Overall the stability has been really good but there have been a couple of little bugs we've run into. Nothing has been negatively impactful to our traffic, it's mostly been a couple of cosmetic things.

Everything, so far, has turned out to be a really simple fix where they were able to get back to us within a day. We had an issue installing an agent on a newer version of Red Hat, but they had a solution already in place; it just wasn't rolled in. But they had it fixed for us within a few hours, and they actually had that fix in production within about a week. We've had a couple of what seemed to be visual bugs with the SaaS interface, with the web UI, but no service impacts. 

Everything has been really stable. It's just that there have been times where you'll click on something and you would expect to see something there and it's not there, or it's listing more information than you would expect. Those have all turned out to be bugs, but I don't really fault them for that. 

They've upgraded. We've only had it for six months and we've upgraded our aggregators and our SaaS instance two or three times. They're very proactive on updating and the platform is really stable. They just occasionally have a few little cosmetic bugs. I would prefer that than a company that either doesn't advance and make good changes or one where bugs have performance impact. The performance always seems really good; it's just a few cosmetic things once in a while.

It's very stable.

We faced some minor issues, but overall, the product is stable. I rate it an eight to nine out of ten. 

There are sometimes issues when new versions are updated. I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. 

Whenever there's an update, there always seem to be things needing adjustment.

I would like to see the stability level improved. 

The stability is great. There are no issues at all.

Using the solution for segmentation did not require system downtime or changes to networks or applications, which was a bonus.

The solution is managed by a team of three admins. This is not their primary job. It is just an addition to their primary job as a normal UNIX administrator.

I would rate the tool's stability a seven out of ten due to the capacity limit. Once we reach 70-80 percent of the maximum rules, the system becomes slow in terms of response. The backend processes being a SaaS solution need to be more robust. 

On a scale of one to 10, I would give GuardiCore an eight for stability. It's a great product. Several years ago when I looked at it, it was one of a kind in what they do, when you look at the entire set of functionality, especially the quarantine. 

In terms of the stability, GuardiCore is great. We did not have any issues of anything being missed. I am looking forward to continued integration with various API and networking manufacturers, especially with Nutanix and Mellanox. The latter was just bought out by Nvidia, so I think the best is yet to come.

I rate Akamai Guardicore Segmentation a nine out of ten for stability.

I have not had any problem at all with stability. It has been perfect.

We have used the solution for segmentation in parallel with having our firewalls up in local servers. So far, we have not had a problem. We occasionally find a connection blocked by Guardicore Centra, but it is easy enough to go in and create a new rule for it. That is part of the process. Downtime has been fairly limited, and we have not had any real problems.

A couple of people are needed for maintenance: my boss (Head of Infrastructure) and me. It needs one person to maintain it and a backup.

The stability for Guardicore is high. I cannot comment on FireEye, however. When I say stability, I have to see the production workload. When I say that the stability for Guardicore is high, I mean there's not much an issue. Features were coming in very fast. Whenever we requested something within two to three months there was a rollout. A global rollout, too. It wasn't just for one client. I was amazed and surprised by how fast they implemented suggestions.

We have had zero downtime, so the stability is good.

Having no downtime is important to us because of the damage that can occur if we're down for even two minutes. For example, if a company is selling drinks like beer, and a reseller asks for Heineken but they can't buy it because the data center is down, the reseller will purchase it from another company. This can result in a lot of damage so our data center has to work all of the time.

The stability is very good. I do not face any problem with Guardicore Centra in terms of stability nor does it have trouble with other systems. It is very transparent.

It does not require any kind of windows where you have to put down the system or network. You can install it, making it run where applications are running. This is very important that we do not have any downtime in the installation of the agent. We can do it in real-time. 

It has been stable so far. I haven't had any big problems.

As far as I can tell Guardicore Centra is a stable solution. But only time will tell how stable the situation is. 

We haven't started to deploy it yet, because we were negotiating the pricing and so on.

I cannot comment on stability under higher loads because we have not yet deployed it and exposed it to live traffic. We are still in the testing and evaluation phase.  

So far, the solution has been stable.