We performed a comparison between Cisco ACI and Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Virtualization solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One area where it has an advantage... is that you're able to reuse a specific integration. If you add another server, you can use a specific integration and assign it to another port."
"The most valuable feature is programmability, where we can manage a network via APIs and software, as opposed to having to manage complex hardware."
"The biggest benefit has been that it has improved communication between my endpoints in the data center."
"The straightforward migration of all of the applications and loop balancing are the two most valuable features. Also, the measurement of their customer-wide sources is very straightforward. It's another dimension of the networks."
"The security component is its most valuable feature."
"With its programmability, you can do stuff to policies to make them more flexible, allowing you to connect devices in new ways."
"It is very stable. It works 100 percent of the time."
"Because we can use automation processes with this platform, we have been able to free up our IT department's time."
"Network Security is one of the most valuable features of Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization."
"Scalability is not a problem."
"It is easy to manage, easy to maintain, and stable. If you set up everything alright, it will give years without any issues."
"The support system that they have in place is very good and they are easy to reach."
"Routing, switching, and wireless network security are the valuable features of Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization."
"The most valuable feature is its user-friendly management dashboard."
More Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization Pros →
"It would be better to introduce some wizards to guide you through the whole configuration process instead of clicking through a bunch of menus with no concrete path. It is too easy to forget one or another if you configure it this way."
"I would like for there to be more information about it available. While using the ACI in the graphical interface, I would like if there was something that explained every step that you can click and it will tell you what you are doing in more detail."
"The initial setup was a bit complex. ACI was just out at that time, and there wasn't support at that time."
"Figuring out how to implement the product for clients is the area we struggle with the most every day. Perhaps an enhancement would be artificially intelligent solutions, but that would be further down the road."
"The initial set up was complex. We had to deploy 120 leads. Migrating from Legacy Cisco network to ACI was complex."
"Where there is room for improvement from ACI is for Layer 2 and Layer 7 packages. Normally, when you're updating your ACI fabric or you're introducing new Layer 4 to Layer 7 devices, there are some constraints, there are some limitations... When you are doing device packages you will not have the functionality of ASM. It's like WAF, web application firewalls. So you need to configure it manually."
"I would like to see the data center unification of Cisco ACI with Cisco DNA into a single platform to deliver the data center and campus sides."
"Cisco ACI would benefit by providing the option to integrate easily with DNAC in their next release."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the cost. The SDN hardware especially is much too expensive, specifically 799 and 9000."
"The solution's orchestration part could be improved."
"This is a software solution, which is less stable than a hardware solution by definition."
"It would be helpful if they offered modularized upgrades, such as additional memory or a faster processor."
"There is room for improvement in enhancing compatibility with other solutions and vendors."
"One of the things that can be improved is trimming all mobile numbers so that it aids in swiftly acquiring information for tablets or any necessary solution."
More Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization Cons →
More Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ACI is ranked 1st in Network Virtualization with 96 reviews while Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization is ranked 3rd in Network Virtualization with 6 reviews. Cisco ACI is rated 8.0, while Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco ACI writes "Stable, easy to extend, scalable, and has a host-based routing feature". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization writes "Versatile, offering flexibility and scalability". Cisco ACI is most compared with VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, Nuage Networks, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Juniper Contrail Networking, whereas Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization is most compared with . See our Cisco ACI vs. Cisco Enterprise Network Functions Virtualization report.
See our list of best Network Virtualization vendors.
We monitor all Network Virtualization reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
