I would recommend this solution to others because it is user-friendly and easy to maintain.

I rate the Juniper SRX Series Firewall an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. They can blindly go with Juniper. Juniper has very good after-sales support. Their technical team is very aggressive in support, and they give very good support to the customers.

I plan to keep using this solution. Currently, there is no plan to switch from Juniper to any other brand. I am 100% satisfied with Juniper. They provide a very good service to my customers. I don't have any concerns about after-sales support with Juniper.

I would rate Juniper SRX a ten out of ten.

We are using the latest version of the product.

I'd recommend the product to others. 

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

Currently, we are using the solution as a data center firewall, but we previously used Juniper on all my segments. Since Juniper doesn't have any web content or web filtration, we moved to Fortinet for the internet segment. Otherwise, Juniper is quite okay.

The solution is easy to maintain and monitor. We have moved from SRX550 to SRX1500. Its uptime for the last three months from the deployment day is working fine. The solution's management interface is quite user-friendly for configuring policies and rules.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Juniper mentioned that right now it does not support the Apstra fabric which we currently have in the network. They said that in the next version, there will be support for Juniper SRX. We might have to upgrade the firewall.

We do preventative maintenance on the devices.

I didn't explore the next-generation side of the Juniper SRX to recommend it, but I would recommend Palo Alto and Fortinet solutions.

I rate Juniper SRX a six out of ten.

My advice would be, generally, it is a good product with helpful support. The one thing we would like to see changes in is the pricing could be better.

I rate Juniper SRX an eight out of ten.

I believe that knowing exactly what you want to do is beneficial. There's a lot. It's a very flexible platform, and there's usually more than one way to accomplish your goals. Planning ahead of time is definitely beneficial. If you don't have a lot of experience, I'd recommend working with a partner if at all possible.

I would rate Juniper SRX an eight out of ten.

We're a Juniper partner.

I have used various versions of the solution, including the 300, 645, and 1500.

I'd recommend the solution to others.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. It's a reliable solution. However, maybe, when we use the big box model, the pricing is reasonable.

Most of the companies that we deal with have a committee that takes care of purchases. We sit with the committee and they iterate through the various benefits of the solutions, after which the purchase is finalized. We are not biassed toward any particular product. We explain everything to our clients, show them the prices, and they come back to say what product they have chosen.

In summary, this is a good product, although it is a little bit expensive and the training could be improved. Training is something that is very important, and we were not able to get much information. For example, we couldn't get the best-recommended practices, which is something that we look at when implementing solutions. We were able to get a few of them, although not all of them have been updated. Consequently, we have a shortage of information about Juniper. Nonetheless, customer support has been able to help us in a big way.

Overall, things have been a bit slow, but we have been able to catch up.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

I would recommend reading the documentation before beginning the configuration.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I rate Juniper SRX Series Firewalls nine out of 10. I recommend getting a centralized management solution because managing Juniper firewalls can be messy without it. 

You should read all the release notes before you change the OS because you don't know what you're giving up and what new features you're getting. It's not always that the newest OS is the best for you. So, select the OS based on your specific deployment needs and not just to have the newest one.

Overall, I rate Juniper SRX Series Firewall an eight out of ten.

My advice to anyone considering Juniper as a solution would be to first understand that the product needs to be chosen to fit the environment. You want to get the one right box that has the capacity you need. You have everything you need in the model by just updating your license. You do not have to look for a new box when your traffic remains under the upper limits of the capacity. If you are under the limitations of the capacity, the traffic goes straight out, unimpeded.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Juniper SRX as a nine or even a nine-point-five overall. Additional features that could be added to make this solution a ten that other competitors have would technically make it the best product. For example, Check Point offers Blade Architecture. You just keep adding more and more blades. Because of this, Check Point — especially in the area of their security database — they are quite superior to Juniper. o there is room for improvement.  

When you really study on an enterprise level where Check Point stands out or where Juniper stands out, you have got to look into the way each product fits your needs. I mean Check Point is currently easy-to-use, and very good, global product. It also has quite a good rating from the industry over the past few years. Certainly, someone considering a purchase needs to consider options and trends.  

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

I suggest not relying on the management and primary CLI.

I rate Juniper SRX a nine out of ten.

I would rate this solution 10 out of 10.

If you have the routing solutions and you want to use Juniper as a complementary solution, you could use it. But if you want it mainly for the firewall, I would recommend Fortinet or Cisco instead.

Our client is a medium, small branch company. When they purchased this firewall, they understood that they could use it for a couple of years.

I have a client that works with Juniper 4200 and 4300 and they find the solution to be very user-friendly.

Overall, I would recommend the solution as it is easy to use and has a pretty good GUI. Customers really seem to like it.

In general, on a scale from one to ten, I would rate it at an eight.

I would advise definitely taking some training if you're not really familiar with the interface or the GUI. Brush up on it before you dig into it because a lot of people know Aruba or Cisco, but you need to be familiar with it. Don't just buy it because you read some marketing material on it. You actually need to know how to deploy it.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this product is to make sure that they fully understand Junos OS. Over the past four years, I have become moderately proficient with Juniper SRX. There still a lot to learn but I also have contractors that I can get assistance from if needed. For example, currently, I'm trying to set up RADIUS and I'm having some problems with it.

In summary, I think that their design philosophy is really good, but the execution leaves a bit to be desired.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

I would rate the overall solution a ten out of ten. 

I would give it a seven out of ten.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

My advice for anybody who is implementing Juniper is to enroll in the training that they have available. Train first, then deploy. That will make it much easier.

Overall, I think that this is quite a good product. However, they need to expand their range of device offerings.

I would rate Juniper SRX a seven out of ten.

Make sure to have skilled local support.

We are planning to move to the bigger version of Juniper SRX later this year (SRX5800). We are also planning to move to IPv6.

Make sure you have qualified personnel, because qualified personnel may not be as readily available in your country as Cisco professionals, for example.

I would rate Juniper SRX a nine out of ten.

I suppose Juniper is a good solution for the railway and metro environment. These projects are very handy and work in the relevant environmental condition, because in this environment we have different climatic conditions. Suppose we require -5 to 55, -5 to 85 compression, some EMCMI specifications, such as EN501214 - Juniper is a good solution in the railway and metro environment, anywhere worldwide and domestic. It is relevant anywhere.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Juniper SRX an eight.

Overall, this is a really good product.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

At the moment the solution satisfies our needs. There are no extra features that we need at the moment.

I would rate this solution 8.5 out of 10 because it seems to satisfy our needs. Everything seems good and works fine.

I rate Juniper SRX seven out of 10. 

We're just a customer and an end-user.

In general, on a scale from one to ten, I'd rate this product at a nine. We've been quite satisfied with its capabilities so far. 

I'd recommend the solution, however, it really depends on what an organization needs. There are various factors, like pricing, for example, that should be taken into account when looking at solutions.

This solution is really nice to use. It's very similar in terms of capabilities to a Cisco, but it's just that the operating system is so much nicer to use.

I would say that you need some time to get comfortable with the operating system if you've never used it before, but don't let that scare you. Buy it and put it on your desk for a week, then play with it. If you've got a live environment or if you've got some type of simulation you can set it up in, it won't take long and you can feel comfortable using it.  

I would rate this product an eight and a half out of ten.

I rate Juniper SRX a seven out of ten.

You need to know what your company's strategic vision is, and then map the security part of that. I don't just mean cost-related, but the strategy for profit-related future ventures. You need to know why you want a particular firewall. Don't ignore the functions and future growth and products on the horizon from each of the vendors.

What you go with has to meet your current needs but, more importantly, is the company a going concern - meaning if they're going to get better - then how do they complement your particular industry's growth? Are they going to be there to make remote access and extranets and research easier to deliver? The product has to be configurable, with lots of options should you need to subscribe to those options.

The most important criterion, for me, when selecting a vendor is that they have to rank high in industry ratings. Juniper has just not been there. I haven't seen the 2018 reports, but year after year Juniper is not only the least visionary but one of the least in terms of performance. I also don't like the fact that they spun off their VPN to Pulse Secure. I know that's a subsidiary, but I don't necessarily want to have a separate appliance for a light-duty VPN.

I would rate Juniper at seven out of 10. It's a little harder to configure from a VPN perspective, VPN Tunnels. Their tech support is the big problem for me. I don't want to be bounced around. I don't want to get half an answer when I ask a whole question. I would take an inferior product with better tech support, without question. If I have a responsive engineering team that will fix problems when they come in, with firmware releases, etc., I'd clearly take an inferior product with that better support. It's all about function.

I probably wouldn't have chosen the Juniper in this environment. We just don't need yet another knowledge base to learn. And it doesn't fold into some of our Cisco services. For example, the assets control doesn't integrate well with the Radius servers. Something like that could be downloadable ACLs, for instance.

This product will offer maximum performance and capacity.

It is extremely reliable depending on the business need. It supports full routing functionality and advanced security services like Application Security, Unified Threat Management (UTM), IPS, and threat intelligence.

Advanced security services require a license.

The solution is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain. Also, I advise others to add chargeable features in the initial setup. If it increases the price of the device, that's fine.

I rate the solution as a seven.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Juniper SRX an eight.

The main thing is cost. Having said that, it's not ridiculous, but you're always looking for the best value, and them bringing out the virtual cores has been really good. The cost is more expensive, but you're getting a bang for your buck. They are very good value for money in their product.

The overall, ongoing costs of licensing has added to my budget, but until I get long-term experience and make sure that it's running as expected, I can't say it's everything that I expected.

My advice is to make sure that you have local support because it is very important. Juniper does have some good options in terms of support.

This is not a perfect solution because I think that there is still room for improvement, but I think it is the best solution that I have tested for MBPN.

I would rate this solution an eight and a half out of ten. 

Be sure you know what you are looking for. The SRX650 is a perfect product for a small datacenter, not for a branch office where you need lots of visibility.

Implement your structure (zones) first, on paper, before starting to configure it.

I would rate Juniper SRX a nine out of ten.

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

We are using the SRX Model 345. It's a physical device. It's not a virtual instance.

In general, I wouldn't recommend Juniper to, for example, a small business. I would maybe recommend it to a bigger company. We might have made a mistake taking Juniper. Maybe we should have used something more user-friendly.

I would recommend it to a company that has more than 250 people. Or maybe even over 300. For a smaller company, it's not financially, efficient in the long-term, in terms of subscriptions or maintenance costs and similar things. A company that uses high-grade enterprise equipment, should be really financially equipped to handle such things.

It's highly advanced, at least for me. I would really need some training to at least handle some basic things, or maintenance, or even Firmware upgrading or high availability configurations. It's too advanced for me. I would really need to have some kind of network specialist certificate to manage them.

I would be really worried about the warranty as a new user as well. You really need to keep the subscriptions up to date, or not to stop them. If you've stopped them, you also need to pay penalties for the years that the subscriptions weren't used. 

Regarding equipment, you really need to have them in twos, not one. You need to have high availability for all of them. The equipment tends to malfunction, specifically if there are any power issues inside the building, or if there isn't any generator or UPS underneath, and so on. The equipment really needs to be taken care of.

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

You have to be aware of Linux commands, which will make you able to use this device, like exporting file, saving file, monitoring your logs, and making a new script.

I can say for, that for a datacenter, and for price, first I appreciate Palo Alto and then I appreciate Juniper, more than the others.

Support for Juniper is best, better than Palo Alto, but Palo Alto is more powerful. And there is a big difference in pricing.

This is a product that I can recommend to others.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Juniper SRX a rating of nine.

I would advise others to do good planning in the beginning because that helps a lot in having a very little downtime. It took us two months to implement it, which might seem very long, but we had zero downtime. Nobody noticed anything during the switch. It was the best way to implement it. This is the most important part. When you are trying to do such changes in the organization, it is very important that you do it by using the right resources and from the right perspective.

I would rate Juniper SRX a 10 out of 10.

We choose our solution based on many reasons. One is the cost, which is the primary reason, and the second is the performance. Performance in this context includes how it loads, and how it handles. Based on these parameters, we choose the firewalls.

At this time, we are not using cloud-based features. It is something we anticipate in the future. We are not using Juniper cloud-based. When you have a setup at an architecture level, they will not have drastic changes until, or unless they are financially stable and they want a higher level of architecture to be implemented.

The change will not happen suddenly, even if you have an enterprise core application it won't be done in a different way. There will be a roadmap done. We also have the SSG firewalls.

There is a lot of work in the pipeline, it might take more time to change the firewalls that need upgrading.

When we use so many products, we have to follow the hierarchy. We don't commonly work in a UI environment.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. It is good, and it is faster and easier to maintain. The price is not bad and when compared with Cisco, I find that Juniper is better. It's a good product for enterprise companies. 

We have a custom-built model that makes it very simple to migrate.

I would rate Juniper SRX an eight out of ten.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

If you're looking for a product that can give you routing as well as security services, and you're not looking for too much taxing on the security part, I guess this is a good product. If, however, you're looking for security services on a greater edge, maybe something like next-gen firewall features, referencing services, or IPS to a greater level, I would recommend going with other security products. If you want integration of both, you can use this, and maybe if you evaluate, or move forward with better services over a period of time and better models of that, maybe this is something that you can always look for both, routing as well as security services.

SRX is a security product that's not that good on security, but it's good at routing, so they actually balance out. I would rate them around six of ten. 

Cisco does one thing right. Cisco has AnyConnect so they can fully integrate SSL routing services. Previously Juniper used to have Pulse Secure and MAG devices. They sold it off to Pulse Secure, but maybe they could try to integrate SSL VPN with their products. Maybe that would help them increase market share.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Juniper SRX a seven.

I would advise people interested in using this solution to start learning Junos.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Juniper SRX a nine.

We're an official Juniper partner.

I don't typically work with the user interface. I deal more often with the CLI, and that works very well. I'm not really able to comment too much on usability for those who need a user interface to operate the solution.

I'd recommend the solution. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would rate it at an eight. For the most part, we've been pretty happy with it.

We are a reseller. We don't use the product ourselves. We implement solutions such as this for our clients.

I'd advise those considering the solution to gather the most information possible and organize it so that you can configure the firewall according to the company's needs. The relationship between the information that we get and what the client needs at the firewall, the real needs, is important.

Overall, we've been happy with the solution and I would rate it a nine out of ten.

I find that the interfaces are okay. The big thing is performance. With all the features turned on it slows down.

The advice I would give to everyone is to specify a larger box than you think you need.

Due to the performance indications, I'd rate this product as a 7 out of 10.

Give us 10 minutes of your time, and we will show you the differences. When I do presentations, I give potential clients demo access to the solution(s) I am presenting.

I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Juniper SRX a ten.

Further advice regarding this solution is that anyone planning to implement this product should understand the Juniper suite. They should understand the firewall concept, Juniper configuration, and the command line. They need previous experience with Juniper products. 

On a scale from one to ten, one being the worst and ten being the best I'd give Juniper SRX an overall rating of eight because of its' competitive price. But it's a very complex product compared with other similar products.

We use the SRX1500 with Junos 15.1X49-D75.5. 

I rate the product 10 out of 10. It is very strong and Junos is very powerful. The total throughput is very large.

It is a very good router with firewall.

I rate Juniper SRX eight out of 10. I recommend it. There are two vendors — Juniper and Cisco— that we recommend for the production environment of any kind of build.

We are a reseller and systems integrator. We are also a customer. 

In the office, we have Juniper SRX firewalls. We have not activated the SD-WAN.

I would recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

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

Juniper is good at the routing protocol. If you want a solution to protect your environment from the internet, I would propose a firewall gateway solution but ultimately it depends on what the customer needs.

We are partnered with Juniper, so if customers ask for a firewall solution, the first solution that we pick is generally a Juniper firewall. If a customer wants a firewall other than Juniper, we offer it. Usually, we will do a firewall like FortiGate or Palo Alto, if the customer has enough money, as Palo Alto is very expensive.

It crashed, and we could not change it for some reason. I don't want to keep Juniper within my network anymore.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

• Dedicated support team
• Easy configuration.

I would rate this solution a 7 out of 10.

The Juniper SRX300 is a stable and very reliable product, packed with a lot of capabilities that are not available in the competing products of the same range. I would highly recommend this product to anyone interested in implementing it.

This box has it all and is more for the small-scale branch market. Packaged as an all-in-one routing, switching, and security solution, the SRX300 minimizes the need to deploy separate devices to perform these functions by leveraging on its consolidation, all coming with the carrier-grade capabilities.

I do not recommend this product and instead, would recommend using FortiGate.

I would rate Juniper SRX a zero. I would not even give it a one out of ten.

We are just a customer.

It's a good device overall. I'd recommend it to other users and companies. As long as a customer is buying something that is supported and has a good lifespan, they should be happy.

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

I like the SRX series. In fact, I like all products from Juniper. 

I would rate Juniper SRX an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to new users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Juniper SRX an eight. 

I really like the architecture of the product, but it's not a leader in the market. It's a very good platform, but if the user needs more performance on the edge, I would prefer something else. If a user needs a more sophisticated next generation firewall feature or threat intelligence themes, I'm not sure they'll get that with SRX devices. I think there's a gap there. I think it's a good solution but not for everyone. 

I rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

We plan to continue the usage of this program in the future.

This is a product that I can recommend to others who are planning to implement it.

I would rate Juniper SRX a ten out of ten.

This is a product that I very much recommend.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We have found this solution to be easy to implement and easy to use. It is a little more expensive than some products, but it is worth the investment.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Check the customer requirement first.

Be aware if you need RPC. Out of 18 software versions only 2 has been without issues with RPC.

I would recommend this solution for those who are interesting in using it for a VPN.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

They can use the Juniper SRX as a data center firewall. Juniper needs to focus more on their perimeter firewalls.

Our most important criteria is to look for 24-hour support, prices, partnerships, and what they offer to partners. Also, we want to know if the product can function with Juniper.

Be wary of Juniper's stake in the security realm. If they are ramping up again and are again competing with Check Point, Palo Alto, and FortiGate, then they are worthy of consideration. It is also worth your consideration if your network is Juniper based and you have a secondary firewall vendor.

We are satisfied with its stability , but we don’t advise others to implement a cluster design other than Active/Passive.

This is a product that I can recommend to others.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.