There were a few limitations in the product. While evaluating it, we found a couple of gaps. Rate Limiting features were not completely developed. The new feature requests used to take a little longer. The product was not mature, which is why it did not have a couple of features we needed. 

There were limitations and gaps in the product because it was new. Some of the WAF features were missing. Custom rules did not work. We could not create more than 15 custom rules. We had to raise new feature requests all the time. We could not see the logic behind the rules.

Verizon EdgeCast is great in the US and they have good coverage. Globally they do have endpoints, but compared to CloudFront with AWA or Cloudflare, they have less of a reach. 

The comparable features that we are looking at fits into Cloudflare's free version, as opposed to Verizon EdgeCast, which we are paying for.

In the next release, I would like to see more global endpoints for their CDN and a lower price.

The web interface of the Verizon Edgecast portal is very old. It's not user-friendly, slow, and it is missing some valuable features like the ability to make bulk changes. I really hope they are developing a new portal web interface.

A lot of reports are available but not always adapted to your needs.

Another thing is the number of options; a lot of features are available but most of them require users to subscribe to an option. So, it's powerful because you can address all kinds of needs, but it can be very expensive because of the options.

The deployment time of the rules is too long compared to other CDN providers. You need 45 minutes to have a new ruleset live-deployed in production, whereas it takes less than one minute for some other CDN providers. This is something that really needs to be improved.