For me, there is room for improvement in costs. Affordability is a problem because it's created for large enterprises only. So, some customers, even if their engineers want the solution, might have problems with budget limitations.

The user interface is quite user-friendly, but what I would like is to have a small information pointer available somewhere. It could be a plus feature that I want to implement. When I hover my mouse over the user interface, it should provide a brief explanation. It would be helpful to have it incorporated into the UI.

So, in summary, when I hover over the small "i," it should display relevant information about the feature or functionality I want to implement.

Currently, from a technological perspective, I don't have any limitations. However, I have my own limitations in terms of affordability and cost.

Price is an area with certain shortcomings in the solution that needs improvement.

The technical support team of Cisco needs to improve the support they provide to users of their products.

The weaknesses primarily involve pricing and the ongoing need for increased bandwidth and data throughput. These aspects are interconnected with the lifecycle management of the network. Security is also a concern, even though is somewhat implemented. There are no specific requirements except for user-friendly dashboards, but the definition of "user-friendly" can vary from person to person, making it challenging to define a universal standard.

The product has many features that do not work properly. We can’t work on basic DNA activities. The tool has very complex features. It's not stable, and it's not fully estimated.

The solution’s security side could be improved.

It's a very hard software to learn. It's very deep, and when we first got it, there wasn't a whole lot of documentation on it. There's more now, but you really have to know what you're doing to use it to its full functionality.

It seems to be a little bit more centered toward wireless than wired. You've got more options you can do wirelessly than you can with the wired switches, but it works for what we need it to do. We would like to see a little bit more about the traffic, and we're looking at what's out there to see about that. We are looking at something that might give us a bit more insight into the actual traffic. If they had the full functionality on the wired side, as they do on the wireless side in terms of being able to view traffic and everything, it would be good.

The configuration jobs part could be better. Basically, it's very easy to make mistakes when you're writing the little config file that you need to push in. You've got to do it exactly right. It's not based on CLI commands or whatever. It's got its own little format syntax. It needs to be synced up NTP-wise and time-wise. Otherwise, it doesn't work. I've had other management software where the time could have been off on both of them, and it wouldn't have been a big deal. 

I would like to see them make it like the old CiscoWorks did where when you wanted to run a command, you could just type in the command on your command line on the switch, instead of having to jump through the hoop to get the config pushed out to the new devices. I'd like Cisco to give more control to people who are using it and not keep it for themselves. It's one of those things where you've got to have the right image, and they all have to be on that image, or it doesn't work. NTP has to be synced up. There are a lot of little issues there to get it to work. When we first got it three years ago, there wasn't that much documentation, and we were sometimes just fumbling around in the dark. They've gotten better on the documentation, but they have a tendency to make it a little more complicated because they want you to have them do it, not do it yourself. It looks like that's where they're going with this software over the years. I've been doing this for 22 years, and it looks like they're trying to take the control away from the end-users and take it back for themselves. I've seen the younger generations coming out, and they don't seem to want to learn the switching and routing at the depth they need to in order to become a third-tier engineer. So, personally, I understand why they're doing it, but I'd like to have more control on my end. While I would like to have more control, there are people who work for me who I wouldn't want to have that control.

They don't have a good training plan. We had a guy who walked us through it and other things, but he was searching. We've had it since earlier on, and he was searching for stuff just like I would've been doing. He didn't know that well. So, they need a little bit better training plan or something on the initial buy to get people to realize exactly how everything works, how it's all tied together, and what you can do with it. I've learned a lot of stuff that this guy didn't show us. There are ways to do things, but he never showed those to us. He just showed us how to set it up and not how to monitor a bunch of stuff or push the configs out.

The tool's deployment is complex. It also needs to improve its GUI. 

As a user, it would be good if I could plug in controllers, suites, and devices from other vendors to Cisco DNA Center. Users could use the intelligence in Cisco DNA Center for the entire environment.

The features of Cisco DNA Center and Cisco Prime could have more parity.

In a future release, there should be more deployment features.

An area for improvement in Cisco DNA Center is the latency in data correlation. For example, sometimes, when an issue happens, and I check the logs, I can't find the corresponding log. There's a delay in log replication, so this is what needs improvement in Cisco DNA Center.

Reporting in Cisco DNA Center could also be improved because it only has a few templates, and you can't customize it based on your requirements. There aren't many options available in Cisco DNA Center regarding reporting, versus Cisco Prime, which has excellent features for different levels of detailed reports.

I'd like to see real-time data replication in the next release of Cisco DNA Center, similar to what's done in Meraki. Data in Meraki is real-time with no delay, so data is immediately replicated in the cloud. Currently, there's a lag in Cisco DNA Center, and addressing that lag is the enhancement I'd like to see in Cisco DNA Center.

The solution also needs to be more user-friendly.

Technical support could be better. The price could be better, and it could be more stable.

The product doesn’t have good monitoring capabilities. It should be improved. The data has a lot of inconsistencies. We cannot trust it or rely on it. The solution has a lot of bugs in assurance and provisioning. Sometimes, in the inventory, the devices are out of sync. The AI features are very basic.

The solution's integration feature needs improvement. It could be integrated more and more into the traditional environments.

They can improve the network visibility. Licensing and its maintenance are also needed.

We are trying to reduce the company's and employees' assets and give it extra features. We are also separating the wireless SSI test network and trying to manage all the company properties through it.

In terms of areas for improvement in Cisco DNA Center, we don't use the product on 80% to 100% of its capacity, because our infrastructure is a small one. For us, it's enough. We have report capabilities, and other capabilities that we need are configured on the solution. If there is an expansion for any Cisco solution, we can integrate it with Cisco DNA Center, for example: with ISE, so we're fine.

What could be improved is the licensing cost of Cisco DNA Center. It's a little bit expensive.

Cisco DNA Center should improve its configuration management. It is better to have a dev version before pushing it. 

The architecture should not be limited only to the USXC as a platform. Let's say if I'm referring to the Catalyst 1000 Series or an MB Series of an SG or FX. Due to the fact that there are mid-market and commercial customers who are using such kinds of product lines apart from the Catalyst 9000 or Cisco UCS architecture, they should all come under a single pane of glass. Any new product should be added right from Cisco itself.

The network automation should not be limited only to Cisco, as there may be customers who are using Palo Alto firewalls, or they might be using Ruckus for wireless. There has to be some sort of integration with a third party. 

The integration of Cisco DNA with a couple of leading CRMs or ticketing solutions would be ideal. 

The solution can be quite pricey.

The solution needs to improve the dashboard. The dashboard is very difficult to understand for someone using it for the first time. We took around two months to connect our environment to Cisco.

They should include UTM features in the product. 

There are some software problems from version to version. It takes a long time for DNA Center to recognize the video and control access devices.

Cisco could improve the security side of their solutions.

I don't have any areas for improvement regarding Cisco DNA Center that I can share now. However, what I want to see in Cisco DNA Center and Cisco Prime in the future is more support for other platforms so that you can manage third-party products, such as Fortinet. If you can other non-cisco devices on Cisco DNA Center, that would be beneficial, especially to LAN environments here in the UAE with multiple vendors. For example, through ICMP, it can be a minimal management level to manage the availability.

Cisco DNA Center can do some pinging to check whether a device is online, and it should be able to show you that this is a Fortinet device and it's a firewall, for example. The tool should show you some information about the product or device type. A feature like this is available in many other monitoring solutions like DNA centers.

There should be an option for automation of template deployment by using the stored data. It is not easy to save configuration information for lots of devices without using other tools. There should be a tighter, better repository of information that can be merged with the templates.

Cisco DNA Center is costly for Ukrainian customers. The functionality and connections are excellent. If the price decreases, it should become more accessible.

When it comes to deploying wireless fields, integrating defaults into the DNS interface can be challenging.

We encountered issues with their response times, which had a big impact on our workflow.

The pricing of this solution could be improved.

There is a limitation with the number of VRFs that you can have in your network, and this has caused us problems with some customers.

This solution does not support IP version 6.

I would like to see better integration with Cisco Meraki.

I'd like to see them focus more on the digital side of things. 

The network, data center, and SD-WAN are all being treated as different services, but I would like to have only one solution to manage all of them. Data is traveling from the inside to the outside layer, and I want to be able to fully control all of the data going in and out. It should not be set up as multi-service, but rather a single one.

If you have old Cisco hardware such as switches or access points, or they are from another vendor, then they will not work with this solution. The hardware will still function but you will not be able to control it with DNA.

Better compatibility with third parties and to other Cisco products because if versions are not perfectly matching requirements, it gives a lot of problems.

With their provisioning status, if there's a failure in provisioning or in some type of task that DNA is trying to push out to a switch or whatever device, sometimes the task status errors or the provision errors are a little bit big. 

I think they could provide a little more detail to someone when a task fails. It's an error code that tells you that this task has failed, but it doesn't get too deep into why it failed. The task failure reporting or provisioning failure reporting could be a little bit better in the UI, with more information given to the user.

From the CLI you can get much more information from MagLevs.

Also, the UI could use a little bit of improvement. I know that things have gotten a lot better in version 2, but I haven't worked with version 2 yet.

A feature that I would like to have seen is the true debt disaster recovery, which is now available in the 2.2.1 version.

More detailed information would be helpful, but you can get that information from the CLI but not everyone is comfortable working in the Linux shell.

The tool's IoT integration should be better. 

We have had a lot of problems with the Cisco switches and have needed to upgrade the operating systems, which means that we have to upgrade the DNA. When we upgrade the DNA it means that we have to upgrade the ISE, also. If it is a large cluster then this process is painful.

DNA Center has been on the market for a few years and they need to update it.

It would be helpful if it could be integrated with a variety of solutions, such as Meraki.

Cisco does not support other OEMs for analytics software integration.

Integration with analytic tools and API integrations would be ideal.