We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story
reviewer1486944
Systems Administrator II at Lincoln Land Community College
MSP
Top 20
Easy to set up, reliable, provides seamless failover, and the powerful load balancing capabilities save us money

Pros and Cons

  • "Failover is seamless and our services are rock solid."
  • "It would be much easier to have the management interface directly integrate with the Kemp Support library, allowing you to choose the desired template from the online catalog to then directly download to the LoadMaster."

What is our primary use case?

We use an on-premises Skype for Business Server VoIP service that utilizes the Kemp LoadMaster LM-2400 for service resiliency. This allows our three front-end servers to seamlessly support our service. We never miss a call and our chat service is always ready as a result.

Kemp has a pre-made virtual service profile that perfectly fits our use case so the initial setup is quite easy. We also have expanded the use of the LoadMaster to accommodate a number of ancillary services that also require resilience.

How has it helped my organization?

The Kemp LoadMaster is easy to set up, well documented, and very easy to maintain. It has done a flawless job supporting our Microsoft Skype for Business Server VoIP services, as well as expanding to cover a number of other services that require load balancing.

The LoadMaster has helped to keep our Voice over IP services in-house, which has produced tremendous savings versus hosting our services in the cloud. This has allowed us to devote our resources to other projects, increasing our overall effectiveness.

What is most valuable?

The load balancing features of the LoadMaster are the best we have used.

Failover is seamless and our services are rock solid. Kemp maintains a library of templates pre-configured for a number of services, including Microsoft Skype for Business Server. This makes configuring the virtual services very easy. It also makes it very easy to add additional virtual services as you find new use cases. The convenience of being able to download new or updated templates from Kemp's support site cannot be understated.

What needs improvement?

If I had to pick an area for improvement, I think it would be direct integration with the template library. At present, you need to download the templates from the Kemp support portal and then upload them onto the LoadMaster. It would be much easier to have the management interface directly integrate with the Kemp Support library, allowing you to choose the desired template from the online catalog to then directly download to the LoadMaster.

For how long have I used the solution?

We first implemented our Kemp LoadMaster eight years ago when we launched a new VoIP project that required load balancing for enhanced reliability.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is rock solid. We have only experienced one issue in eight years. Kemp support was all over it and got us back online in no time.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

For our organization, the LM-2400 is perfectly sized. I'm sure it has an upper limit but we have not gotten anywhere near it yet.

How are customer service and technical support?

Kemp tech support has been absolutely fantastic. 

We have had one hardware issue, which over a span of eight years isn't bad at all, and one setup question. Both of these issues were handled quickly and to our satisfaction.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, we had been using a Barracuda load balancer. It was nice but the management was not as easy to use and it was not quite as reliable as we would have liked.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was very straightforward. The virtual service templates provided by Kemp make setup a snap!

What about the implementation team?

We used a vendor team but our assigned technician was not familiar with networking or load balancing. I ended up taking over the setup and it couldn't have been easier.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The Kemp LoadMaster is a tremendous value. It works well and is easy to set up and to maintain.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Barracuda and F5 were evaluated as well. The performance and value were found to be much better with the Kemp LoadMaster.

What other advice do I have?

The Kemp LoadMaster just works. It is extraordinarily difficult to suggest any changes that might improve its feature set. Go with Kemp, you won't regret it!

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Jason Dunn
Systems Administrator at a construction company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 20
Keeps us highly-available and avoids downtime, with top-notch customer service

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature is the load balancing and allowing for high availability of our web services."
  • "The configuration of the basic services is pretty straight forward but for more complex solutions, there needs to be better documentation or knowledge base articles."

What is our primary use case?

Our organization provides resources for public safety. For continuous service and support, we need to run our system with high availability and avoid failures or downtime. 

Kemp LoadMaster helps us achieve this goal by utilizing the Kemp LoadMaster virtual appliance in our VMware environment. Kemp LoadMaster allows us to provide load balancing and high availability to our web and API services for internal and public use, making sure that public safety is not put at risk.

Along with making sure public safety is not put at risk, Kemp LoadMaster allows us to keep our web services secure by adding another security layer with its web application firewall and IPS.

How has it helped my organization?

Kemp LoadMaster has greatly improved our uptime while reducing the time spent on maintenance of the virtual appliances, allowing the IT team to concentrate on other projects.

Because of the reduced time from the Kemp maintenance, we able to spend more time making sure that the hardware and server software is up to date. Kemp allows us to now have the flexibility of updating and applying firmware or software upgrades that would normally be service impacting to our infrastructure to be done during work hours without any interruptions.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the load balancing and allowing for high availability of our web services. If we need a maintenance window to apply updates to any of our infrastructure that would normally be service-impacting or require extensive steps to prevent it from being service-impacting, is now simplified to "it just works".

Also, what makes it very valuable is the fact that Kemp listens to its customer base. You have the ability to request new features and it does not fall on deaf ears. The development team is very responsive and accommodating to their customers.

What needs improvement?

The configuration of the basic services is pretty straight forward but for more complex solutions, there needs to be better documentation or knowledge base articles. The knowledge base that is there is well done, but it would be excellent to see it expanded out. For those fringe installations, technical support is more than willing to assist.

The one thing that I would love to see implemented is the ability for Kemp to automate certificate creation through Let's Encrypt. That way I can cut back on my cost of certificates and also pushes towards a more centralized location for certificate management. 

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using Kemp LoadMaster for just over one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This product is extremely stable. We have the metered license so the Kemp appliance has to phone home monthly to send our statistics for the month and the only issue we have ran into is the phone home feature failed once which could have been caused by an internet hiccup.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is easy to scale the solution. If needed another load balancer, it's as simple as firing up another LoadMaster VM.

How are customer service and technical support?

Customer service is fast and responsive. Haven't had to use it very often, if at all. 

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Simple Failover, but it was running into issues and we were looking for more of an enterprise solution.

How was the initial setup?

Setup is cake. It is straightforward and easy.

What about the implementation team?

Kemp's team helped with the implementation while I drove the keyboard. Kemp's knowledge and expertise were top notch.

What was our ROI?

ROI was immediate and gives the peace of mind knowing if something happens to one of my servers, nothing will be seen by the public.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The price is great and the value is definitely there.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We also evaluated F5.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about Kemp LoadMaster. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
554,382 professionals have used our research since 2012.
JimRyan
IT Manager at SWITCHCRAFT INC
Real User
Top 20
Good protection against email outages, and the support is helpful

Pros and Cons

  • "The old process of manually having to redirect Outlook Web Access traffic and Email traffic to a second server is a thing of the past."
  • "The cost of the GEO upgrade is not cost-prohibitive but it's something that would be a nice add-in, out of the box."

What is our primary use case?

We use the Kemp Load balancer with our on-premise Exchange 2016 using two servers on a DAG at different locations. The Kemp load balancer allows us to have a hands-off failover between servers either in a Disaster Recovery model or during upgrades for security patches or service pack updates for the Exchange software.

We are now expanding this for our corporate webserver that will also be hosted at both of our locations. We have more confidence in having on-premise applications than trusting the Cloud. 

How has it helped my organization?

Our organization is better protected from an email outage than before. The old process of manually having to redirect Outlook Web Access traffic and Email traffic to a second server is a thing of the past.

I can sleep at night because of the Kemp Load Balancer, just knowing that in case of a failover, the email will keep flowing and our users will have access in the morning.

Having near 100% uptime for email is critical. Without email access, we would lose business

What is most valuable?

With the move from our second Exchange server to the second data center, the GEO function allows the Kemp LoadMaster / Balancer to work together.

We originally deployed Kemp when we had both Exchange servers at one site. That was good to start with, but as we upgraded to Exchange 2016, we needed to have devices that would handle this increased functionality. The GEO functionality made this happen, allowing the two devices to see each other and determine the failover in either a Disaster Recover of software patch scenario.

What needs improvement?

I can think of three things that would be nice; First, it would be helpful if the GEO function was built into every device. The cost of the GEO upgrade is not cost-prohibitive but it's something that would be a nice add-in, out of the box.

The second is the throughput. If the device was licensed based on the throughput then we could upgrade hardware to get better transactional throughput.

Third, if they had dual power supply options on the lower end models it would be helpful because I may be a smaller shop with only 35 servers, but I still rely on dual power supplies whenever possible.

For how long have I used the solution?

Switchcraft has been using Kemp Load balancer for about three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Kemp is very stable and we have never had an issue.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

You need to upgrade devices to increase the scale.

How are customer service and technical support?

Support has been easy to deal with. I have only needed to contact them a few times during the initial setup. Once it's been in place and operational, we have not needed to mess with the system, which is a huge advantage.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Kemp was my first experience with load balancers.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was easy.

What about the implementation team?

Our partner was great. They had used the devices before, which made it easy.

What was our ROI?

ROI was immediate, as it gives us peace of mind that email would stay up. Call it insurance.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Set up was easy; nothing is cheap nowadays but it is well worth the cost

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did not look at other solutions, as it was recommended by our Consulting partner on the project.

What other advice do I have?

The Kemp load balancer is well suited for an on-premise Exchange system, either at one location or at two.

It is also suitable to use for balancing web site traffic between systems..

Kemp works well when used with two or more units in a multi-site environment  I have not found a solution that the Kemp will not handle well.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
DK
Head Of Technology at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Excellent support, no outage, and scalable

Pros and Cons

  • "It has been functional. We don't have any outages."
  • "When we go serverless, we may again have to revisit this because the configuration needs to be changed. With this change, we can run into a lot of other configurations that we haven't got into, which involve additional expenses. It would be challenging to convince management to buy at that price point. It would be a balancing act of justifying that expense and the value, that is, how it is going to save a bit of time and make our platform secure. It can have better configuration ability. A lot of iterations happen when we have multiple servers pointing to the same domain. If we do not orchestrate carefully, it gets into a loop, which takes away the precious time of the user who is trying to subscribe to a service. It takes a little longer time to realize services as well as web pages."

What is our primary use case?

We have several customers for different services. We have built services on private cloud libraries. We load Java and Python. A lot of these applications interact at multiple data points. For that, we use software load balancers. 

What is most valuable?

It has been functional. We don't have any outages. 

What needs improvement?

When we go serverless, we may again have to revisit this because the configuration needs to be changed. With this change, we can run into a lot of other configurations that we haven't got into, which involve additional expenses. It would be challenging to convince management to buy at that price point. It would be a balancing act of justifying that expense and the value, that is, how it is going to save a bit of time and make our platform secure.

It can have better configuration ability. A lot of iterations happen when we have multiple servers pointing to the same domain. If we do not orchestrate carefully, it gets into a loop, which takes away the precious time of the user who is trying to subscribe to a service. It takes a little longer time to realize services as well as web pages.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for the past four months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable. We don't have any outages.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable. It is a load balancer. We have around 2 lakh customers who are using our systems. Every single login has to go through these load balancers.

In terms of our plans to increase its usage, we are thinking of implementing our solution across the cloud. Therefore, when we go serverless, we may need a lot of cloud balancers. We will have to move to a virtual cloud balancer, which is altogether a multi-cloud. We want to take it across multiple geographic locations, which would be huge work.

How are customer service and technical support?

They are excellent. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was easy. We took it into production after two days, and it took less than 30 minutes.

What about the implementation team?

We implemented it ourselves, but consultants gave us all the information and required knowledge about how to verify. We spent two days doing a hands-on exercise in our staging area, and we were able to understand the entire software ergonomics. After we understood and played around, we finally did some hackathon. We finally concluded that the build is safe and secure, so we posted it. After that, we decided to post it to production. It took less than 30 minutes. We have three DevOps. Our overall software development team has around 20 people.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Currently, no cost is involved with a virtual load balancer. They have used open source. We did not pay for software. We paid for the expertise. We are only paying the consulting charges, which are very reasonable, that is, around a thousand dollars.

What other advice do I have?

The load balancer that we're using right now is for having a tougher load balance between all the services. Very soon, we are looking forward to rolling out a serverless platform on Azure so that we remove the dependency on DevOps configurations and having this container management hub. We will move to a virtual load balancer. They have offered us a pretty competitive price. We are not using all the capabilities. We are only using a subset. We are in touch with their team, and they are very collaborative.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others. If they're looking out for a load balancer for a cloud or on-premises deployment, Kemp LoadMaster definitely works.

I would rate Kemp LoadMaster a nine out of ten. It is hard to find a thing to complain about.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Implementer
SP
IT Engineer at AIS
Real User
Helps to maintain email server uptime, updates are easy to apply, and the technical support is great

Pros and Cons

    • "It would be helpful if there were a way to incorporate tooltips on the fields so that we don't have to dig through documentation."

    What is our primary use case?

    We currently use multiple Kemp appliances to load-balance the delivery of email to our CAS\Mailbox environment.

    Previously, we had multiple CAS servers and Mailbox servers and Kemp was handling that environment greatly. We also used it to migrate to a Single CAS with multiple DAGs. The process was very simple on the Kemp side.

    We also are using it to assist us with uptime due to any possible maintenance windows we have and/or any troubleshooting with the server environment. Kemp allows us to reboot servers and not affect mail delivery, as it will still deliver to a different node.

    How has it helped my organization?

    LoadMaster has greatly helped us with the uptime of our email services. If one server is having issues, it will still deliver to another server.

    Using this product also made it easier to handle migrations to newer Exchange services because the product was the main point of communication, which meant that changes on the device affected everything. This made things simpler for us.

    Not spending hours on troubleshooting issues, Kemp support resolved issues quickly.

    What is most valuable?

    The load-balancing is the biggest feature, of course. It just works. If one CAS goes down, Kemp will still deliver to the other server. It is the same with multiple mailbox servers. If one goes down then mail can still be delivered, due to the fact that Kemp is handling the communications.

    Updates are easy to apply and don't cause downtime as long as you have two load-balancers. 

    The product also allows us to limit certain services on the Exchange server. Allows more control and Access Control Lists (ACLs) for internal and or external access. Instead of making changes in IIS on a server, you can have Kemp control it.

    What needs improvement?

    Obviously, there are a lot of moving parts and fields\settings on Kemp LoadMaster. Not all the settings are easily understandable. It would be helpful if there were a way to incorporate tooltips on the fields so that we don't have to dig through documentation.

    I don't expect the software to assist in migrations, but it would be a plus if they had more documentation on Exchange migrations with Kemp and specific changes that need to be made. However, support is very knowledgeable and assisted us.

    I would like to see an increase in the knowledge base on technical issues or common troubles.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been using Kemp LoadMaster for one year.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We have used the product for multiple years and haven't had any issues or outages from it, so downtime was never an issue.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    This product is highly scalable.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Technical support is A+. They were great in our migration process and even went to assist us with questions that we had on Exchange.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We did not use another similar solution prior to Kemp LoadMaster.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is straightforward.

    What about the implementation team?

    The vendor, Kemp, assisted us and they are very knowledgeable.

    What was our ROI?

    It has paid for itself after multiple years. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Any decent product will cost money and if you want great support and a great product, then you will want to spend the money on it.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We did not evaluate other products before choosing this one.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    reviewer1443177
    Network and System Administrator at Kliniken Maria Hilf GmbH
    Real User
    Improved uptime and security for our Exchange servers, and the support is great

    Pros and Cons

      • "In the web interface, there are a lot of settings in the different menus and it would be helpful if there were an interactive help system or tooltips to help the administrators find and configure the right settings."

      What is our primary use case?

      Our company e-mail and mobile communication system, which is based on Exchange Servers, needed load-balancing and security. After a few discussions with resellers and external consultants, we decided on the Kemp Load Balancer solution.

      Our installation is a virtual Kemp Load Balancer based on VMware. We have configured four  Exchange Servers in a DAG configuration and we have been very satisfied since it was installed. In the future, we would like to map further services via the Kemp.

      How has it helped my organization?

      For us and our e-mail and mobile communication system, the load-balancing and security features are very well-suited. 

      From the installation and configuration to the daily routine, Kemp is great. Importing and defining the rules for the communication systems was quick and easy. Various services and ports are configured for our e-mail and mobile communication system, and we configured some Access Control Lists (ACLs) and the Web Application Firewall (WAF).

       After the configuration was complete, we found that we can still use Kemp for more services. 

      What is most valuable?

      The most valuable feature is that load-balancing, as Kemp helps to maintain the uptime from the e-mail servers.

      If we have or need a maintenance window for one of the other e-mail servers, Kemp will still deliver your e-mail traffic to the other server. It just works.

      It is easy to apply windows updates to your Exchange environment, and using the Kemp Load Balancer made it easier to handle.

      Another great feature is the ability to use the Kemp Load Balancer virtual appliance in our VMware environment.

      What needs improvement?

      In the web interface, there are a lot of settings in the different menus and it would be helpful if there were an interactive help system or tooltips to help the administrators find and configure the right settings.

      The configuration of "standard" services is quite easy but when you configure more advanced settings, it's no longer easy and can be challenging. The Kemp Load Balancer is a very good product out of the VMware ISO (Box).

      Sometimes, you feel years back in the web interface but it's just cosmetic.

      For how long have I used the solution?

      We have been using Kemp LoadMaster for nearly two years.

      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

      Stability-wise, this is a great product.

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      The scalability is great.

      How are customer service and technical support?

      We had contact with customer service/technical support for the license renewal and i can say the contact was very helpful and friendly, just great. Until now all our questions have been answered and resolved by the vendor.

      Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

      We haven't tried any other solution.

      How was the initial setup?

      The initial setup was straightforward.

      What about the implementation team?

      It was a mix between in-house and vendor team, and the expertise of the vendor team is awesome.

      What was our ROI?

      There is no ROI. It is for security reasons that we decided to use the Kemp Load Balancer solution. We no longer wanted the traffic to go directly to the Exchange servers.

      What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

      The costs for the Kemp Load Balancer solution are okay because, for a good product, you have to spend money.

      Which other solutions did I evaluate?

      We did not evaluate other products. We thought about some other solutions in theory but ultimately decided in favor of Kemp.

      What other advice do I have?

      Its a Kemp it works great.

      Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

      On-premises
      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
      reviewer1475775
      VP/CTO at StarNet Solutions, Inc.
      Real User
      Top 20
      Easy to work with, fast support, and well-priced

      Pros and Cons

      • "The user interface is very easy to work with."
      • "Perhaps Kemp could offer some training videos."

      What is our primary use case?

      Our primary use is to provide application load balancing for inbound SMTP mail and webmail for Microsoft Exchange.

      We have also used the product to load balance Citrix applications and delivery controllers. In our Citrix environment, it is much easier to implement, manage, and use versus Citrix's own Netscaler that we have used in the past.

      How has it helped my organization?

      It fixed our issue with internal webmail and SMTP overload. The product works exactly as advertised and we are thrilled with it. We now have webpage acceleration and can even load balance geographically with virtual boxes in our Microsoft Azure space.

      Kemp basically has taken the overloading of one of our servers and now spreads it across three servers without any hiccups. We have excellent performance, see real data for our connections, and have no complaints from our end users. That is a very big help for us!

      What is most valuable?

      The user interface is very easy to work with. We did not have to hire outside services to implement what we figured out ourselves and saved plenty of money.

      What needs improvement?

      Perhaps Kemp could offer some training videos.

      For how long have I used the solution?

      We have been using Kemp LoadMaster for 10 years.

      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

      We have had zero stability problems, ever!

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      It works well.  You can make them an HA pair or put in larger units if required with an easy upgrade path moving the configuration from one bx to another.

      How are customer service and technical support?

      We made one phone call and the problem was resolved, immediately. We had a resolution in 12 minutes!

      My understanding is the company is built from engineers who left a competitor and took what people complained about at the original company and made it into a better product. Their support always picks up within minutes. In this day and age, sitting around waiting for techs to pick up the phone is a draining task! I do not like companies that have poorly trained engineers who don't pick up the phone!

      Their support team is based in the US and that helps us as well. They seem to understand that we only call if there is a problem we cannot solve. Their engineers are really well trained and understand the root of the problem immediately, almost every time. Again, it's hard to complain about this product as we love it!

      Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

      We tried a few products and they were expensive and overly complicated.

      How was the initial setup?

      The initial setup was very easy. The configuration took about 20 minutes through a web browser.

      What about the implementation team?

      We implemented and deployed in-house.

      What was our ROI?

      For about $2,500, we have already made our money back!

      What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

      At $2,500 USD, this is absolutely a fantastic buy for the money!

      Which other solutions did I evaluate?

      We went with Kemp after trying other products like the Netscaler, the F5 solutions, and a few other lesser-known vendors. The Kemp solution gave us everything in the box without having to pay for any additional licenses.

      What other advice do I have?

      Overall, the product has covered what we needed and even offered some additional features.

      It's really hard to say what can be improved when we do not have any complaints, to begin with. I just have to say that even Microsoft named Kemp their preferred load balancer for Microsoft Exchange in the past.

      Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

      On-premises
      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
      AI
      Network and System Administrator at Guardian Capital Group Ltd
      Real User
      Top 20
      Reduces site failures, easy to manage from a single pane of glass, and the support is good

      Pros and Cons

      • "The DNS Load Balancer makes it so that I don't have to worry about site failures."
      • "We experienced a brief period of instability."

      What is our primary use case?

      We use our devices as virtual load balancers for Exchange 2016, primarily.

      We have two sites with two LMs at each site in clusters. We also use the devices as global DNS services and reverse proxy/authentication servers for our external users.

      Our services are primarily Microsoft products being served. These include Exchange, SharePoint, CRM Dynamics, Skype, and ADFS. We are also looking at implementing websites in the future as required.

      SSL offloading is enabled. Our devices are set up in the network as well as the DMZ.

      How has it helped my organization?

      With Kemp, I have been able to implement a global DNS load balancer between two sites for internal and external users with our existing Exchange DAG setup. This has made DR and BCP much easier to manage.

      Our previous setup used Microsoft's TMG solution, and when that went end of life we needed to figure out a replacement. Being able to use load balancing, SSL offloading, and Edge Security Packages, all in one service, made my life much easier to manage from a day to day and single pane of glass perspective.

      What is most valuable?

      ESP gives us peace of mind because it has taken over from Microsoft's Threat Management Gateway (reverse proxy) solution. It also alerts us if there are attempted security breaches so that we can be sure we are safe.

      The DNS Load Balancer makes it so that I don't have to worry about site failures. As it manages both our external DNS and internal DNS queries, we can failover to the individual sites as required. This is true for site failures as well as planned maintenance. 

      We also use the Kemp 360 Vision, which monitors our services from an external perspective and alerts us via SMS and email, so I know if things go down. 

      What needs improvement?

      We experienced a brief period of instability.

      For how long have I used the solution?

      We have been using Kemp LoadMaster for six years.

      What do I think about the stability of the solution?

      I have only had an issue with the solution once in terms of stability. The issue was not an end user-visible issue, and upgrading the O/S fixed the issue right away.

      What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

      I beleive it's scalable because I can always upgrade my licensing to a unit that handles more requests. 

      How are customer service and technical support?

      Service is great, easy to work with, and always responsive.

      Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

      Prior to Kemp LoadMaster, we used end-of-life products from Microsoft.

      How was the initial setup?

      The initial setup is straightforward, due to Kemp's support services and available templates and documentation.

      What about the implementation team?

      We completed the setup in-house.

      What was our ROI?

      I believe it is high due to the many services that the solution has been able to provide.

      What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

      From a cost perspective, Kemp is very competitive and is not hard to justify by any means.

      Which other solutions did I evaluate?

      We looked at Citrix Netscaler as well as a solution by A10 Networks.

      What other advice do I have?

      My advice is to use Kemp's support to help with the initial setup. It is included in the initial cost and it makes sure that best practices are used. Keep up with the support because it's worth it.

      I am currently happy with everything.

      Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

      On-premises
      Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.