphs that show bandwidth savings, but I would like to see it on a per-application basis.

Another thing that I find is that many people do not know about this solution. It should be marketed better so that people are more aware of it.

Four years.

The stability of this solution is quite good. If you have a standard deployment with typical policies in place, and no custom applications, then you may not need to look at it for a couple of years. Once the deployment is done, you will yield the benefit.

Sometimes there are problems with very customized deployment modes, where the system traffic will cause problems and you have to reboot it every two or three months. It generally depends on what applications are being run in the environment.

Specific applications can also be discussed with the technical support team, and they may find a way to identify these issues and resolve them permanently.

In-house applications can sometimes cause problems, but for known protocols, there is no issue.

I don't think that scalability is a problem. If you have higher traffic then give it more CPU power, bandwidth, and RAM, and it should work fine.

Every device, regardless of vendor, has its limitations. However, as a generic case, it is perfectly scalable.

Technical support is awesome, and transparency is there.

If there is a feature that is not there, they will help you to create a workaround. They will give you access to the device and let you play with it. They will not say that they cannot do it, as some other vendors might say. When this happens, they will raise an FR (Feature Request) and will see what can be done. After a couple of months, or perhaps even years, the feature may be implemented. In the meantime, you have a workaround if it is possible. They sometimes come by the office and explain that the feature cannot be implemented directly, but will then assist you with the workaround.

The initial setup and deployment are quite simple. You can just log in to the device and it will guide you. It will give you a deployment page, you can get your IPs, click Ok, and you're done. You don't need to invest much time. The deployment guide is there if you need it.

We assist our customers with the implementation of this solution.

When it comes to buying a WAN accelerator, the number one thing that you save is bandwidth. This is one data point that you should look for when you are doing your POC. If you are not saving bandwidth then it makes no sense to deploy.

If you are saving on bandwidth then the next thing to compare is the application latency. Previously, an application may have been working fine, but problems may occur, such as a slow UI, because certain things are not being passed or fully processed. So, it is important to make sure that all of the applications are still functioning correctly. Then, finally, look to see that the application performance has improved.

For ROI, it isn't that money is directly returned to you. Rather, it is realized in the savings for using a lower bandwidth, or in not having to upgrade your bandwidth with your provider. As a second point, your application's performance will improve over a period of time.

You have to negotiate when it comes to pricing and licensing.

I do not think that the solution is costly, as it is still cheaper than its competitors.

It also depends on the relationship that you have with the vendor, being a standard user versus being in a partner-level program. Your benefits will vary.

For people who are considering this solution, I would suggest doing a POC first to see if it fits. If it works in your environment then you will get a good product at a cheaper rate.

The first thing to look for is the benefit that it gives. Once you see that, then the next thing is to ensure that it does not impact the people who are trying to use it. You need an architect to design your WAN acceleration, because if something goes wrong then it can cause problems in the entire network.

This solution is not perfect because the reporting can be improved. It is still possible to obtain the data and do the analytics using a custom tool, but this is why I am taking one point off.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.