The system worked extremely well from the beginning and there have been no issues with stability. In fact, stability is the reason why the solution was put in place.  

The solution is stable. Other solutions provide better stability, such as Silver Peak SD-WAN.

I rate the stability of Cisco SD-WAN an eight out of ten.

The solution is very stable. 

The solution is stable. 

My first impression of the solution's stability was that it was quirky. We had some dropped sessions where the VPN session would just drop if we had a carrier drop and some sessions where the solution would drop the VPN session. It wasn't a virtual device; it was a piece of hardware in the data center. I saw it and had that drawing. The solution would drop the VPN sessions whenever they got too loaded because we had a priority on the session screen devices and they had an issue there. My initial thought was, "Why didn't we use something else?" After Cisco made changes to their FlexVPN appliance in iOS, it became really stable. We had a workaround for it, which was to tear down the session every few hours and round-robin the remote devices to set up the sessions. This would help to load balance the solution into the data center. After Cisco fixed their software, we no longer had to do that and we didn't have any issues because it would automatically shift the remote to set the load across all the appliances.

Sometimes there are issues on the routing layers. Most of the time, the protocols don't meet the compliance standards. If one site is Cisco and another site is Juniper, then there is a mismatch in the protocols, so there is latency. If all the sites are Cisco, then it's stable.

I would rate the stability as six out of ten.

Cisco SD-WAN is stable.

Cisco SD-WAN is a stable solution.

We've had absolutely no issues with the stability of the solution. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It's been quite good overall.

It is a stable solution, and I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

I find the solution to be stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The stability and performance of Cisco SD-WAN are really good. It's a reliable solution. 

The product is stable. We don't have any downside so far.

Cisco is very stable, whether a branch network or the branches. We don't have any issues with them.

Cisco SD-WAN is very stable. It's a decent product. 

I found the stability of Cisco SD-WAN good enough.

The product is stable. 

We found the solution to be quite stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We haven't seen major issues. 

SD-WAN is 100 percent stable. If you use the suggested operating system, all the Cisco solutions are stable. According to the Gartner Magic Quadrant rating, I believe Cisco was No. 1 three years ago. Now it is No. 2 or 3, so I believe that they could improve more.
And many customers have used DMVPN or VPN solutions for many years, so those solutions are also extremely stable.

The stability of the system is quite robust. Initially, there might be some minor challenges, particularly in the first couple of months, regarding certificate issues.

The stability is good.

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

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

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

I rate the stability an eight out of ten. So, it's very stable.

Cisco SD-WAN is stable.

The stability is really great. It's definitely reduced downtime. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is very, very reliable. It's quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's been good overall.

Its stability is fine if you stay within certain releases. From the stability point of view of the releases, it is fine.

The stability of the solution is good as of now. 

I can't say that Cisco SD-WAN is incredibly stable, especially since Cisco has acquired Viptela and they are now busy with trying to improve Viptela's features and tools. So in some situations, it has been my experience that Cisco's SD-WAN is solid but it does succumb to stability issues at times.

So far we have completed only one project with Cisco, while other one is still ongoing. With that experience, I can say some stability improvements are needed, but I don't know about the other partners who have completed ten or more projects, for example.

The solution is stable, and you need good connectivity. 

Releases and updates/upgrades for the software in each component are not simple to configure.

The solution is stable. This is the reason why we ultimately chose it as a product. Cisco's experience regarding the complex configuration of networks is perhaps the more mature in the market. 

They have made some improvements to the solution, and I think these advancements make it one of the most stable in the industry. It's not great for large configurations, so it may not be as stable in those cases. However, Cisco remains the most stable on the market.

Cisco SD-WAN is stable.

The solution is stable.

Cisco SD-WAN is stable. 

It is pretty good. We have been reasonably happy with it.

For standard use, it's pretty stable. If you want to use this solution to manage traffic, then it depends on the release. Cisco has several patches for a variety of problems. Still, they can't guarantee that there won't' be any bugs. 

SD-WAN is very stable - once it's deployed, you can just forget about it, it runs by itself.

Since Cisco acquired Viptela, the stability of this solution has given problems since it is quite new. 

Cisco SD-WAN is a stable solution. I have not seen any issues with stability. If you do the preventive management exercises, ensure that you have the right temperature, regularly perform inspections, and monitor the solution properly, then everything will work perfectly.

The solution could be more stable. There are issues that they've had to deal with.

I have faced issues with one or two boxes. We replaced those boxes.

Sometimes it's a little buggy, so there needs to be some updates to make the solution more stable.

The solution is stable. There is very minimal movement and very minimal packet loss. There is very minimal delay in the network. In terms of performance, it's absolutely best of breed, and world-class. There is no discussion about that. In terms of hardware, probably is the best provider. 

Cisco SD-WAN's stability is good - I haven't found any issues at the operational level.

I would say neutral at this time because I am deploying this in an office this week. It seems okay in terms of stability. It hasn't crashed since it has been up.

I have not heard any complaints about the stability. The problem with this solution is with the interface, not the equipment.

Cisco SD-WAN is a stable solution.

It is a stable solution.

We had issues with the stability only one time when we integrated Viptella SD-WAN with Cisco Umbrella. After reading all of the documentation, we have not had any issues with the stability.

Cisco's SD-WAN is a stable product.

It is good. There are some nice elements about it, but there are a few difficulties, and it is always an improvement process.

The solution is extremely stable. It's not something that has a lot of bigs and glitches. It's reliable. It doesn't crash.

Cisco SD-WAN is stable. It's scalable and reliable, and robust.

The solution is stable.

This is definitely a stable product.

Cisco SD-WAN is a stable network solution.

It is as stable as your lines are. We mostly have fiber connections, and it is really stable and performing well. I once had a problem with a power unit, but I have never experienced any downtime.

The stability of SD-WAN on iOS needs improving, they're in a transition phase. Cisco recently acquired Repeller. They are gradually migrating from their old SD-WAN to this new retail SD-LAN. It's been a challenge because the roadmaps they envisaged haven't quite worked out, it's not a smooth road. If you change from traditional WAN to SD-WAN from the retailers perspective, it can be a bit of a challenge. We also deploy Fortinet and that's easier. I don't know what's going to happen in the next couple of years, but for now, doing SD-WAN is a little bit of a challenge

When we have had power outages for a few hours we have had no issue with Cisco SD-WAN coming back online and functioning.

Cisco SD-WAN is a stable product.

It is extremely stable. You can set it and forget it, if that is your thing. There are a lot of improvements with each full version release. As with all things Cisco, if you have the chance to wait for a few months before deploying the latest release, do it. They can be buggy for the first few months. 

The stability of the solution is one of the better features. 

As of now, the stability is fine.

We have not experienced any issues with stability over the past two months.

It's stable enough. They hardened it to their operating system. It's not an issue.

The solution is very stable. 

The solution is stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. The solution is reliable. It just works.

We do find that the solution can be a bit buggy. The more complex the setup is, the more bugs we seem to find. There seem to be many bugs in the software.

The web GUI is easy to deploy, however, when we deploy a whole network for a customer, we can see how they run inside the GUI. We've had to open cases with technical support to help us deal with issues that arise.

Cisco SD-WAN is stable. There might be minor bugs in a few of the features, but overall, the product is stable and the customers are happy with it.

This is a stable solution. it does what it is supposed to do and is working fine.

Cisco SD-WAN is a highly stable solution.

Stability (especially running in virtualized environment) is an issue SDN vendors do not talk about until customer learns the hard way. It has to be tested.

It's very good and stable compared to the others.

Stability-wise, it is a good product and it works very well.

I have found this solution stable.

The solution could have better stability. It's not ideal right now. It could be quite a bit better.

The solution is stable enough. We haven't faced crashes, bugs or glitches that would make us concerned that is wasn't reliable.

We have had no issues with stability.