I have not come across limitations in the solution. I have worked on the 300 series, the 700 series and the 1000 series, but there are no limitation within the box. The important thing is that the combination of the box and the license provide the correct solution. That's what comes with this. Otherwise, we must consider the hardware and configuration details in respect of the throughput authorization when it comes to 100 Mbps for NGFW or 400 for UTM. These are especially present in terms of the configuration of the box against the bandwidth.

The solution is scalable.

I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

It is scalable, but there might be some issues with scalability if you don't have an additional device.

The scalability is pretty good, actually. The internal processing is light. It could scale much bigger than compared to the other SD-WAN solutions that I'm aware of. Even the small unit actually could scale for 1,000 branches already. 

On the Internet side of things, the solution is quite easy to scale. You have limitations regarding each box's bandwidth, but it's quite flexible. You can do anything between ten megs and two gigs of total throughput. I suppose that is scalable, but you need a different box for each of them.

We have quite a range of customers from small, medium, and enterprise clients working with Versa. It is very scalable in that direction. We can do a single branch office with ten staff or massive organizations with thousands of people.

The solution is scalable. We have 200 workers using Versa WAN solutions. They run the gamut from network admins to security admins, installation guys, field engineers, technical account managers, and more. They use the product to check endpoints or data analytics. 

The solution is extremely scalable. We find that having a control center and being able to monitor in one location is very scalable. If organizations need to expand the offering, they can do so rather easily.

Everyone in the organization really uses the solution due to the fact that it's a network edge. Anyone who wants to get out of the network has to use the solution. If you're looking at it from that point of view, if you're looking at it from how many people within the organization actually deal with the daily grind of monitoring and keeping up, we have a small team that takes care of it. The team contains anywhere from five to ten people at any given time.

It is pretty much scalable. Currently, it is on around 5,000 of branch location, and I don't see any problem on this front. We are providing services to enterprise customers, and we will be increasing the capacity of Versa.

Currently, approximately 1,000 plus employees regularly use Versa for various teams , and perform actvities such as  as deployment, assurance life cycle management, engineering, and PoC.

In terms of scalability, it doesn't matter if the company is large, medium, or small. We can use it for small and big companies - there is no limitation there. It is not always the company size that matters. When we go to a market segment and a big company, they may not know Versa at all. They may know VeloCloud better.

It is very scalable. That is the main feature of SD-WAN. It's extremely scalable and it is very easy to reuse templates and bring up multiple sites at once.

It is easy to scale. The solution has considered various roadmaps and focused on future growth for organizations. Some features may not be active just yet, however, they are in the roadmap.  They are looking at, for example, delivering Ethernet over two or three layers, over the internet, which is very interesting and is, in my opinion, revolutionary.

The solution benefits huge companies, more so than smaller ones. Currently, various product features are capable of fulfilling any big enterprise requirements. They are trying to get the certifications from international security communities like Gardner. Their focus is more so on the larger scale organizations and they are trying to compete with companies like Cisco, Palo Alto, etc. Since it is meant for bigger companies, it can get pretty big itself.

Good and stable

The solution is scalable. If a company needs to increase its capacity, it's easy enough to do so.

We have about 500 users on the platform currently. Some of them are hosting on the VNF, and some them are hosting on the physical advisors. It's a mixed platform. Our team uses it on a daily basis.

The solution isn't great for scalability if you have an enterprise-level organization. It's more for smaller companies and less so for larger ones. That might limit it for some users.

It is easy to scale if you know about the SD-WAN technology, and you have worked on a similar solution. It is similar to other SD-WAN technologies and components. If you are experienced in working with other SD-WAN products, it will be easier. If you don't have a clue about it, it will be a problem.

In terms of the number of users, in my team, there are 15 to 20 people. We get a requirement, and then we work on it. For example, a customer has a requirement for Versa Flex to be deployed in their environment. Sometimes, there may be ten people working on it, and sometimes, there may be just two people working on it. It depends on a customer's requirements.

FlexVNF's scalability is quite good - they implement using a template configuration, which allows for good scalability.