It offers good stability, we never faced any issue.

I purchased two gateways, one as a backup, but I have never had to use it. Cisco Secure Email is stable.

It's extremely stable. It hasn't gone down on us since we've had it. They made a major move, moving their appliances out of the AWS cloud into Cisco's cloud. They notified us they were moving and we talked about it. We really didn't have to do much of anything, and there was no downtime at all when that happened.

We do have two security appliances in the cloud, so if one went down, the other would pick up. There is redundancy at the hardware level, but we've never gone down.

The stability depends on the volume of the workload.

Cisco Secure Email is stable. 

We really haven't seen any issues on the stability side of it being cloud-based. We also have three virtual hosts that run in our environment. in the event that we lose one, there are two others. We have never seen any issues with the environment, which Cisco proactively monitors. They'll come back to us and indicate if there are any hardware performance issues and schedule appropriate restarts to appliances, if required. This happens occasionally. 

Given a lot of people target hospitals, we tend to be attacked more than other corporations because there are health records, health information, financial information, and research information. Cisco Secure Email Cloud Gateway and some other products have definitely allowed us not to have the downtime that we may have had if our previous products and solutions were in place. As far as I'm aware, we haven't had any downtime since we put in Cisco Secure Email Cloud Gateway and Umbrella several years ago, which has been fantastic. 

We have our security analyst who gets feeds out of Cisco Secure Email Cloud Gateway into our other products. We also get feeds into AMP for Endpoints, so we see what happens because we have our Cisco Secure Email Cloud Gateway integrated with AMP for Endpoints. That goes into our Threat Grid and Threat Response. 

Our server team might get queries about messages that might have been quarantined or someone having trouble receiving external emails. That's usually where a domain might be rated above our parameters and gets blocked. With something like 3,000 mailboxes, we spend at most an hour a day checking on the Cisco Secure Email Cloud Gateway environment. 

Performance is actually very good. I have deployed around 10 to 15 instances of this solution, and so far, I haven't encountered any major issues. As of now, it's a good product.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

When most software evolves, the software becomes more stable and feature-rich. As we're seeing with the latest version from seven onwards, it's a lot more resilient and a lot more robust. The actual GUI interface is also a lot slicker now, whereas before it was a little bit clunky. We've definitely seen improvements with the latest version of Secure Firewall.

I would say that we hardly had any issues with the stability of this solution.

The product is stable. We never had issues. If everything is configured right, it's something you can easily forget about.

It does not add anything to the potential downtime for a corporation, unless everything fails. If all your email exchanges fail, then you don't have email, but this solution does not affect the performance of your whole network. 

At the minimum, you need two devices. If you have two devices and one fails, then the other one can handle the work, though you might have some email delays.

You should keep track of what is going on. It does need some daily administration, fixes, and policy changes.

It's very stable. We haven't had any issues with the stability. It hasn't gone down, and it has managed the flow of our email volume really well.

The product is stable. The only challenge is the IPs get easily blacklisted. The IP addresses of IronPort devices easily get blacklisted. Cisco should make items to contact the companies whose IP addresses get blocked. During the configuration of the tool, there should be some provision in the product to indicate which IP addresses are from IronPort devices and not from the server.

The product is stable. There have been no complaints from the customers. Fine-tuning is important, which will come whenever you go live, especially for larger domains where customers have 1,000 or 2,000 email IDs and multiple domains. That is the only challenge where we have to fine-tune the policies. But the product is stable.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

It is very stable. They have AsyncOS, which is the OS that runs on the appliance. They've released different versions. There is a general version, a limited version, etc. They keep coming with more services just to improve the platform. 

We never experienced downtime. We have ESAs, and they are in a cluster. If one ESA fails, there is no downtime. The remaining two can handles email communication and relay. We have high availability and redundancy. So, we don't experience any downtime.

We do ESA health checks with OEM during which they connect with us virtually. They connect to the device and then check if all security features are still well configured and if there is any other way to improve. Doing this quarterly has really helped to make sure that the appliances are up to date.

We haven't had any issues at all with the stability of the platform.

Its stability is perfect. It's very good.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, it is good.

I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten.

The stability of the product is a ten on ten.

It's stable. We haven't had any issues with it.

We haven't had any stability issues with it. It seems to be good.

It is very stable. We have never had any problems.

The way we are using it now, it does require maintenance. I decided to take a zero trust for URL links coming in emails or unknown links. Then, if there is a link that somebody wants to get through, then I have to add that to the list to allow it. So, there are some dictionaries and things to maintain the way we are running it now that we didn't have in the past. For many years, we got it running, then forgot about it. It just ran and ran. Now, I think it is just a different environment due to the level of phishing emails, etc. 

The way that we are running it now, there is more to maintain, like the dictionaries and the list of employees, so somebody doesn't spoof an employee's name. It takes maybe an hour or so a week to update the dictionaries and things like that. 

Right now, I'm the only one maintaining it.

I would rate the stability a six out of ten. We had multiple issues with the stability. Usually, the customer complains that there's an email coming from an outside sender, and it enters our environment, and our email gets multiple emails from a single sender. There might be suspicious emails or multiple things that we usually get from customers.

It is very stable. I haven't had any issues with memory or CPU. I haven't had any unstable performances from any of the appliances. Initially, we had physical appliances, then we went and upgraded to virtual appliances at some point. However, even the physical appliances were pretty stable.

I did run into one issue at one time where I had to shut something off. It was a bug, but being down for an hour or two is just two costly for our firm.

Deployment and maintenance is handled by two people (email engineers).

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten. 

It's been stable. I don't have to do anything with my email gateways. They chug along and they do what they do. They don't always get it perfect, but I have never had one fail on me. And I've never had a problematic appliance that I'm aware of. We had Proofpoint for a lot longer, but if I were to compare the percentages, I would have to say that the stability of Cisco appliances is superior to that of our previous Proofpoint environment.

The solution has proven that it's very stable. I only recall three real problems with the system. And I've been working at the same company for 15 to 16 years. It is very stable.

The stability of the solution has made a very good impression. In the last two or three versions, I haven't found bugs or anything that could affect the stability.

It was very stable. My experience with that version of it was really great. Apart from the improvement needed to the filters, it was all good.

We expect 95 to 98 stability (perfection) in the product. 

We have one person doing maintenance, which is me. I handle this product along with three other security products. 

The tool is stable.

I rate the tool's stability seven to eight out of ten. 

IronPort is indeed a very stable solution, including both software and hardware.

It's very stable. We haven't had any issues or downtime.

It is currently stable. I will upgrading next year, but the current version has been working great for six year.

We have two people (system administrators) performing maintenance for the system and security part for the company.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

The stability of the solution is very good. They always come out with very stable versions of firmware and it has never caused any issues.

The system is very stable. We have had very little downtime and the system is, in general, reliable. 

We have occasionally had hardware problems because we are using an appliance-based solution, but that might change. We may consider going to virtual systems. In general, we have had a good experience with this product. The hardware, given occasional failures, has been very reliable. There is an upgrade process for keeping the system running with the most current, recommended version of AsyncOS. We have had very few problems where an upgrade has gone wrong. We've been very pleased with the solution.

From my perspective, it's pretty stable. We didn't have any issues.

I have had no complaints with the stability.

It's very stable. We've had no issues with instability.

It's a very stable product. We hardly have any issues. Issues are mostly around license activation and the like. It's a reliable product and very popular here in the Middle East.

It's quite stable. We didn't have issues because, when I think about the issues, they were from us. The two boxes were in cluster, so when the guys at the other site would start without telling us, we would get cluster error messages. Apart from that, it was fine.