Cisco Enterprise Routers Reviews

It's our network device.

It is a good router that is available with advanced technology.

We are evaluating and considering moving to SD-WAN, which is the latest one.

As we are expanding, we require more coverage.

I have been using Cisco Enterprise Routers for 15 years.

It is always updated. We are using the latest version.

It's a stable router.

We have no issues with the scalability. We have approximately 500 users in our organization.

Technical support is good and they are very nice.

We have no issues with customer support.

It's a plug-and-play type of installation.

We have a team of 10 people to maintain this solution.

There are licensing costs and they are expensive.

We are currently evaluating other vendors.

Generally, I don't recommend anything to anyone.

I would rate Cisco Enterprise Routers a seven out of ten.

We perform immigration checks in Pakistan. We have around 26 distributed check posts across Pakistan. We need network links to collect the data, implement the stop list, and other immigration-related data.

For immigration, we use an MIS system that helps the immigration personnel. This requires a network infrastructure at its core. We need to ensure the availability of data and to ensure data security.  round 90 to 95 people use it within our organization.

In itself, Cisco is a reliable product and does not require any major changes. We have utilized Cisco for around 15 years, and in that time, there has hardly been any incident to my knowledge that a router suddenly became faulty, or started to malfunction. Cisco is an excellent and very comprehensive product, and we have no issues with that.

It's not really about how Cisco can be improved, but the utilities around it. For example, Fortinet has a good firewall and useful auditing tools with it. It also allows establishing centralize infrastructure, just by installing a Fortinet client software, VPN software, at the client end. However, we know that Cisco is also providing such a product in the name of AnyConnect. It is a concern over the cost aspect because of the budget we have available, Fortinet is much cheaper than the Cisco product, including the functionalities it provides. Cisco routers are an expensive product. Regarding Cisco usage in the future, it depends upon the increase in the immigration checkpoints. If our government decided to open 10 more immigration checkpoints, and other sites related to those, it would require more procuring of hardware, including the number of routers to support this. 

We have been utilizing Cisco routers and switches, since 2004. We are a police organization in Pakistan.

We still use the Cisco router 1721 Modular Access Router, which is now obsolete but still works. It is very stable. We have some very old, like 16, 17 years, old models. We have been using Cisco for around 15, or 16 years. We are satisfied with Cisco. 

It's highly scalable. There should always be provision for scalability, as we procure many routers with modular capability. For example, we know that modular routers are capable of extension via WAN interfaces and other interfaces.

We are very much satisfied with Cisco technical support.

Some companies provide initial licenses very cheaply, as do Cisco, but when you want to renew or expand something, the licensing becomes expensive. 

The network team proposes that we might utilize Fortinet instead of Cisco in the future. There is no problem with Cisco, but this is when we might move towards Fortinet because Fortinet can provide these things that are very much cheaper than Cisco, including additional resources.

I would rate cisco 9 out of 10. Cisco is the network equipment leader. It introduces new features; it's the trend maker. The trade-off is cost. Cisco is highly recommended, subject to the availability of funds. It's all about the resources you have and how much you want to invest. We are the customer. However, we are also studying Fortinet and its comparisons and things like those to finalize the procurement process.

We primarily use the routers for internet and wire connection.

The routing feature is the solution's most valuable aspect. 

The solution is more flexible in configuration and in deployment. The deployment is very easy.

Currently, we use the 4000 series of the solution, however, there were issues with the 1900 series.

The solution needs to offer some security features in a future release.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is very scalable. In our company, we have about 10,000 users. We don't plan to increase usage right now.

Technical support is excellent. I'd rate them ten out of ten.

We previously used, and still use Juniper. We use both Juniper and Cisco within our organization; we haven't replaced one with the other.

The initial setup was straightforward. Deployment takes about two hours.

Our strategy was to have both high and low-level information in regard to the configuration. We usually have it in our script and we can use this information to assist us with deployment.

You require about two people for deployment and maintenance of the solution.

In most cases, I handle the implementation myself. However, in some cases, we used system integrators due to the nature of the contract involved.

There's a yearly licensing agreement. You can add more features at an additional cost if you need to.

We're mostly using the 4000 series of the solution.

In terms of advice, I'd say users need to be clear about customer requirements to avoid overpaying for features they don't need. They should take care to select the proper router type and use the proper license. For deployment, they need a high level of understanding, for the implementation and configuration. They need to be prepared for all scenarios to be network ready. Something might turn off, for example, so they need to be prepared for those instances in order to properly handle them.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Something I like about the solution is all the options it offers and ways it can be configured. I can do things with ease and find the relevant documentation to assist me. I believe that the reason the company chose to go with Cisco products is because they offer everything needed. 

While scalability is available, it must be paid for. The licensing and price could be improved as the equipment purchased may come with very basic commands that require the consumer to pay for a more expensive license for a greater array of functions. The licensing policy can sometimes be very complicated. 

All other aspects of the solution are fine, as in the past it was only possible to use certain commands to configure the solution, but now there is also the option of using a graphical interface. 

We have been using Cisco Enterprise Routers for around 10 years.

The solution is very stable. 

While scalability is available, this option costs money. 

We do not have experience with technical support for the simple reason that we did not purchase it. As such, we must rely on ourselves for this or read the relevant documentation. 

We use Cisco Enterprise Routers mostly for the core network and in a satellite network. We use the equipment to connect our equipment to the internet and provide a robust infrastructure to satellite equipment.
It's a complement of the satellite network, and mostly all the switches and routers that we use are from Cisco. Only the permanent equipment for our modems and the modulators are satellite equipment.

It's a sound solution, so it's very easy to solve problems without a support contract, as mainly the problems we have related to the equipment can be solved by doing a Google search. Because it's a very well known solution, there are books on problems. It's a solution that fits us, as we probably can't afford a very expensive contract.

It is stable and scalable, and it can be set up fast.

It can be very expensive, sometimes, to do the jump to the next router for your needs. It will be great if you can buy a variable router and then upgrade or enable features as you grow. Otherwise, it can become very expensive to have robust equipment.

In the next release, I would like to see more free SD-WAN features and vertical solutions.

I've been using this solution for more than 10 years.

It's a pretty stable solution. We have not had to reboot in a couple of years. It's very rare that we need to reboot a router or a switch.

It is a scalable solution.

The basic configuration can be setup in a day.

It's not probably the best solution if you have a very limited budget, as it can become very expensive to have robust equipment.

If you want an easy solution to keep your network running in a very short time, Cisco Enterprise Routers is a good option. It's not probably the best solution if you have a very limited budget.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco Enterprise Routers at nine.

We use Cisco Enterprise Routers in the WAN solutions.

It's easy to use, and there is a lot of information available on the internet.

I would like to see more boundaries and better performance.

I have been working with Cisco Enterprise Routers for several years.

It's a stable product.

It's a scalable solution. We have 3,000 users in our organization.

I have not contacted technical support.

Depending on the client's needs we use other solutions such as HPE.

The initial setup is straightforward. It was easy. It was installed in minutes.

We have a team of 50 admins to help with the deployment.

We plan to continue using it in the future.

We used an integrator to help us with the implementation.

For others who want to use this solution, I would recommend it.

I would rate Cisco Enterprise Routers an eight out of ten.

This is a solution that I integrate for our customers.

Most of the hardware is very stable.

In the 3750 model, the best feature is the stacking. My customer needed that because they wanted high-availability between the firewall and the end-users.

High-availability management needs to be improved. When one switch fails, it will ask you to come back and use a different one.

If they can negate or reduce the modem delay, that would be great.

When we are performing maintenance, it takes too long to reboot the device.

The scalability is very good. I have not had any issues with it.

I rarely contact technical support. I am a technical person and do it myself because I am the first level of support for my customers. Everything is easy to do. What I like about Cisco devices is that they have documentation. Whenever you have an issue you will go online to find it first. Normally, there are examples of it.

The last time I contacted Cisco was for somebody who wanted to change their license for a wireless email security appliance. Support was able to help me, and the issue was solved. If I cannot handle the issue then I contact Cisco tech and they will solve it. They are great and have helped me to satisfy my customers.

Previously we were using another solution, but we change to Cisco Enterprise Routers because where I work, most people want to have full control of their devices.

Most of the time, I use the command-line interface.

The downtime for a switch automatically taking over for another one has been reduced. It used to take five or six minutes for the jobs on the other resource tree, but it is faster now.

My advice for people implementing this solution is to test it. Try new things that you have never tried. Cisco has support, which is the most important thing.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.