I give the solution a ten out of ten.

Our organization purchased the enterprise R20 set up and we are currently using version 8.4.3. of the solution.

We have two telephone switches, one in New York and one in LA, the Loadbalancer.org devices in the Enterprise R2 solution are on Dell N240s in our data centers.

The other feature that I like about the solution is the graphing for network bandwidth and system load averages that are right on your front screen. You can see when somebody's attacking you. Throw that picture up on a screen in your NOC, and then you can see how your domains are doing. When there's a sudden spike from normal traffic, say five megabytes, and now all of a sudden it hits 50 megabytes, you know there's something going on. Look at the WAF logs.

Regarding stability, the box has been up for three years. They are deployed in an N+1. We had a router crash, on the underlying router of the network. We had an instance where the default router crashed and it was brought back up and the Loadbalancer itself did a switchover to the other device and became active. It was stable for over a year after that. Overall the solution is very stable, with no crash problems.

We're not running a huge load through it. For example, our system load of the N240 box is probably less than 2%. It's not pushing a lot. The amount of traffic we are pulling through is maybe at peak times for SIP provisioning servers for phones, maybe 10 megabytes. We run roughly 20,000 phone lines and customer portals through the WAF. It's not a heavy load, but they've been very consistent, with no crashes, and good support. I find their support contracts in this industry reasonable.

When you purchase this solution you get the extra firewall, you get the HAProxy control, you get the WAF rules, and you get a Loadbalancer functionality if you ever need it.

The solution requires on average one person for one hour a day to maintain.

I recommend learning how to write your own rules to match your deployment after starting with the standard delivered set. Customization is easy! Know what is good on your system and what's bad on your own system when you see these Internet requests coming in. For an enterprise, you could use this device to lock down any unwanted entry to your network to make yourself truly private. If you know the IP addresses of your sites, you can tell this device, "Don't let anything else through."  Have some dedicated personnel monitoring it at first for two to three weeks in order to get the rules correct, the way you want to improve, or control your network traffic. Then turn on the blocking. After that, do your daily monitoring for about an hour a day to see if anything needs to be modified.

The number of people using Loadbalancer.org depends on the company. One client has ten to one hundred users, while another has up to one million users.

There's a plan to increase the number of users for Loadbalancer.org, but that depends on the company.

Between one to ten managers, admins, and engineers take care of the deployment and maintenance of Loadbalancer.org, but it depends on the company.

I'd recommend Loadbalancer.org to anyone who wants to start using it.

My rating for Loadbalancer.org is eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution for small businesses with limited resources and do not have complicated requirements.

I would rate Loadbalancer.org an eight out of ten.

I would definitely recommend this solution. It's highly scalable.

There are different scenarios provided to suit different customers. If it's a small environment, there is a box card virtual plan that allows up to 2000 concurrent users to load balance. If the load is high, there is the option of a physical box and physical scaler. If there's a higher load, one can opt for SDX that works as a cluster.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Loadbalancer.org is highly valuable for organizations dealing with extensive file transfers. It helps prevent server overload by distributing the load across multiple servers, ensuring stability and enhancing security.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

For what it is and what it does, it's not a very glamorous piece of kit. It's a load balancer, it takes the connection and decides where to put it, to another server or somewhere else. It's the speed at which it can do it and the fact that when it does go wrong - and obviously things do happen - how quickly and how well the company resolves it. Those are the two things which make us stick with and recommend it to anyone else. 

Most people, if they need a load balancer, they know that they need a load balancer. It's not something which you can just say, "Oh yeah, I was talking to the guy in the pub, and he said, 'Oh you really need to get one of these.'" It's quite a very specific requirement to have one. But if anyone does need one, absolutely, it's bang on.

Give it a go. They're great.

For load balancers, these guys are perfect. If you need a lot more bells and whistles, you may need a more expensive product. Tell the sales guys at Loadbalancer.org your needs, but do your research. Set up a trial device. Make sure you do not need a more full-featured product. Loadbalancer.org is improving their product all the time, but know what you are getting into.

Plan your specifications and features carefully. It's about doing proper planning to make sure that they will actually fit your requirements.

The owner of the company writes a very extensive and detailed blog. I would suggest any other potential customers read it, that they read the owner's blog, to understand what the company is focused on and where their priorities lie. Beyond just the product marketing and materials, you can actually see where the owner of the company wants them to be going, and what they're doing. And that might help focus you on whether it's the right product for what you're trying to achieve.

You need to have a basic knowledge of load balancers to use the solution. You can deploy the solution on-premises or on the cloud. Analytics-wise, the solution is much better compared to other vendors.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Implement major changes during the appropriate support hours so you can get support if things don't work out correctly.

Start out with the limited, restricted option first. Because to upgrade to the unlimited option, you just call customer service and get your license changed. That would help some small businesses. So if they evaluate, and they find that they need more, they just update their license and they get unlimited clusters. So that way they are saving, if they want to be cautious.

We are planning to change to another load balancer with the bonding capability feature. 

I would recommend this solution to others, but it would be better if it had the bonding capability.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

I would say, go for it. It has proved to be a pretty reliable system, it hasn't let us down. Try to break it.

We've never had any trouble with it. And when I've had to speak to support about firmware upgrades and things like that, they either do it for you or they give you guides and it just works. It's probably few and far between, with regards to things that actually do what it says on the tin. There's a lot of stuff out there at the moment that says it does everything but it doesn't. This is one of the few that actually does it.

I would rate it a nine out of 10. We have had one or two small crashes on them, nothing major, but I guess that would be the only thing stopping it from being a 10.

I would say that, from the experience that we've had, the devices, operation, and the support from the technical support teams, that I can't fault it. I can't fault the systems. I'd happily recommend them.

It's just worked. It's been a good system. We were advised to purchase it and it was good advice. I'd say that it's been absolutely 100% brilliant for us, and I wouldn't think twice about recommending them.

Do it. 

I think they have very nice upgrade offers. When you start small, you can take the smaller version, and if your company is hopefully expanding, you can always choose an upgraded version. I remember they had nice offers. We never needed one because we immediately chose the Enterprise version but I can imagine that you would like to start small, and they have nice offers for that.

I would say it's a 10 out of 10, because it does exactly what it needs to do and that's what you want from a product.

Basically, I'm a consultant, so I implement things. I don't use them personally. However, I do implement for customers. I work with people that are F5 partners.

I’m currently using the F5 version. The current new version is 16 dot something.

I work primarily on-premises as these are still appliances, VMware physical appliances. VMware is mostly on-prem.

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

I rate Loadbalancer.org seven out of 10. I would recommend Loadbalancer for some companies. It depends on the management. It needs to be a good fit for your business requirements. 

We have approximately three engineers that do the maintenance of this solution.

I would recommend others to focus on the network and learn how the solution works fully and they should understand the concepts behind it.

I rate Loadbalancer.org an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution. It's a market leader. The admin should know the product well before configuring it. They need experience. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. Not a ten out of ten because of the complex configuration. 

My advice to others considering this product is that they will experience a very good, stable product which is very easy to set up.

The Loadbalancer.org product has helped reduce our tech teams time on manual maintenance of our load balancer and the development of the product is ever evolving.