We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Cisco Wireless WAN OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Cisco Wireless WAN is #6 ranked solution in top Wireless WAN tools. IT Central Station users give Cisco Wireless WAN an average rating of 8 out of 10. Cisco Wireless WAN is most commonly compared to Cambium:Cisco Wireless WAN vs Cambium. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 30% of all views.
What is Cisco Wireless WAN?
Cisco Wireless WAN can help your business expand rapidly while making critical applications and services available when and where needed. Your business can run applications such as interactive video and TelePresence on a primary 4G LTE WWAN link, which is 10 to 15 times faster and 5 times lower latency than 3G.
Buyer's Guide

Download the Wireless WAN Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2021

Cisco Wireless WAN Customers
Aegean Motorway, Baylor Scott & White Health, Beachbody, Bellevue, Brunel University London, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Chartwell School, Children's Hospital Colorado, Cisco Live Milan, City of Biel, City of Mississauga, Dundee Precious Metals, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Erickson Living, Goldcorp, Great Ormond Street Hospital, Grupo Industrial Saltillo (GIS)
Cisco Wireless WAN Video

Archived Cisco Wireless WAN Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
RagidKader
Lead Solutions Architect at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Real User
It is quite expensive, but the manageability is simple and it is easy to work on

Pros and Cons

  • "I like that it has integrated the cost of our network access."
  • "The technical scalability is easy, but the license scalability is quite tricky."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case of this solution is for streaming access to the personal devices of students and staff for guest wifi and connection. So we provide corporate access to devices. They use it for media streaming, for social networking, for learning solutions. Most people don't connect through land cable anymore - they all go for wireless options.

What is most valuable?

I like that it has integrated the cost of our network access. We see identity controls solutions so we make sure it's all part of the same management console. We have the same console and the same authentication, and we use a multi-high profile defendable wireless system, access ports, and wireless access IDs. So each access ID has different kinds of people, different kinds of networks, the VLAN. Cisco controllers are now the best in this field. We end segregation on the Wi-Fi side based on the access ID.

What needs improvement?

The solution is very expensive, and I think the price should be more competitive, like with Aruba, Meraki, and other products. The price model is very high but the manageability is simple. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have some glitches from time to time, but the support is fast and they support us very well. This doesn't happen very often, though.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The technical scalability is easy, but the license scalability is quite tricky. It's licensing costs incurred, but technically the solution is very scalable. A total of 5,000 users are using the 3000 access points, and 2,600 users are using 800 access points. I am the architect and the rest of the users are basically university students, faculties, administration staff, and support staff who mainly use for media, social net access, corporate file access, academic system access, and learning solution access. And it used for radio-audio frequency wireless tools.

How are customer service and technical support?

The support is good and I will rate them a seven out of ten.

How was the initial setup?

As a typical Cisco solution there is a slight complexity to the setup, but because most of the engineers at Cisco are certified, it is easy for them. The integrators used a professional space on the vendor site for the deployment.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

This is a very expensive solution but there are no additional costs.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We compared it to Aruba Wireless. Aruba has its own strength in the latest technology, their architects are very different, and they are more advanced. So I think Cisco is one step behind Aruba.

What other advice do I have?

My advice to others is to understand the use case properly before deploying any solution. If you don't have a complex use case and if you can't afford it, don't get Cisco. But if you have a complex use case with a high frequency, high bandwidth of data usage in a wireless network, Cisco is the right product for you. The licensing strategy and the pricing could be improved, but it is a good solution. I rate it a seven out of ten. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
SujithKombra
Founder, CEO at Espina IT
Real User
Scalable solution that is easy to use with good technical support

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features for me are the ease of operation and scalability.

What needs improvement?

The cloud interoperability needs improvement.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is scalable. We have twenty thousand users.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support for this solution is good, and the general Cisco tech support is also good. They are able to help me with any problems.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is simple It took one week to deploy this solution and it takes two people to maintain this solution.

What other advice do I have?

Our clients are large enterprise companies. This solution is the best on the market. I would rate this solution a nine out of…

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features for me are the ease of operation and scalability.

What needs improvement?

The cloud interoperability needs improvement.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is scalable.

We have twenty thousand users.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support for this solution is good, and the general Cisco tech support is also good.

They are able to help me with any problems.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is simple

It took one week to deploy this solution and it takes two people to maintain this solution.

What other advice do I have?

Our clients are large enterprise companies.

This solution is the best on the market. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Ubiquiti Networks, Cambium Networks and others in Wireless WAN. Updated: November 2021.
554,529 professionals have used our research since 2012.
DO
Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
MSP
Enables you to control everything, every technology within the wireless arena and has good granularity

Pros and Cons

  • "Granularity of standardization and technical controls."
  • "Include more managing features within the product, rather than having to purchase them as extras."

What is our primary use case?

I've been designing wireless solutions and have been a solutions provider for over 20 years. I spec the solution based on the client's requirements and use whichever vendor device is affordable, and fits the purpose of the company's requirements.

We mainly use the WLC 5000 series. We use other Cisco products, mainly geared to smaller markets. I use Cisco and Dell devices, but mostly Cisco, as in the switching arena. I'm most familiar with cloud management and wireless Cisco solutions such as the WMM. I'm not familiar with the Cisco CSR or Cisco Cloud Services Router 1000V. 

In terms of WLAN solutions, it all comes down to the business requirements and commercials. I would tend to use Cisco at the higher end if the commercial can afford it, but it also depends if it's fit for purpose on the NRL hive. I also use Ubiquiti and I've also started to look at Campion as well. But it really depends on the requirements. External, Ubiquiti, internal Cisco, and Aerohive.

What is most valuable?

The granularity of standardization and technical controls would be the big one in terms of valuable features. You can control everything, every technology within the wireless arena. It contrasts with Meraki which is very much macro-driven so you don't have the visibility of the complete engine. From an engineering and consultant perspective, I want full control. The Cisco WLC solution supplies that in the form they have at the moment, but I know that they changed the UI a couple of weeks ago. I haven't seen it but as it exists at the moment I'm on 8.5 or 8.6 of the code up, but they're using the code that they use on the WLCs and not what would be the new version, which I believe is different.

What needs improvement?

With the WMM there are a few bits and pieces missing that some of the other vendors have. Cisco has a bad habit, although they'd probably see it as a good habit, of not applying extras. I want more managing features. Cisco would love you to go and buy Cisco Prime, which is very expensive, especially if you want to get reports active for the SME market. They generally don't add to existing products and are actually outpricing themselves. Cisco needs to realize that if they want to reach a global market, there are many markets within that. They need a price point that allies a smaller market and sometimes a specific country. I work in Northern Ireland and Ireland, which is very much SMB, and Cisco has priced themselves out of that market. From a management perspective, if I want to get good reports and good troubleshooting capabilities, I have to go and buy an additional product, Prime or another product that they facilitate. Aerohive products and the like have that under the hood and are a cheaper product. Cisco needs to be paralleling what the other vendors' devices are doing and giving what could be other markets the ability to use the product. For now, they've priced themselves out in some locations.

In terms of additional features, they need to look at the market and need to look at whether or not it includes more management features under the hood and more layers to functional troubleshooting which other vendor devices do, that would be a big improvement. But they need to be built into the product that you buy, and you shouldn't have to go and pay thousands of pounds for an additional management platform. There should be a level of management solution purchased through the standard WLAN, Cisco's WLAN solution. There isn't enough.

What other advice do I have?

I would want people to be aware that Cisco Wireless WAN is a top-end product and solution. Their portfolio is superb. They have major experience and maturity and are very much in tune with their field. I work in warehousing facilities. Like most things, though, there are pros and cons. Cisco is the top end, commercially. It's going to be double the price, and I mean double the price, of everything else. Other products that I use, and I have cross-referenced the price point with many solutions for the requirements of our enterprise customers, are half the price.

They are a good product. Do they warrant the extra expense? I would have to say no, but they do have great maturity and their product portfolio is not just the access points but their other add-ons; their antennas, maturity and the information out there, which is invaluable. You pay for these from an engineering and consultative perspective. I need to research issues and other people's experiences. Cisco obviously has the world's best engineers, consultants who have that and very nicely post their experiences. That is invaluable. But unfortunately some markets, again I'm talking about Ireland here, sometimes can't afford that. And there are other products that can do the job just as well.

Commercially they are quite flawed but in terms of technology, you can't really beat Cisco, to be honest. Commercially I would rate them as a 2 but technically they would be an 8 or 9 out of ten. I'm not a fan of the Meraki product so I'm taking it out of the equation. I'm talking about Cisco WLCs, and what would be the solution. Technically it's an excellent product.

Unfortunately, their validity into other commercial markets is flawed. Majorly flawed. And they have too much competition, and Cisco being Cisco will just go "Well, that's fine, we didn't want to do that."  Then we would not use their products. So that's unfortunate. Maybe that's just a bit of pretension on their part.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller.
Irshad Mehmood
Technical Project Manager at Saudi Telecom Company
Real User
Good documentation, stable, and integrates easily

Pros and Cons

  • "This is the most stable product in the market."
  • "The reporting feature needs improvement, especially adding information with regards to availability uptime."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case for this solution is supplying Wi-Fi to public users.

We have been using this solution for 3D uploading and providing resources for users. Our goal is to offload traffic from mobile devices while people are at work.

We have been installing this solution in malls, the university, and other buildings. We have deployed this solution across the whole country.

What is most valuable?

This is the most stable product in the market.

The documentation is very good and it's available everywhere. If you use Google to search then you will get it all.

The integration is easy.

What needs improvement?

The reporting feature needs improvement, especially adding information with regards to availability uptime. Currently, we have to calculate this on our own by using a performance tool and then customize the reports to display it. This information is a major concern for us because we need to know how much uptime is available to our customers.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using this solution since 2015.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a stable solution and we have not had any problems. We have not found any bugs.

The only problem that we have had is related to power failures, which has nothing to do with the product.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have deployed this solution across the country, and anyone who is in the kingdom can use Wi-Fi for free for two hours. We have thousands of users.

We will be deploying more Cisco products because the integration is easy, and our core is already made up of Cisco.

How are customer service and technical support?

We are satisfied with the technical support from Cisco.

They are not only taking care of the Wi-Fi. Cisco has also deployed the IP MPLS network.

Whenever we have a problem and we explain it to them, they try their best to solve it.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, we were using the Cisco 5500 series and the 8500 series.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup of this solution is not complex because there is lots of documentation available and it is very good. Instead of being complex, it becomes easy for you.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are also using a solution by Aruba. Some of the features are better with Cisco, whereas different features are better in Aruba.

We also evaluated Nokia and we found it more difficult to integrate.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
DD
Network Engineer at a pharma/biotech company with 201-500 employees
Real User
A stable device providing good coverage but it needs centralized management

Pros and Cons

  • "Mobile anchoring and graphic user interface are helpful features."
  • "There is no centralized management for multiple wireless control deployments or a user tracking feature."

What is our primary use case?

I'm a user, administrator, and implementer of Wireless WAN. I work in a large company and we use the system throughout our campus sites. We mainly use version 5508 and for smaller sites, we use 2504. There are more recent products but I don't have experience with them. We currently have 50,000 people using the Cisco Wireless WAN and have no plans for further expansion.

How has it helped my organization?

Improvement to our organization would be in terms of IoT, I would say, because some buildings are fully covered by WiFi. We're talking about large buildings of 60 access points per building. Users have benefited from full coverage and of course, that includes cell phones which also connect to WiFi, and using the guest wireless, and the ICP. Reduction in mobile data costs has allowed for increased savings, thanks to our corporate WiFi.

What is most valuable?

Valuable features for me would be the friendly GUI. It's not a feature as such but it's the first thing I would point out because troubleshooting is very easy on it. I can literally point down to a single host, find roughly where he's located and examine the strength of his connectivity. Also, I find the mobile anchoring to be handy although compared to the newer solutions it's a little old. 

What needs improvement?

Improvement could be made in the planning - WiFi survey and planning, and WiFi key mapping - should both be included in high-end devices. You would expect them to be included in such a product. When we bought it, 5508 was a high-end device. Some aspects could be achieved automatically by the wireless controller. For example, if there is a single access point deployed in a densely populated area, there will be many users and all those users bring down the speed. I think an option where the range of the access points is determined by the signal strength of the end-users would be good. There should be a mechanism mitigating that because when a user with a low WiFi signal connects, he basically crashes the experience for everyone else. Some automation on their part would be good.

A neat feature that some of the other vendors have is that of informing, where I can tell the access point to narrow down its signal and focus it in a specific direction. That is very handy, for example, in long corridors where you don't want the access point to spread its signal everywhere but rather focus it to a narrow field of vision, so to speak. That's a feature I would like to see. Vendors like Aruba have things like tracking mobile devices. That would also be a handy feature because it allows you to pinpoint areas that have low WiFi coverage. Another feature would be a dynamically generated heat map. Let's say you can see on a heat map where the user has been and can follow his WiFi experience in terms of signal to noise ratio, signal strength and the like as well as interference by other machines detected in that path, how the access points see each other and the strength of signal they're producing. The only thing missing is the piece of software that could show you that graphically.

I would like to see a centralized management where I don't need to log on to every controller and then proceed from there. Also, a centralized management for multiple wireless control deployments and, of course, features such as user tracking so I can pinpoint the user, all the way down to the wireless control access point and switch that the access point is connected to. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using Cisco Wireless WAN for about ten years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's a very stable device when used properly by people who know how to configure it; a high-end quality device. Recently some of the access points have started to break down but they are over 10 years old, which is quite good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The product is very good quality with high scalability in my view.

How are customer service and technical support?

We currently have around 10 people in our maintenance team

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Prior to Cisco, we used Palo Alto. The switch was made to Cisco because we wanted to standardize the network throughout the company. 

How was the initial setup?

The setup is relatively straightforward. To configure the controllers with prep time and IP address, would take a couple of hours, give or take.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I wasn't involved in the decision-making process about alternative options before we went with the Wireless WAN.

What other advice do I have?

We use dedicated wireless control for our campuses in a redundant topology, active/passive. We use both Flex connect and local, essentially switched networks. Our company uses physical machines, not cloud-based wireless controls.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
AO
Senior Consultant at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Consultant
It is stable and scalable and the technical support is very good

Pros and Cons

  • "The program is very stable."

    What is most valuable?

    I use this solution because I work for a Cisco partner. We use a lot of Cisco products and it makes it easy for us to position this wireless solution for most of our clients because they already have a Cisco base. It is very easy to propose it as an alternative.

    What needs improvement?

    The solution has all the features we need, but it is very expensive.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Cisco Wireless WAN for over five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The program is very stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is scalable enough for most of our clients. We have many users and don't have issues or problems with scalability.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I don't have any complaints about the technical support.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was straightforward.

    What other advice do I have?

    If I were to give advice to others, I would say is this: I haven't had much experience with any other option. Or if you were asking me to recommend this solution over another one, I'll generally recommend the Cisco Wireless WAN, because that's the only one I know and have experience of. I would like to see better pricing. It would also be great if one of these wireless cards could support multiple service providers. On a scale from one to ten, I will rate this solution an eight. 

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
    MA
    Network Operations Supervisor at a government with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    The setup is easy and has good integration between solutions

    Pros and Cons

    • "The initial setup was really easy and straightforward."
    • "The integration support technology should be improved."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use Cisco Wireless WAN for normal campus access, for voice roaming, regular setup, some employee networks, network using portals, and simple registrations.

    What is most valuable?

    We acquired the Cisco Identity Service Engine (ISE), and what I found the most valuable, is the integration between Cisco wireless and the ISE. It is very useful. 

    What needs improvement?

    The integration support technology should be improved. We have more sites to the technology itself and before we only had to connect the access points to a controller. Now we use most of the pieces of what the wireless as a concept can provide. So more integration and support will be great. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using the solution for eight years now.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The program is very stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I believe the solution is scalable and it is easy to add more users.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The technical support is really good.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We have been working on Cisco for many years now, so we just upgraded to Cisco Wireless WAN.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was really easy and straightforward.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Cisco is more expensive than other solutions.

    What other advice do I have?

    The reason why we chose Cisco over another solution, is that Cisco is very strong here in the Aruba and Ruckus region. We have a vendor specifically in Saudi Arabia. What I like about this solution, is that it is always available and it's up to me to integrate, something called the DNA. I like the features that Cisco provides and it a solution that's easy to work on. I like the integration between Cisco and all the other Cisco products when it comes to network roaming, the DNA. So this is the integration that I'm looking forward to integrating, Cisco wireless with the DNA.

    On a scale from one to 10, I will rate this an eight. The reason why I don't give it a ten is because Cisco is rather expensive. I would like to see it being more affordable.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    MuhammadNaeem
    Network & Information Security Engineer at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
    Real User
    A stable solution with good technical support, but it needs more physical ports

    Pros and Cons

    • "This stability is one of the major reasons to stick with this product."
    • "The worst thing about the Cisco controllers is that they only have two ports."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use this solution to provide wireless service in our hospitals.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is stable and the support is good.

    What needs improvement?

    The worst thing about the Cisco controllers is that they only have two ports. The design of having only two physical ports is very bad.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using this solution for six or seven years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This stability is one of the major reasons to stick with this product.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have about ten thousand users in our environment.

    We run different hospitals and on a daily basis and we have between eight and ten thousand clients.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Cisco is always number one in terms of technical support. There is no doubt that they are better than any other vendor.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I also have experience with solutions from Aruba and Avaya XE. We removed the Avaya units after their merger and are sticking with solutions from Cisco and Aruba.

    How was the initial setup?

    I have a lot of experience with this solution, so I find the setup to be easy.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    Between Cisco and Aruba, I would say that the features are similar. Each of them is better at different features.

    What other advice do I have?

    Wireless solutions are not something that you need to change very often. We have older models installed and they are still working fine. Changing the entire environment involves a lot of money and a lot of effort.

    My advice to anybody who is considering this type of solution is to first look at your ecosystem and then choose the product. Don't just choose one without looking at what other types of products, such as switches, you already have.

    I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PR
    Senior Consultant at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
    Consultant
    Great integration with other Cisco products, offering good stability with an easy setup

    What is most valuable?

    It's a good solution and it works very well. It has great integration with other Cisco products. It's good for the management team to only have one brand, one manufacturer of products.  I like how the look and feel of the product are standardized to match other Cisco solutions. 

    What needs improvement?

    The pricing could be improved in future releases. It's quite expensive.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for six or seven years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability of the product is good. I haven't heard anything bad from customers, who seem quite happy with it.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is scalable.

    How are customer service and technical

    What is most valuable?

    It's a good solution and it works very well. It has great integration with other Cisco products. It's good for the management team to only have one brand, one manufacturer of products. 

    I like how the look and feel of the product are standardized to match other Cisco solutions. 

    What needs improvement?

    The pricing could be improved in future releases. It's quite expensive.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for six or seven years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability of the product is good. I haven't heard anything bad from customers, who seem quite happy with it.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is scalable.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The technical support for the solution is pretty good. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is straightforward.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution is quite expensive.

    What other advice do I have?

    We use the on-premises deployment model. We're a Cisco partner.

    I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
    JaromirLikavec
    Senior Network Engineer, IT Manager at Fraunhofer IGD
    Real User
    Easy deployment and management with a user-friendly interface

    Pros and Cons

    • "The ease of management is the solution's most valuable feature."
    • "Pricing is very high with Cisco products. It's something that many people complain about. They should work to make it more affordable."

    What is most valuable?

    The ease of management is the solution's most valuable feature.

    The user interface is much better than older versions.

    What needs improvement?

    We're in the phase of deploying a new system, so I can't speak to what might be lacking in the solution just yet.

    I'm curious to see how Wi-Fi 6 will function. You have access points supporting Wi-Fi 6, but no clients know about it really.

    Pricing is very high with Cisco products. It's something that many people complain about. They should work to make it more affordable.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for 20 years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The older version was very stable; I'm hoping the newest version will also be stable.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The technical support is very good.

    How was the initial setup?

    Deployment is easy. We're doing it in stages so as to not disrupt any service and are in the process now, so I can't speak to exactly how long it will ultimately be as a process.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Cisco pricing is very expensive.

    What other advice do I have?

    Our clients are mostly enterprise-level companies.

    Our first test of the solution will be to see how the new features are implemented in Wi-Fi 6. The new access point is smaller than the previous one, and I find it's very good, very pleasant, because the 3700, and especially the 3800 were very, very weak.

    I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. If the pricing was better, I'd rate it ten out of ten.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    ITCS user
    Senior Manager of Network at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
    Consultant
    The best available customer service in the market that's worth every penny.

    Valuable Features

    Flex-connect.

    Improvements to My Organization

    It helps to connect AP's in multiple branches.

    Room for Improvement

    There are a few software bugs.

    Use of Solution

    Cisco 5500 Series Wireless Controller. We have used it for about 4 years.

    Deployment Issues

    No.

    Stability Issues

    No.

    Scalability Issues

    No.

    Customer Service and Technical Support

    Customer Service: It's the best available in the market. Technical Support: Also excellent.

    Initial Setup

    Very straightforward.

    Implementation Team

    In-house.

    ROI

    It's very reliable and can be used for long term purpose.

    Valuable Features

    Flex-connect.

    Improvements to My Organization

    It helps to connect AP's in multiple branches.

    Room for Improvement

    There are a few software bugs.

    Use of Solution

    Cisco 5500 Series Wireless Controller. We have used it for about 4 years.

    Deployment Issues

    No.

    Stability Issues

    No.

    Scalability Issues

    No.

    Customer Service and Technical Support

    Customer Service:

    It's the best available in the market.

    Technical Support:

    Also excellent.

    Initial Setup

    Very straightforward.

    Implementation Team

    In-house.

    ROI

    It's very reliable and can be used for long term purpose.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    it_user5550
    Network Engineer at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
    Vendor
    Best support for high speeds, once we got through the module compatibility issues.

    Valuable Features:

    1.One of the reasons we selected this WWAN modem is the underlying support for all the high speed modules and speed which is higher than 100Mbps. 2.Can be used to easily setup a high speed ISP or mobile network 3.Another deciding factor was the support for large number of devices that can interoperate easily with Cisco WWAN card 4. Failover support. There is a secondary link which can take over in case the primary goes down. 5.It provides transparent handoff support for devices which are using older technologies. 6.Provides higher bandwidth to support high definition video calls. 7.Supports advanced features like quality of service (QoS)

    Room for Improvement:

    While deploying the module, we had to struggle with the telemetry system server setup as it had some module compatibility issues with tracking system

    Other Advice:

    Cisco LTE WWAN provides an easy way to setup an high speed, robust and secure network with speeds of 100Mbps and above. It supports a large number of network devices and can easily integrate with devices running on older technologies as well. We tested the HD video call feature as well and found it to be of very good in terms of video, voice quality and overall speed. We faced some module compatibility issues with Cisco WWAN while setting up the telemetry system server setup. Overall a good product and provides large number of features for providing high speed network.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    it_user2589
    IT Administrator at a tech consulting company with 51-200 employees
    Consultant
    IPv4 4G WWAN Module

    Valuable Features:

    This product is fulfilling our technological requirements to setup a high speed 4G environment in a large ISP / Mobile network. Easily manage and configure in existing network without any changes. This module provides automatic secondary link whenever the main link is down.

    Room for Improvement:

    When I tried to setup in Cisco ASA 5500 series IPv6 network then I faced a module compatibility issue. Cisco will remove this obstacle in future. It is not possible to setup a GPS tracking system and telemetry system server with this module.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Product Categories
    Wireless WAN
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Wireless WAN Report and find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Ubiquiti Networks, Cambium Networks, and more!
    Quick Links