Juniper MX Series Routers Reviews

We are using Juniper MX Series Routers for internet connection and for importing and managing data. We are also using them for internal connectivity. They serve as a border between our initial team.

For the Juniper MX Series Routers, it plays a crucial role in our network. They offer numerous features, enabling multiple connections and handling various reports. The routers efficiently manage the number of switched fabric codes and process features based on the specific switch requirements. Previously, I utilized them for processing and addressing customer-side concerns. The routers have excellent documentation, making it easy to resolve any issues that may arise. It's excellent for customization, especially in tailoring the Windows configuration environment. Overall, dealing with this solution has been straightforward and efficient.     

Currently, I don't have specific concerns or ideas for improvement. Regarding functionalities, I appreciate the user interface of Juniper Elite. Additionally, I'm exploring the use of Juniper Routers in a Parliament environment, particularly with Baragon, and so far, I find it to be a valuable feature.

We're currently facing an issue as we're in the process of building and dealing with the software, specifically transitioning from R2 to RC. It's like when there is an update in the routers, and in the process, there are chances to end up losing some of your settings. The challenge arises because the recommended configurations for RC do not align with our features, necessitating a reevaluation of many features. It would have been more efficient if the initial recommendation had been for RC, avoiding the need to redo our research. This has resulted in a loss of time for us, and we've encountered this situation multiple times.

I have been using Juniper MX Series Routers.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

I would rate it a nine as well. We are implementing MX Routers in various environments, testing new features. I estimate it to be more than four hundred users.

They are really supportive. 

Positive

In comparing Juniper with other vendors, especially competitors like Cisco, I prefer Juniper over Cisco. While I have experience with both, I find the command interface of Juniper more preferable, and I believe it offers better overall performance.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I find it to be one of the most feature-rich aspects, particularly appreciating the synchronous configuration, making it straightforward for me.

I would rate it around a three. While I'm not deeply involved in pricing discussions, I believe it is comparatively more affordable than Cisco.

I would overall rate it 8 out of 10. 

We have established a customer network using Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches, specifically the EX4200 with 804 ports, and it includes several Cylance Wi-Fi access points.

In our company, we are integrators who create solutions for our customers. I find Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches to be suitable as it allows for easy configuration and offers features like SNMP. I find it convenient to switch from Cisco to Juniper EX because of my experience with various vendors like Huawei and Cisco. It's easy for me to read configurations from Cisco and transfer them to Juniper.

We mainly work with customers who want to change or upgrade their network infrastructure, moving from vendors like Cisco, Aruba, or Huawei to Juniper for modernization. Juniper's features are more advanced, and it helps us meet the diverse needs of our customers. My role involves helping with the deployment and configuration of switching, access points, and Wi-Fi, for building robust and modern networks.

There are areas for improvement in Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches. One aspect that could be enhanced is the pricing; many clients acknowledge the quality of Juniper switches but find the pricing challenging, especially when compared to competitors like Huawei.

Additionally, from a feature perspective, there's a desire for improved clarity and ease of configuration in Juniper switches. Some users find it difficult to understand and configure certain aspects, necessitating the use of external tools. This complexity, especially for Internet service providers, can be a barrier. Addressing these concerns could further strengthen the position of Juniper switches in the market.

I have been using Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches for the past ten years.

I find Juniper switches to be stable and reliable. The stability is high, and it's easy for me to affirm the stability of Juniper switches.

In terms of scalability, it's excellent, especially for Ethernet providers in Ukraine where there has been significant growth. The switches have proven to be scalable for customers with varying network requirements.

Positive

Comparing Juniper with other vendors, especially competitors like Cisco, I prefer Juniper over Cisco. While I have experience with both, I find the command interface of Juniper preferable, and I believe it offers better overall performance.

The installemnet is easy to find on the portal. Joining the portal and navigating through it has become straightforward for me. When deploying Juniper switches for customers, the first step is to discuss their requirements and recommend any modernization or changes needed. The next steps involve addressing specific features, discussing network topology, and optimizing costs for the project. 

In terms of manpower for deployment, it can vary based on the complexity of the project and the current market conditions. In the current situation in Ukraine, finding new engineers for the team can be challenging due to the ongoing changes in the market and the need for maintenance.

My advice to others considering Juniper switches is that they are efficient and reliable. 

Overall, on a scale of one to ten, I would rate Juniper switches at around seven.

We use it for routing, MPLS, and VPNs.

The most valuable features for us were related to our transition into MPLS technology, specifically for BPN and VPN services. Juniper's MPLS capabilities, including IS-IS and RSVP, were crucial in our decision because they aligned perfectly with our MPLS network requirements.

Identifying areas for improvement is tricky because Juniper's MX Series routers are a great fit for our needs. The Commit and Rollback feature, in particular, outshines what Cisco offers. While it is challenging to pinpoint specific areas for enhancement, there is room for better support and updates for Ansible. Having more up-to-date Ansible resources and open tools for independent use of telemetry data would be valuable, along with maintaining or improving support for integrating Juniper with external solutions.

I have been using Juniper MX Series Routers since 2008.

Juniper MX Series Routers is very stable.

The scalability of the solution is excellent. I would rate it as a ten out of ten.

We switched from Cisco to Juniper's MX Series routers because of their innovative data and control plane separation. We had been using Cisco since 1999, but Juniper's approach caught our attention. In 2008, we considered different platforms, including Alcatel and Brocade. However, Juniper's competitive pricing and top-notch product quality made the decision easy. Moving to Juniper has been a great choice for our network team.

The initial setup for Juniper's MX Series routers can be straightforward if you prefer manual configuration. We typically connect via console, load our configuration files, and get our network up and running. We haven't used automated configuration tools because they might not have been available when we started. Sometimes, when you are used to a particular setup, it is challenging to switch to a new approach.

I'm not very satisfied with the current licensing model that mandates a license for adding a new interface, which wasn't the case initially. Our needs, particularly as an educational institution, are different. We believe that the product pricing and policies should be more adaptable to better serve clients like us.

Overall, I would rate Juniper MX Series Routers as a ten out of ten. It is an excellent solution.

We primarily use the solution as an execution router. 

We can use the router on IGP and EGP protocols. Our enterprise customers can connect in different ways. It usually depends on our enterprise customer department. If they are using two links or three links from the same handle of power, we can configure with EBDP, with our client. It offers good bandwidth support. The capacity of the routers is very good.

It is easy to initially set up.

The solution is stable.

It's scalable. 

We haven't had any issues with the routers. Everything has worked well. 

We'd appreciate it if they had a better GUI. It would be more flexible for the customers that way. For example, MicroTik is more popular with customers based on its better GUI.

I've used the solution for the last three years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

We can scale the solution well. We have about 30 to 40 people on it currently. Mostly, they are engineers. 

Technical support is great. They are responsible and experienced. We have been satisfied with the level of support we get.

Positive

I've used Cisco routers as well. The price is a bit higher. We get higher capacity in Juniper for less cost.

I'm also familiar with MicroTik, which offers a better GUI than Juniper. 

The solution is simple to set up. it's not overly complex. 

I'd rate the process of implementing a five out of five in terms of ease of the process. 

We are using the latest version of the solution.

I'd recommend the solution to others. It's a very straightforward product. 

I would rate it nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for its router capabilities.

The solution allows for a lot of communication with the internet. 

When you configure Juniper, you are configuring in the right scheme as Juniper configurations use XML files so all configurations are allocated in necessary strings. For example, if you configure a system, some comments can be on the top of configuration and some in the middle, and some on the bottom. You have to scroll through configurations always up to down typically.  However, in Juniper, all configurations are allocated in one place. It's very convenient. 

Juniper is at the forefront of IT technology. Every new technology always can be reflected in the latest version of the firmware. If you work in data centers or internet service providers, you have to be always very flexible and update your firmware to modern configurations and so on.

Juniper is the end of the software-defined network. There are more popular routers. Right now, the leaders are Cisco, Arista, and Huawei. Juniper has to chase them and catch up to their offerings. 

I'd like to see a router that is supporting, for example, HD-1.

If you are using the Enterprise Router in a service-positive network the features they offer currently are enough. If you use it in a data center, maybe you need a supporting VX-1 or something like that to be part of the vTAP configuration for this router. 

The initial setup is not easy.

I've used the solution for ten to 12 years. 

It's one of the more stable routers. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable and the performance has been good overall. 

Scalability is very good. You can change modules inside interfaces in this, for example, modular router. We've moved, for five or seven years, between different types.

That said, a half year ago I had a problem. We bought a new MX 480 for connection between two devices. One old device, which we bought it eight years ago, and a new one. We had to use an old version of mixed MIC devices inside this router to bind the new router.

We have about 20 people using the solution right now. 

I've used the Juniper Support Team for a couple of problems with Juniper. They were great. they answered my questions and responded in a reasonable amount of time.

Positive

The initial setup is not very easy. It's not complex either. It's in the middle between easy and complicated.

If you are configuring MX or 80, if you know what you need to configure and if you are configuring the data center, deployment can take one day.

However, usually, you don't know what the customer needs or you don't know which direction of configuration you can use. For example, you can configure interfaces like virtual interfaces or sub-interfaces. It looks the same, however, they have some inside configurations that take longer.

So for these devices, you should analyze for big devices for data centers and internet service providers, you should analyze what kind of configuration you do before so it'll take more time than configuration.

You do have to pay for the solution, however, there isn't an additional licensing cost. 

I'm a customer and end-user.

I'd recommend the solution.

It's a good solution with good support. You can also find technology knowledge about the product on the internet. It's not very difficult to look up more details. You can find anything in the forums, for example. In Russia, these routers are popular, which makes it possible to ask some advice from engineers from other companies. They can share their experience which is important when you reconfigure devices.

If it was in January, I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. However, right now, I'd rate it maybe eight out of ten since we don't have support in Russia any longer. Nobody can send you new details to change things if they're broken, for example.

In a service provider environment, I rely on Juniper MX Series Routers to deliver high-performance networking solutions to our customers.

By using the product, our performance has increased by around 20%.

The most valuable feature of Juniper MX Series Routers is its exceptional policy management capabilities.

The product is solid in general. The only thing that might need improvement would be the occasional downtime.

I have been using Juniper MX Series Routers for over five years.

Juniper MX Series Routers have been mostly stable, but we have encountered occasional performance issues and downtime, mainly related to hardware issues. It is a common challenge faced by any vendor. I would rate the stability as an eight out of ten.

The product is fairly scalable.

The support team is quite good. They respond quickly and have been effective in fixing our issues. I would rate the support as a seven out of ten.

Neutral

Setting up Juniper MX Series Routers is generally straightforward. It takes a few hours to deploy it.

Overall, I would rate Juniper MX Series Routers as an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for connection with the internet and with other organizations through Juniper. We use it for interconnectivity.

The product protects us from multiple threats from the internet. Juniper is the first layer of protection.

It's so simple to use and intuitive. It offers high protection and I like it. It's user-friendly and flexible.

It is easy to set up.

The solution can scale. 

The stability is good.

Technical support is helpful.

We've witnessed an ROI.

The integration could be better. It was a difficult configuration with integration with other systems. Others are more user-friendly when it comes to integration. 

I'd like to see more notifications available via both SMS and email. 

I've been using the solution for ten years. It's been a decade. 

The solution is stable. It's one f the most stable products on the market. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The product is scalable. It's not hard to expand as needed. 

We have around 300 users. 

We may increase usage in the future, however, I do not have exact details. 

Technical support is great. I'd put it at the same level as Sophos. They're great.

I work with FortiGate, Juniper, and Cisco. Fortigate may be a bit more flexible than Juniper. It does have a cloud sandbox we can use, for example.

Previously, we used ASA, Cisco ASA, and changed to Juniper, as it was really difficult and it is not as user-friendly. Juniper is more stable and easier.

The solution is simple and straightforward. It is not complex at all. I'd rate it a three out of five in terms of ease of setup. 

The last time we deployed Juniper was six months ago and we had a pretty good time. After six months, we replaced all the requirements with the latest version of Juniper and it took, with migration, maybe three hours. It was easy.

We have four people on staff that handle deployment and maintenance. These include an engineer, a specialist, and a person well versed in analysis. 

We handled the deployment in-house. We did not need outside assistance from integrators or consultants. 

We've seen an ROI of over $200,000 and maybe as much as $400,000.

We pay a yearly licensing fee. I can't speak to the exact price. There's only the licensing fee and not any extra ancillary fees.

We did look at pfSense and Sophos, however, we decided on Fortinet and Juniper. 

I'm a customer and end-user.

We always download the last update for this project, however, I don't remember the number of the update.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's easy to use, stable, and continuously improving. 

We use it for Internet pairing. 

The full Internet DGP is a valuable feature. They used to provide high gig options, but now we have increased capacity and look for more options.

Juniper can work on their capacity, and ability to support BGP protocols. The functionality is limited in Juniper. There is a disruption in the convergence of network change. There is also a change in license which needs to be looked at after each time. Automation can also be improved.

I have been using Juniper MX Series Router for 15 years now. 

It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. 

The scalability is currently not satisfactory. We have a device that needs ten terabytes of gig capacity, but currently, Juniper provides four Terabytes, which isn’t satisfactory for our needs. I would rate it a seven out of ten.

The support is good. 

Positive

Before Juniper, we used Cisco. We decided to shift due to the capacity, volume, and price differences. Currently, we are looking into Arista Networks.

The initial setup was not a very complex process and took three weeks. It went according to the plan.

We have to pay for the device and licensing. The support service requires additional costs.

It is a good product. It has been a very stable product in terms of functionality, capacity, and transmit limit. The support was very quick and documentation is readily available. I would rate the product an eight out of ten overall.