We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The segmented traffic it provides is the best in the industry right now."
"Using SD-WAN to combine services can result in better up time, higher speeds, and much lower costs."
"This solution can scale from SMB to the enterprise level. It is very impressive."
"The initial setup is quite simple."
"It's very easy to manage and monitor the network's health and security using the solution."
"The centralized management is the most important feature. We can monitor what is going on at every location in our network with just one center."
"The solution's application control and application traffic steering tool are its most valuable aspects in terms of how we utilize the product."
"You get security, all of the service you need, and it's easy to deploy."
"First and foremost, it enables the customer to deploy high availability connections. This kind of solution enables them to deploy these HA connections for policies mostly automatically. It's a more automated approach than with other vendors."
"We had several clients that were paying $7,500 a month for an MPLS line for one single 10 megabit circuit and we were able to take that from $7,500 a month down to $500 a month for two 10 megabits circuits that added redundancy where before they did not have redundancy and it gave them a much better throughput."
"The most valuable feature is the support for asymmetric lines."
"Compresson deduplication should be added."
"The bandwidth limitations would be good to remove, but it is a policy and license situation for Cisco because the cost is very high. It would be good to have OTP implemented with VRF. It can have support for EIGRP Over the Top (OTP) VRF. I saw some limitations in regards to the VRF protocol and the advertisement between VRF configuration. EIGRP Over the Top basically was quite limited with the VRF configuration. If you wanted to do rollback in VRF by using the EIGRP OTP protocol, the formation was not populated across. Cisco got back and confirmed that it is a configuration that I need to wait for until the next release, which is going to happen in one year. Cisco documentation is not the way it used to be before. It just gives an easy way to configure, but it doesn't go into the details of the configuration. The information that you need is there, but sometimes you want to go further and get more information, but the information is quite limited. It would be good to cover a few business cases or configuration cases. They used to be there in the past."
"What I find should be improved is the possibility of really separating the software layer from the hardware layer since today the current offer is not well adopted by the service providers"
"When it comes to adding more security features, you need to add more RAM."
"I would like to see a better, web-based interface to make changes to the configuration or to view statistics."
"I would like them to add some more SD-WAN ports. We have seen one implementation where there were four ISPs. Currently, we have a maximum of two ports for ISP in this device. Therefore, we cannot connect directly, and we need other switches. There should be some option to have more than two ports for SD-WAN."
"The price could be better. From a technical side, and everything's working smoothly. Cisco SD-WAN could be cheaper."
"The security features could be improved."
"Their WAN optimization in terms of wireless connectivity doesn't have a very good cellular capability."
"The security can be improved, with the firewall for example, because they supply a basic one but not a UTM."
"They have to implement more security with it. The security, mainly their firewall functions, have to be included in the firewall features."
"80 percent reduction in WAN costs. There are no MPLS or P2P circuits left in the organization."
"SD-WAN as a service is probably something in the neighborhood of $100 to $200 a month per location."
"Cloud subscription management must be paid for, although this does not incur a perpetual fee."
"You have to pay between 3000 and 10,000 euros, or something in that range. The core switches Nexus cost me between 10,000 and 20,000 euros."
"It's expensive. If you compare Cisco with Fortinet and Juniper, you'll find that Cisco is more expensive than other vendors."
"The price of the solution is the only negative factor, it is much more expensive compared with the Cisco Meraki SD-WAN solution."
"The license model is too complex with too many flavors and options. You might not be able to see it from an end user's point of view, but from a telco point of view, their license model is too complex. They should have a flexible license model. If you want to have good pricing, you need to buy it for a two-year, four-year, or five-year license immediately. Some other vendors have much more flexible license models."
"The price is high."
"The licensing fees depend on the bandwidth. As an example of what we charge our customers, for 100MB without Boost, the price is approximately $2,000. That includes the licensing and the unit."
"You typically will license the hardware and you license the software to access the hardware capabilities. The price will range anywhere from a hundred to $300 a month. There are no additional costs."
Deploy software-defined WAN without compromising the application experience.
Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect is a complete, high-performance SD-WAN solution that enables service providers to quickly and cost-effectively bring new, differentiated, managed SD-WAN services to market to expand market reach, create new revenue streams and deliver SD-WAN services with SLAs in and out-of-region.
Cisco SD-WAN is ranked 2nd in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 41 reviews while Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect is ranked 9th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 3 reviews. Cisco SD-WAN is rated 8.0, while Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Cisco SD-WAN writes "Stable, cutting-edge, and robust". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect writes "Has enabled considerable money savings and reduction in traffic ". Cisco SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, VMware SD-WAN, Versa FlexVNF, Meraki SD-WAN and Cato Networks, whereas Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, VMware SD-WAN, Prisma SD-WAN, Versa FlexVNF and Cato Networks. See our Cisco SD-WAN vs. Silver Peak Unity EdgeConnect report.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions 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.