If a company is considering Cisco DNA Center, it's important to have competent engineers who understand the technology and have experience working with Cisco networking solutions. They should also be familiar with Cisco's vision and direction in piloting technology. However, companies that have engineers specializing in other solutions like Palo Alto Networks, Juniper Networks, or Aruba Networks may have a different approach and may find it challenging to implement Cisco DNA Center without additional study or external consultants, which can lead to extra costs.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. The reason I gave it a nine is because Cisco revised its certifications after 2018 when networking changed the way companies connect and design their networks. From a design perspective, everything changed with the evolution of SD-WAN (Software-Defined Wide Area Network) and software-defined access. So, bringing in a solution like Cisco DNA Center at the heart of an enterprise, especially at the data center, is significant. Our data center is essentially the same as an optical data center for this solution. So, running Cisco DNA Center at the data center and across the enterprise gives complete control because it works alongside Cisco I. It means the network engineer has the ability to implement and control all devices across the enterprise, whether it's a mobile user, desktop computer, server, router, switch, or any other device in any branch or location. Full control over these devices is possible. Furthermore, Cisco DNA Center, working alongside I, enhances security by providing user access to specific resources and offers a new approach to setting up and securing enterprise networks. It brings improvements in security, scalability, and performance.

Cisco DNA Center is pretty much a complete product.

I won't recommend Cisco DNA Center to anyone, and I would rather suggest that they use Aruba.

Cisco offers good products, and I believe they have the most solid products in the market.

I rate the overall solution somewhere between eight and nine out of ten.

The choice of the solution depends on the organization's size, network complexity, and whether they have its own maintenance or operational department. Organizations can opt to outsource to Cisco partners, but this decision relies on their specific needs. It's crucial to determine whether to keep network knowledge in-house or rely on external expertise. Skill versions and portfolio updates should be approached cautiously, considering customer requirements and the timing of upgrades to avoid disrupting operations. I would rate it eight out of ten.

We did not have any user experience issues. I don't highly recommend the tool. Organizations with expert Cisco engineers can use the product. It's not suitable for organizations that don't have any expertise. Overall, I would rate the solution a six out of ten.

I am using the latest version of Cisco DNA Center.

We have two engineers for the solution's implementation. We have four dedicated engineers for monitoring Cisco DNA Center, going through the dashboard, and updating the customers.

Overall, I rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten.

I would rate it a seven out of ten because it is functional, and you can do a lot with it, but you really have to know it. So, I'm going to knock them down a few points because they don't have a good training plan.

I rate the product a nine out of ten. 

Overall, I rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten.

We have one network engineer for the maintenance of the solution.

My advice to others is for them to make sure their building diagram are to scale

I rate Cisco DNA Center a seven out of ten.

I have hands-on experience with Cisco DNA Center.

I've worked on three projects using Cisco DNA Center, either a single standby or three-cluster node. Whenever there's a large-scale network, my company tries to go with Cisco DNA Center. As a whole, my company has between ten to fifteen projects utilizing Cisco DNA Center. Whoever wants a network upgrade would use Cisco DNA Center, but there'd be different setups for every region, such as APAC, EMEA, etc. Currently, my company has nine clusters or nine boxes. A single company can have multiple projects that use Cisco DNA Center. Because it's an evolving networking technology, people get accustomed to it and may want SD access, not just LAN.

My advice to others who may want to implement Cisco DNA Center is that before buying a product, you need to understand what it can do and how to handle it. A typical engineer working on a legacy network won't be able to work on Cisco DNA Center because it has a different protocol, technology, and configuration. It would be best if you learned how to handle Cisco DNA Center before going with it, so I suggest getting trained by Cisco first. Without the training, using Cisco DNA Center isn't going to be easy for you. You won't know how to integrate a switch with Cisco DNA Center unless you get the training. Through the training, you'll also learn the protocols. Before making the purchase, you need someone to explain Cisco DNA Center to you.

I would rate Cisco DNA Center as seven out of ten. It's a new technology with Software-Defined Access capability, which allows centralized LAN management, so I prefer Cisco DNA Center over other solutions. Cisco DNA Center still requires a lot of improvements, though, so I deducted three points out of ten.

I'm a customer of Cisco DNA Center.

I would tell potential users not to buy Cisco DNA Center as it's a considerable expense that isn't worthwhile.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco DNA Center a seven.

We are partners with Cisco. People wanting to use the product must compare it with other tools and choose accordingly. Overall, I rate the product a six out of ten.

The solution works best in an API environment than in a traditional network. I rate it nine out of ten.

My advice is to categorize before implementing the DNA cluster. If the architecture is not good enough, you might face some issues with the transceiver. It might not be compatible with other solutions.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Cisco DNA Center is deployed on-premises. There is a link for the cloud because you need to have internet connection, but the data stays on-premises.

The advice I would give to other people who want to use Cisco DNA Center is to go for it, particularly if they have Cisco infrastructure, though these days it's really hard to do that because integration could be an issue. If they have other Cisco products they use in their infrastructure, it'll be a plus, so they should use Cisco DNA Center.

I'm rating Cisco DNA Center eight out of ten.

I rate the product a six out of ten. 

We are a system integrator and we are providing network automation solutions and services to our customers. 

Overall, I would rate the solution at a six out of ten. It's quite good, however, it's not ideal for smaller organizations as it's cost-prohibitive.

This solution is best for customers who are end-to-end, Cisco customers. For the customers who have a heterogeneous environment where security comes from let's say CrowdStrike or Palo Alto or Ruckus we would suggest that a customer goes with Ansible. Cisco has limitations in terms of integration and automation when working with solutions outside the Cisco family. Some sort of API interface has to be available. 

Cisco should invest some resources to educate the users about the product. Overall, I rate the solution a six and a half out of ten.

Cisco DNA Center is a good product. There could be more features added to the dashboard. Overall, I rate it a ten out of ten.

I rate DNA Center seven out of 10, but it's not accessible to all companies who would benefit from the solution.

We are happy with this solution; we cannot design data center switches without Cisco DNA.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco DNA Center at nine.

My company uses Cisco DNA Center.

I'd tell anyone planning to use Cisco DNA Center to use it, especially when you have Cisco products or devices, such as wireless, security, and voice. Cisco DNA Center is the best product for  network monitoring and management. You can use Cisco Prime, but I prefer Cisco DNA Center because the visibility available there. You can see almost all information on a single page of the dashboard. If you have a Cisco environment, it's best to go for Cisco DNA Center.

I would give Cisco DNA Center an eight out of ten overall.

It is a good product. It does a good job. I can't think of any specific technical challenges we've had. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

People should keep an eye on the Cisco DNA Center software, which is becoming more accessible. This software is not confined to a single device due to its large size and high cost. Some customers can utilize multiple sources or partner sources and can use virtual or software clients to install it on their network. This ensures certified features on the platform.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Cisco DNA does not have a Cloud solution. It's an on-premises appliance.

They may stand up if they bring in another heritage. They may have some heritage or legacy sites that they may bring over to the new network.

We are multi-national. Our organization is based in London, New York, and Sydney. Our clients are all multi-national global clients.

We do have some regional clients as well, but we are well-positioned to serve multi-nationals across three regions.

My advice is to read the release notes thoroughly. Understand how to deploy, in a single or three-node cluster. Most importantly be aware of release notes and read the documentation.

Do your homework, read the manual, it's there for a reason.

Be patient when standing up a new fabric site. Don't do too many tasks at one time.

The biggest lesson that I have learned is to be patient. When you have a series of tasks that you need to do, don't initiate too many at one time, initiate three or four, allow those to finish, and then continue on.

From when I first started working with DNA, it's come a very long way.

From a programmability standpoint, it really is quite solid. I really like the LAN automation capabilities.

In terms of software-defined networking, I think it's an outstanding product. I would rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten.

Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

My advice for anyone who is looking into implementing this solution is to start with Cisco Assurance and do the mapping of the network. I would suggest asking for help from the partners to help with the installation. You can do it on your own but you will easily save the money that you spend on the consultants because they are experts. You will not waste time getting it up and running, and you will be back on track quickly.

This is a good solution but nothing is perfect. That said, they are ahead of the other vendors. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

There is some room for improvement so I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

The Cisco Digital Network Architecture is the first solution with these types of capabilities that I have used. It allows me to monitor everything in the network, including end-to-end packet travel and tracking the specific packets.

This solution is really stable and scalable.

My advice for anybody who is considering this solution is to consider the size of the environment. If there are a very large number of switches or visitor access points then I recommend DNA. However, if there are a small number of switches and access points then I would recommend the Cisco Meraki because it is fine for small and medium-sized networks.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from working with this solution is that this technology is much easier now. I think it's a revolution in networking and wireless communication where it is becoming easier and nothing like traditional networking. It is now an overlay and an underlay network. All of the people working in this field have to be up to date with the technology. It is very new and there are many capabilities when it comes to network control, analytics, and security compliance. IT people have to adapt to new technologies.

I have not yet tested the IoT for our smart building because we don't use it in our current location.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

If you plan to implement, I suggest you follow the guide step by step and do not proceed on your own, else you'll face a lot of problems and you'll need lots of support from Cisco TAC.

My advice to others is if you are a large enough company to have the Cisco DNA Center technology, you must try it. It may be useless for small enterprises, but for the large enterprise, for multi-site organization, it's impressive and it saves a lot of money and time.   

I rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten.

I rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten. 

Cisco DNA Center is something that I recommend. We do not sell just the product, but rather, the entire DNA solution. We don't just upgrade a switch. Instead, we upgrade the entire network. DNA is definitely good for the customer.

Overall, this is a good solution but it has been a few years since it has been updated.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would rate Cisco DNA Center a seven out of ten.