F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Competitors and Alternatives

Get our free report covering Citrix, Microsoft, F5, and other competitors of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). Updated: July 2021.
523,975 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) competitors and alternatives

DC
User at a government with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Using services map, we can map traffic from the front-end virtual server to back-end servers

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is the application delivery controller part where we mainly use the server load balancing features to front-end our back-end servers to give us additional high availability, some resiliency, and some failures. All our applications are hosted on a private on-premises data center. We run our own data center with VMware being the main virtualization platform. Then, running on top of VMware, we have Windows and Linux clusters, so x86 Windows and x86 Linux. Our biggest security concerns are malicious code, user data theft, DDoS attacks, insider attacks, brand damage/loss of… more »

Pros and Cons

  • "A lot of our SSL management is done on the front-end side, so there is one pane of glass for a lot of our security certificates. It gives us visibility. It also falls under when certificates are going to expire. Even for servers that are coming down, we can see how that affects the traffic flow by using the services map."
  • "We are starting to do a lot with containers and how the solution hooks into Kubernetes that we haven't explored. I'm hoping that they have a lot of hooks into Kubernetes. That would be the part for improvement: Marketing use cases with containers."

What other advice do I have?

Start off with Professional Services. It doesn't hurt to get 40 hours of Professional Services to help you stand it up. Usually, that's all you need. It is not a lot of hours. A week's worth of help goes a long way. We can troubleshoot the traffic flow using the services map. Then, we can get flow data out of the device. So, I would rank the solution’s traffic flow management capabilities as adequate. We plan to implement these technologies or strategies in the next three years: move from hardware appliances to software/scale-out solutions, DDoS protection, upgrade TLS/SSL capabilities to…
reviewer1365102
IT Manager at a transportation company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 20
Intuitive interface and can be used practically with any application in the backend

What is our primary use case?

I used it as a front end to an RDS Farm. Its load-balancing port 80 and port 443 to multiple RDS Gateways. It's deployed as a virtual appliance on an on-prem virtual machine hosted on the Hyper-V server. Kemp LoadMaster is used by more than 1,000 internal users on a daily bases to access the application system at the back end. It's not exposed to the internet, it's used only from internal users inside the corporate LAN. We have daily VM backups setup as well as application backups from inside KEMP.

Pros and Cons

  • "I like that this is a Network Load Balancer that can be used practically with any application in the backend. They have how-to guides on how to set up Kemp NLB with Exchange, but you can use it as well for Sharepoint, RDS, or any other back end server."
  • "The product is really good as-is out of the box. If there is one thing I would change is to have the license file not be coupled with the MAC address of the device. This is actually not really useful in a virtual environment where if you have a single VM with KEMP LoadMaster and you have not set up static MAC Address, if you, for example, recreate the VM and just load the disk file on a new VM it will get new MAC address and the NLB will not work as it will not see a proper license."

What other advice do I have?

Its a nice and easy NLB to set up and operate on a day to day basis. I highly recommend it.
IvoTuytens
Data Protection Office and CSO at ONVA-RJV
Real User
Top 20
Excellent for internal business core applications and has the ability to scale up as necessary

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is for an internet application called MyPension.be, where every Belgian citizen can search for information regarding his employment and pension. That's the primary application. In addition, we use the solution for our internal business core application. We have 2,600 internal and external users. Theoretically, there are 10 million potential users but most don't access it. We've had times when we've broken records, and that's usually connected to publicity in the press.

Pros and Cons

  • "There are several levels of module so a company can upgrade if necessary."
  • "It's unfortunate that the network firewall isn't really a next generation firewall."

What other advice do I have?

For others wishing to implement, you need to be very clear about what you want to do, how you want to protect your data and then search for a solution. It could be F5 or something else. When we asked for a review of the product, we provided a description of the features we wanted, and they proposed F5 and Fortinet for the same money. I think Fortinet has fewer features than F5. Fortinet is okay, although it does require two appliances so if you also want a low bouncer you have to buy for the low bouncer and Fortinet. When you take F5 only one appliance is necessary and it's a simple…
Eseoghene Charles-Adeoye
Head, Network Design at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Easy to manage with good load balancing and fair pricing

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for load balancing and SSL offloading. It's mostly for load balancing, however, occasionally we use it for the SSL offloading and content switching.

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution is easy to work with and manage."
  • "The solution should be able to scale more effectively than it does."

What other advice do I have?

We're just customers. I would recommend this solution to other organizations as it's quite easy to use. There's so much that you can do, compared to F5, for example. With F5, you have to do a lot of tweaking to be able to achieve certain things. With Citrix, due to the infrastructure, we run very very easily. We run on ECA infrastructure and it's a great thing. It's very very straightforward. With F5, it's not as good. That said, it has some flaws that need to be corrected. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it at an 8.
LL
Network Engineer at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Reseller
User-friendly GUI, easy to configure, and technical support responds quickly

What is our primary use case?

We are a product reseller and this is one of the solutions that we provide for our customers. At this point, we have only implemented it for one customer.

Pros and Cons

  • "The GUI is user-friendly."
  • "The integration with other products should be improved."

What other advice do I have?

While I have not done comprehensive testing with FortiWeb, I have no complaints so far. My advice for anybody who is considering this product is that if they are not very advanced in terms of technical training, this product is a good choice because it is very simple to implement. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
Get our free report covering Citrix, Microsoft, F5, and other competitors of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). Updated: July 2021.
523,975 professionals have used our research since 2012.