Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches Reviews

I use it for my customers. 

The solution works well overall. 

It's a switch. Everything which I'm expecting from the switch is on the Juniper EX series.

It is stable.

You can scale the product.

All Juniper products that you use in internet service provider equipment. They start from flash, et cetera. If you don't stop them properly, you have some problems with flash memory.

The setup, if you don't have your own configuration, can be a bit difficult. 

All Juniper documentation is terrible. If you are familiar with Cisco documentation, you have everything you need and you have a good overall picture. In Juniper, you have a lot of text and you have to figure out what they are saying as opposed to just seeing a picture and understanding what's happening. Cisco documentation is much better than Juniper.

I've been using the solution for seven years or somewhere thereabouts. 

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

It is scalable. You can scale with more equipment, more cards, more interfaces, et cetera. In the case of switches, you've got upwards of six so you can scale the solution for your needs.

I tend to work with medium-sized organizations. 

The solution's support is typical. It's not quite different from others. I fid it similar to other vendors. For example, I see no difference between Cisco and Juniper.

I'm also familiar with Cisco. I prefer Juniper's switches to Cisco. The price is good. 

I have to stop the initial configuration, then I have to remove all defaults and start from scratch. In my opinion, it's easier to start with my own configuration rather than going through the initial set up. 

The solution is reasonably priced if you compare it to Cisco.

The exact price depends on the model, the software you are going to implement, and the features you want. In the case of Juniper, you can use its recommended vendors, SFPs, et cetera. 

At one point, I was a Juniper partner. I just use the solution right now. 

I'd advise potential new users to start with Junos. That's the name of the operating system for Juniper stuff. If you are familiar with this, you can do everything. However, if you are not familiar, it could be very, very difficult for you to start with Juniper.

I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Juniper switches are smart and we have all the features that we want. You can rollback to the previous version if you make any mistake during configuration. This is not possible in Cisco. 

You need to make a few local configurations to work with the solution. We have faced issues with the tool's stability. 

I have been using the solution for ten years. 

I would rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. We have around 148 ports connected using the solution.

We manage the solution ourselves and do not require any support. 

You just need to copy and paste the template. We do not follow automatic configuration but copy it to the environment. However, the configuration commands are long compared to Cisco. It's not an issue since it is just copy and paste. You need one person to handle the product's deployment. 

The product's pricing is less and almost half of Cisco's. 

I would rate the tool a seven out of ten. 

A lot of our deployments are hybrid cloud that we do for clients. We are personally using an on-premises installation.  

Our clients' use cases for Juniper Ethernet Switches are pretty broad as far as the industries covered. There are clients that are urgent care facilities, physician's offices, legal offices, restaurants — it really runs across the boards as far as industries. The USDA has a number of Juniper switches that we put in for them.  

When you are doing switching for anybody — it could be Motorola or Sprint or a restaurant that is relatively small and has 45 employees — it does not matter. They all have the same PCI (Payment Card Industry) compliance needs. If they are in the medical industry in urgent care — like Duke Medical System or just a freestanding office — they all still have the same HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) compliance. When we are configuring switches, we are not only looking at port density in terms of the number of devices that are hooking to it. We are also looking at the VLAN (Virtual Local Area Network) configurations and a number of other things. Whether you are dealing with multilink, VLANs, being able to specifically control certain ports, control certain applications, or whatever, you are using almost every feature to some degree on every switch because the utility is valuable.  

One of the nicest things about Juniper switches is they work well with other vendor products. When you have to go into a situation where other vendor switches are present, you can make it work.  

Whether you are a Fortune 500 company or a small operation, you might have the same requirements for security features. There are security features related to Mac addresses that are present and high-end switches that lack some of the same flexibility in the lower-end switches. We may be talking about the difference between an EX2300 and an EX5500 model switch. It is the same manufacturer. It would be nice to have more of that security relevance in every level switch, regardless of the price tag or the model. It is just like the fact that you have the VLAN capability on all of them. I think the security features should generally be more available instead of scaled up and down with the product.  

Going into the future, you will probably see more fully meshed networks that have multiple internet-facing routes. These should go in an SD-WAN on a fiber-based VLAN. You may have coax services like Spectrum or Cox Cable providing internet avenues. Or you may also have a 4G or 5G modem doing the same thing in providing additional connection avenues. In the end, I think that the switching on that type of architecture and the routing needs to get a little more intuitive.  

Obviously, you can take care of the situation with routing tables and other methods. I think we are going to need to start seeing some kind of AI to assist with some of what we really want to accomplish from a policy standpoint to achieve better efficiency.  

I have been using Juniper switches for probably a little over 15 years.  

I love the stability of Juniper. I look for stability in this type of product. When I have to put my hands on something repeatedly because of problems — endemic or quasi failures, where the OS just kind of locks up and stops performing — I call them insanity failures. I rarely see that in Juniper or WatchGuard or any of those guys. I like that and that is why I lean toward using those products.  

Is there an end to the ability to scale Juniper? If there is, I have never seen it and I would know because I do data center design. Before I did what I am doing now, I was a director of new technology for Sprint PCS. We equipped to handle a lot of routing and I do not know if there is a scalability issue in the end.  

Our clients are a mix of industries that are small, medium, or large businesses. This product can service all of them. The scalability is really very good. 

You always end up using technical support here and there for something. I would give them a pretty high rating. Some of that technical support I reached out for has been in design implementation. I think once we did have a DOA (Dead On Arrival) switch. But things like that are rare and Juniper is very responsive. They are always pretty responsive. Overall it is a good company.  

I would give the technical support a nine. I do not know if there is any company that I know of whose technical support would rate as a ten-of-ten. I am saying they are a nine, but there really is nothing lacking compared to the competition.  

The installation of Juniper switches is pretty much straightforward.  

Juniper is less expensive than competing products and as much as 33% less than Cisco.  

Whether you are on the lower end of the business scale with a smaller portfolio, or whether you are a Fortune 500 or 1000 company, you can not go wrong with Juniper's back-end products. It is a cost-effective solution in comparison to the competition. I do not like to have to touch switches or routers or anything of that nature unless I am doing a new configuration or a firmware upgrade. The Juniper product helps me with that by having impeccable reliability.  

Saying that this solution is impeccable could be the entirety of my review.  

I have been a network architect for a long time. At one time in my career, I thought Nortel and Juniper were on par. They were the two best-engineered equipment supplier manufacturers out there from both a cost and performance standpoint. I had never been a big Cisco fan. The number one reason behind that is the per-port cost for Cisco is 30% higher than everybody else. Number two, they have too many proprietary protocols that are not friendly with what other technicians know. That is particularly true on their routers. I found that in practice, we had to reboot the Cisco products in enterprise and Fortune 500 company levels too many times. When you had 400 and 500 sites out there and you had to rebuild the routing tables, you were screwed. We did not ever have that same problem with Nortel or Juniper.  

So I got a bad taste in my mouth from Cisco many years ago. I spend a lot of time in cybersecurity and I find the Cisco IOS is one of the most vulnerable and most often patched by comparison to other high-end vendors, like Juniper. I have very few problems with Juniper products and they are easy to configure. They do a good job and they just continue doing it for a long time.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate this product as a ten overall for where they are in technology, their solid engineering, and the product. That includes the software and the hardware.  

Even the lack of a few features is not a point to knock them down to a nine because we are on a road where we are taking a trip. I do not care what the literature says, SD-WAN is still new. We are still pushing the envelope on how we want to use it and how we want to design our systems to work with it. I can not mark Juniper down for being on the cutting edge of innovation.  

We are using multiple EX4200 Virtual Chassis Stacks in an on-premises deployment.

The way we have it configured is that it is our core switch model that holds up our entire infrastructure.

The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability.

The ease of management through the command line interface is very good.

It would be nice to have a more available list of modules that you can get for this solution. One of the hardest things that I've found when I go looking for modules on those switches is actually finding a thorough list of them.

The stability of this solution is rock solid. The only time we've had an issue is when one of the redundant power supplies shorted out. I don't think that this was the fault of the solution. Rather, I think it was due to a failed power line, perhaps a spike in power.

This solution is extremely scalable. We had to add a new line module and we were able to do it while it was hot, so we didn't have any downtime.

This solution makes up the core of our network, so everybody in the company relies on it. We're predominately web-facing, so it supports our public-facing infrastructure. It is difficult to estimate the number of users that it supports.

We have been in touch with Professional Services. They are excellent, and they're always on time.

The responses are timely and they're very knowledgeable. If they're unsure then they will quickly consult other team members. The engineers that are dealing with it won't just sit there and try to figure it out themselves. They'll engage other members in their environment as quickly as they can. They get the issue resolved, so it's great.

We were using a solution from Cisco previously, but we were having issues with those, which is one of the reasons that we switched to Juniper. From what I can remember, the Cisco solution was not able to get the throughput that we required. Also, we required the ability to do hot swap-overs of the devices.

One of the main things with Cisco is that any of the changes that you made were instant, whereas, with Juniper, we can actually stage the changes before we apply them. Also, for the Cisco product, it was a really, really expensive product range. 

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

The deployment took one day at each of two different sites.

I was on-site for the deployments, but we had a consultant come in and do it for us.

The maintenance cost is approximately €2,000 ($2,200 USD) per year, including support, for our entire fleet.

We evaluated other options including some by Cisco and HP. 

If you're looking at this solution from an ethernet switching point of view, we don't use any of the in-depth features. We selected this solution for its reliability and ease of management on the command line.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to plan it out in advance. Other than that, they're relatively straightforward. There are no major issues or items that I could call out as a problem. It's just a case of making sure that you plan our your deployment before you start.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Juniper Switches' best feature is its flexibility.

Jupiter Switches' configuration is a little difficult to understand.

I've been using Juniper Switches for a year and a half.

Juniper Switches are stable.

Juniper Switches are scalable.

Juniper's technical support is good.

I would give Juniper Switches a score of eight out of ten.

We are using the product as edge switches. We have a core switch in one of our branches also, a Juniper switch.

There's no specific benefit like I like this or I don't like it, however, it is just allowing us to have a multi-vendor environment. We have other switches also, like boundary switches which are Brocade switches. We are currently we are using a lot of Cisco switches. About 70% of our switches are Cisco.

The solution is stable and scalable.

It's a product that is simple to set up.

Of the current engineers that are working in Egypt, most of them are familiar with Cisco and not all of them used to work on Juniper switches. That's why those switches aren't very famous in Egypt.

The stability could be better. We find, for example, Cisco, to be more stable.

I've been using the solution for more than five years now.

The stability is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution offers good scalability.

It is a multi-vendor environment, so the total environment itself has about 1,000 users. They use various switches, however.

I've never needed to contact technical support. I can't speak to how they are in terms of the level of service. 

We also use Brocade and Cisco. While Cisco is more stable, it is more expensive as well.

The initial setup is straightforward and doesn't take too much time. It's a pretty quick deployment. 

For deployment and maintenance, we have two people who handle everything. They handle networking, switching, and routing. 

It is less expensive than, for example, Cisco. We pay a yearly licensing fee. 

In our environment, we are using a different vendor approach as we don't want to depend on a single vendor.

I'd advise other companies, especially if they are an enterprise, to not deal with a single vendor.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

In terms of performance, Juniper switches have a more user-friendly interface and more features than Cisco products. However, in terms of commands, Cisco is simple to use, and the command line is easier to use.

The only issue that we have with Juniper Ethernet Switches is the firmware because it is not stable.

When the power goes out, it's possible that it has become corrupted, and we couldn't continue because the switches stopped working. As a result, Juniper products were affected. Also, the power circuits may become corrupted after five years. It is, however, stable in Cisco switches.

We think it's popular. We prefer to use Cisco CLI commands rather than Juniper CLI commands.

I have been working with Juniper Ethernet Switches for ten years.

The product's stability after five or six years is less than that of Cisco.

We have approximately 200 users in our company.

I don't choose products by name, but we develop the technical specifications, and any vendor who can meet the technical specifications will be accepted. The tender, financial, and commercial processes will begin, and we will come to an agreement on the list price.

Our developers are in another department.

Technical support is very good.

Several times during the warranty period, we requested support. The response was very fast, they came to support us the next day. However, we did not extend the warranty after the warranty period had expired.

We are also working with Cisco Switches. Cisco Switches are more stable in terms of hardware and firmware. rather than Juniper Switches.

We only use these switches, the EX200 and the 20. We didn't use any other products with Juniper.

Juniper's initial setup was completed in collaboration with a partner. This happened about ten years ago.

It is sufficient for one technical person to install the switches and another to configure them.

The partner completed the deployment in one day for about 13 switches, making it very simple.

After the configuration, the partner brought his technicians to mount the switches.

We had a leakage in the support process and decided to end the product's life in order to purchase a new product with support. We did not renew product support as a result.

Juniper products are very stable. I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate Juniper Ethernet Switches a nine out of ten.

The solution is easy to use and has good integration.

In an upcoming release, Juniper Ethernet Switches could improve by having more microservices.

I have been using Juniper Ethernet Switches for approximately 10 years.

The solution is stable.

The scalability depends on the environment. For example, if the customer is in a healthcare environment then it is more scalable than other solutions.

We have approximately 30 large customers using this solution.

The technical support is very good. We can talk and have the support of the engineers who are developing the software and features.

We use many other switches, such as Aruba, Hewlett Packard, and Extreme Networks.

The installation is easy if you have certified engineers. You have to have some basic knowledge about the CLI of Juniper to do the installation.

The size of the team needed for the installation depends on the environment. However, we have approximately 10 certified engineers, which can do both, the installations and support of the solution. Additionally, we have architects, junior and senior consultants, and depending on the job we have to do, we can supply different types of engineers.

We have a partnership with Juniper and the price of the solution can be negotiated at a local or a corporate level with Juniper to meet our customer's needs.

There is a subscription payment model or you can purchase licenses on a one, two, and five-year basis. If you want decent support, the solution is not expensive.

I would recommend Juniper Ethernet Switches to others who want a well-integrated, stable, and easy-to-use solution.

I rate Juniper Ethernet Switches a nine out of ten.