The solution is quite scalable so I rate scalability a nine out of ten. 

The solution is super scalable. 

FortiADC is a good solution for small or mid-sized companies but F5 can handle the largest companies. 

Across all of our customers, we have more than a million users at the same time with no issues.

I would give the scalability of the solution an eight out of ten. It is quite scalable and performs well. I would recommend F5 Advanced WAF for medium-sized businesses and enterprises, primarily due to considerations around cost and sustainability. The solution is well-suited for companies of this size, ensuring that not only is it deployed effectively, but it can also be sustained over time to meet ongoing security needs.

How scalable F5 Advanced WAF is would depend on what resources your client or the virtual server has. It all boils down to the allocated resources. For me, F5 Advanced WAF is pretty much scalable in terms of the resources I've assigned.

It's scalable and very easy to manage.

The product has modular appliances. It works well, scalability-wise.

We'll size up based on the customer requirement with some buffer, maybe 20% to 30% for the future extension. There is also some consideration on the capacity planning and the size of the box. You can scale. You just need to plan ahead. 

In terms of users, with Advanced WAF, normally their role is more related to the security side.

We just implemented the solution recently and we'll have to wait another three or four years before we change or upgrade the solution. 

After we sized F5 Advanced WAF just right and identified the correct way to configure it, it's very stable.

The solution is not being extensively used.

It is very scalable for what we need. It is a public-facing service. So, everybody on the internet would be able to utilize this type of service.

We are exploring areas to increase its usage.

F5 products are scalable, and they have an excellent R&D department. Their product is constantly maturing.

F5 WAF is a scalable solution. A lot of the employees and other end-users (virtually anybody on the internet who is coming to your site) benefit from the solution. As far as the people who are directly dealing with the administration, maintenance, and deploying the updates, there are maybe two people. But it can certainly scale-out to service passive use.  

It is a very scalable product. You can write down any iRule you want as it is very convenient.

F5 Advanced WAF is scalable.

F5 Advanced WAF is a scalable solution. We have 20 people using it in our company, mainly from our operations team.

F5 Advanced WAF is scalable.

I didn't try to expand it. We have two staff members who are using F5 Advanced WAF.

In terms of its usage, we are deploying it on all points through which we are exposing services, but we are currently not exposing too many services.

For the initial deployment, from what we were planning to implement, it was scalable. 

We now have other requirements that we need to engage with. They believe we need to increase our license, so we can accommodate more features.

We have approximately 300 users using this solution in my organization.

I rate the scalability of F5 Advanced WAF a nine out of ten.

It is definitely a scalable solution.

I have found that F5 Advanced WAF is scalable but there is a limit.

We have hundreds of people using this solution in my organization.

I have found F5 Advanced WAF scalable.

The solution is scalable.

Our entire organization and clients use the solution.

The product is highly scalable. It is suitable for enterprise businesses. I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

Scalability is limited since it is an on-premise solution. You will have to size your box properly, based your throughput and capacity. Our company uses it to protect all traffic of out 5.5 thousand users and we have plans to expand the usage.

This is a scalable product.

Our customers are in the banking system and we have approximately 200 to a few thousand customers.

We haven't really tested scalability; we currently have one network team, two or three people who handle the product and we have multiple applications and servers hosted on the WAF so there's no need to scale for now. 

The scalability is an issue at the moment, which is the reason they need to separate the control plane from the data plane.

We are using this solution daily. It runs 24/7.

The scalability of F5 Advanced WAF is very good.

We have not yet tried to scale with this solution. We have increased by 15% to 20%. 

There are approximately 100 people in our company who use this solution.

The version we are using is not very scalable. 

It's scalable. We haven't had any major issues so far.

It's scalable. There's always options to upgrade the hardware. Any hardware you buy from a store, you have the basic model and the upgraded model. For example, if you buy the 4600 appliance, you can upgrade up to 4800. You get double specs for everything, so you can just upgrade the license of the hardware. However, hardware eventually has a limitation. If you buy too small of a size of hardware, eventually there's some development limitations for the hardware. You can, however, do a cluster. You can add multiple hardware devices. This makes it very scalable.

The solution is not user-based. It's more connection-based, so there's no limitation on the number of users. It's more of a limitation on total throughput or total connection. Limitations depend on the application and how much traffic it generates. We've seen it in Telco environment where there's more than millions of users. We've also seen it do well with online banking where there are thousands of users. Small companies can use it too. It can vary, however, we've seen it in millions of users at Telco.

Whenever I need more performance, I just buy upgrade licenses and additional license keys. So scalability is a question of paying more. It is simple. Everybody who uses the site employs external clients. 

This is a very scalable solution.

It's scalable. 

The scalability is great because we can change or set this device up for almost everything. We can even extend to other functions and buy new licenses - this product will automatically adapt to these new functions. For example, we can buy a license and F5 will automatically extend to these functions. It is a very simple process to extend functionality to this device. You only need to install the license and configure it.

The solution can scale as necessary.

We have a lot of telecom and banking clients that use the solution. I’m not sure how much in total each client has in terms of users. Whoever would be using it would be more on the technical side.

We do plan to increase usage and to continue to offer this to our clients.

Scalability is fine, and we don't have any complaints so far. It's flexible once you want to expand it, but that includes the license upgrade for additional features.

The solution is highly scalable.

I have found F5 Advanced WAF to be scalable.

This solution is not easy to scale. F5 is suffering from scalability issues. They are struggling with scalability.

F5 basically starts their hardware model from a 10GB distribution. So it is a good device to start with and in Pakistan we mostly have up to 40 or 60 gigabytes of devices.

As far as scalability is concerned, we already talked to the customer in detail about what kind of traffic they are expecting in the next five or seven years. Then we decide the box on that data basis and normally we don't have to worry about scaling later.

In terms of adding more features on the F5 hardware, that is a question based on the module. If it takes too much of the CPU, then it is difficult and scaling would be difficult with that hardware. If the hardware is not so many CPU's, then we have to dedicate to each module. Then the scalability becomes a bit difficult. But if you already have hardware that has CPU's in abundance, you can add as many modules as you want. There's no problem.

F5 lets you decide if you want to assign a specific module, a dedicated CPU or nominal resources. You can even decide if you want nominal resources or if you want full resources for that specific module. It all depends on the importance of that module in your business application.

If they are a small company, 250 to 500 employees, or less than 250, then we can go for the virtual Edition of the F5, because as I said, the hardware solution starts from a 10GB box. This can handle thousands of requests per second.

It would be a bit costly for a small scale business. If someone wants F5 and he has less applications and nominal users, he can go for the Virtual Edition. Most of the customers in Pakistan who are using F5 are in the banking sector. They have a good amount of users already, 1500, 3000. So mostly we have banks in Pakistan using F5. And I guess also a few in the education sector and businesses. Otherwise, not many small businesses have F5. The one I mentioned that is using AWAF is a big telecom in Pakistan and they have millions of users. It is not for the very small businesses, I guess.

The solution is scalable.

The solution is scalable.

We have one customer that has multiple sites that use this solution. They have 24 universities using the clusters.