Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Aruba Switches.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
The pricing could be adjusted. The interface could be more user-friendly and the dashboard could be improved.
I think that the environment for our clients should be simplified. Technical support response time could be better.
I think that the performance is getting better but they need to have more powerful switches on the market so that they can capture medium and large businesses. They don't have any data center switches.
I would like to see the data center area improving by some added features in the future.
Managing Aruba Switches is not as good as Cisco Controller. The switch needs to be bigger than it is now. Increasing the number of gigabytes in the switch would improve the switch interacting. You can download the DBS or the datasheet to see the switch interacting. The switch interacting is the transfer of data from the port to the switch. They should provide training courses for certification, and have it available on the internet. They need to increase marketing for their products, especially for the solutions that are stable and very hard working. They should plan an event to market this solution. Aruba could consider opening a training center for engineering, or IT students. A suggestion would be to see the unit have a configuration switch like SMTP to send an email to the users if the performance is delayed or down. That would be very useful. In the command line, we can configure in SMTP to send an email alert to the user and the support worldwide, so that they can know about the problem before it happens.
The templates to automate our switches need improvement. We apply a template using Bison or ANSI C to automate our tasks daily. We are using Bison and ANSI C programming language to automate our work for shutting down ports, and if the support has locked our shutdown with port security. Cisco has Nexus Switches for the Data Center solutions. These switches are very powerful. In my research, I haven't found anything that is comparable. In the next release or the near future, I would like similar Data Cente switches included.
The written documentation, all the available documentation, is often a little bit hard to find. The solution lacks documentation of recent features. We have access directly to Aruba, Germany, so they are always helpful, but if you start, for instance, with something a little bit more complex like zero-touch provisioning, that would require a more comprehensive written piece. The available REST API is invaluable for elegant integration with the core and distribution network. There are some new multicast features coming up, but they are just in the process of preparation by IEEE, and I would like to see them as soon as possible.
Visibility and controls need to be improved. When I compare the Aruba switch with Meraki, Meraki has more visibility and more controls. HPE Aruba has not done any development and research on the SD LAN. They may have another solution for the SD LAN. Aruba should have SD LAN features to provide more visibility on the network and to be able to control things like the traffic shifting or for voice or data. Currently, Aruba does not have this capability. It may be there, but it's tedious. In the next release or the very near future, I think that it is very important to simplify the dashboard and features similar to Meraki. Meraki has a good dashboard and the way they are presenting the information is very useful. I am forced to consider changing products because other solutions have a better dashboard and a user-friendly interface. Other solutions also have better control and visibility.
We have issues with the stability of this product. The firmware in this solution has a lot of bugs that become noticeable when you have complex implementations. One of the issues with Aruba switches has to do with part numbers. For example, in the 9230F series, there are a lot of part numbers with lots of interface names that make the user confused as to which one he can use for the future. Some switches have only a 1Gbs uplink while others have only a 10Gbs uplink, and there are no clear details which one has which interface. The difference comes when you look at the pricing. Having less confusing part numbers would be an improvement.
In the next release, I would like to see network access control on the switches themselves. I would like to see security functionalities when it comes to monitoring the bit of the wireless section of the switches.