The scalability is a good thing.

I have about 50 users who are technicians.

Scalable is fine. The licensing part is not hard-coded with the server. Whenever we want to increase the licenses, we just talk to our NETSCOUT agent again. We'll get more licensing and keep it going. So, it is definitely a scalable solution.

We have around 160 users accessing this tool per month. 20 percent of the users are the admin team who manage the tool. they just log into the tool and check application performance.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten. In my company, we use our own components for the systems in our environment.

The newer technology scales very well, especially in the virtual environment. Some of the hardware that I purchased four or five years ago, since it's a hardware-based system, limits how it can grow and scale. But truthfully, five years for a deep packet inspection tool like this is quite good.

There are some hardware components that communicate to the nGeniusONE that I'm likely to be upgrading within the next few years. My traffic has grown to the point where I need more and, since it's hardware-based, it can only scale so far.

nGeniusONE itself scales very well. It's cloud-based.

We are moving to a virtualized environment in our data center, and NETSCOUT is making very scalable nGenius solutions so that we'll have some virtual instances of it. Our plan is to expand that into our virtualized environment and be able to have some inspection of the traffic that stays in our data center. We've already started that process. Our bottleneck is the internal resources to do it. It will probably be done by the end of next year.

It is a scalable product.

My impressions of the scalability of the solution are positive. We've grown greatly as a company, and it's kept up with our needs.

It's extremely scalable. We've had no issues with the scalability at this point.

I have not had any problems with scalability.

The solution is as scalable as we or our customer wish. But we don't plan to increase the usage for the moment because of the expense.

We have six people using the solution. 

We currently need three guys to deploy the solution and one to maintain it.

Looking forward, I believe we'll see that the more we add to it, the more and more our network will get better.

The solution is scalable. It works the same when we add more components. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. Almost 50 employees are using the solution in our organization.

The scalability is difficult. Packet capture and packet broker are hard to do because you ultimately have to build a separate overlay network, so you can capture the packets. The network speeds are constantly increasing, so now you are at 10 gig or 100 gig capabilities, and it's hard to scale.

From the solution point of view, the licensing and architecture are scalable, but for hardware, when there is physical infrastructure, they probably need to improve on large-scale deployment. They need to focus on how a large number of databases can be effectively managed. And they need to improve the performance of the hardware.

We have between 10 and 15 teams using the solution. Each team's role is NOC support or SOC and, on the business team, there are people doing capacity analysis and people using it for reporting. For deployment and maintenance of the solution there are three or four involved, who are tool administrators.

We're using it fully in our organization. It's covering more than 90 percent. Increased usage depends on the infrastructure visibility. We may look at some expansion, but not immediately.

After today's conversation, here at NETSCOUT Engage 2019, it seems like it's highly scalable. I always knew it was scalable but with the new enhancements coming, it's really good.

Scalability is great. I am looking forward to seeing more.

It scales well also. We are about up to 350 InfiniStreams. We have a multi-tier architecture for the NG1, locals and globals, and backup solutions and the failover solutions for disaster recovery work well.

We can definitely scale it higher. There's a lot more that we've found that we could be hooking the nGeniusONE up to. The possibility is there. The only issue we have is our bureaucracy.

As far as what it could be doing for us, if I had my way we'd have it taking care of everything. It's just a matter of getting it done. But the option is definitely there. We're using it mainly just for data center and core stuff, but the option is there to send it out to our distribution nodes as well.

It's very scalable and very easy to scale.

We haven't really scaled it very much. We're not a really big shop. We've got five InfiniStreams collecting into our nGeniusONE. It's supposed to scale pretty well, but I don't really have much comment on it because we're pretty small as it is.

The current solution is not easy to scale, because it is an appliance-based solution. So, you have to swap everything out.

The scalability is great.

We have 30 solution users in our organization. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

The scalability of NETSCOUT nGeniusONE can be good but it depends on the customer's budget.

In my company, we have 12 people using the solutions.

The solution's distributed architecture, in terms of being both lightweight and scalable, is pretty good. The ability to distribute the solution is good. We have more and more use cases with virtualized systems, so we need a way to be able to distribute the solution on different clouds and sites.

There are about 100 users.

The scalability is excellent. The company allows you to add more to what you already have. Not all companies do this.

It's also pretty scalable, there is no problem with that. It can be expensive, but if you have a good configuration, based on what you are looking for, it's okay, it's manageable.

The scalability needs some work. From a probe perspective, we are limited to a certain amount of throughput on the devices themselves. Without having actual hooks into the bare metal hardware for the solutions, it's a bit of a "thumb in the air" as to when we hit our capacity or when our high watermark is. I'm not sure if our operations teams have that capacity under control. So when we have to scale, it's a very large expense.

The scalability is huge because certain ISPs have hundreds of these things out there monitoring their deployments, versus our having a few. It's very scalable.

So far, on the NG1 side, it's been very easy to scale. We just go into InfiniStream if we need to and we can very easily link it to our same NG1.

In terms of actually needing to add new InfiniStream, this has been a challenge because we'd like to reduce costs. However, there are a lot of use cases where we absolutely have to have new hardware, which we don't like, but it is what it is.

As far as we can see, the scalability issue is mostly that we need to spend more time to tune the software to understand our environment a little better. Other than that, we haven't found any scalability issues. Scalability is related to the hardware sizing and I think we did a pretty good job on that front.

The solution can scale in most directions, bandwidth, hardware, virtual taps, etc.

It's very scalable.

We haven't scaled much. Talking to other customers, it sounds like it scales well.

The scalability becomes very expensive quickly.

It is definitely scalable, as long as we do things right.

It seems to be scalable. We have a pretty big installation. Once we get capacity in place, I think it will resolve a lot of our issues.

It scales out fairly widely, horizontally. And with the new virtual one, we'll be doing it a lot wider. So it has good scalability.

It is an easy-to-scale platform.

We'll probably increase visibility in future because it needs to replace TruView. Currently we are only using packet TAP data. Later on, as NetFlow and those things evolve, we will need to move over to NetFlow collectors on the system as well. Currently we're using them on TruView.

And we need to expand to some of the newer data centers that the client has moved into, as well as the cloud section. We need to expand into those as soon as the client has a bit more budget and they are happy that the system is working and the views and the consolidated views are giving them what they want. Then they'll expand more on the system.

The key thing for us is to get the VAR service up and running, which should be starting from today. They've sorted out their remote access. That took us a few months just to get into the banking environment with all the nondisclosures and security checks. We are quite happy to get that started and to see how they can assist us on the system. We want to do a sanity check on the system to see what we've missed.

The scalability is very good. We have had no issues. It has been very scalable.

We have two network operations centers. We support 34 nodes, and those nodes are being remotely monitored.