We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story
2018-12-09T08:34:00Z

What needs improvement with Juniper vSRX?

1

Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Juniper vSRX.

What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?

ITCS user
Guest
1313 Answers

author avatar
Top 10MSP

VPN access is an area that needs improvement.

2020-10-21T04:33:55Z
author avatar
Top 20Real User

The solution works quite well. I can't think of any features that are lacking. I don't know where it could be improved. Some people complain that the solution tends to have a steep learning curve. It could be because most people have basic familiarity with Cisco or other similar products and maybe have never worked closely with Juniper products. I don't find that it's a problem, however, I have heard this mentioned as an issue for some people.

2020-09-23T06:10:03Z
author avatar
Top 10MSP

Largely the solution seems fine to me. It could use more tutorials. I think there's a step missing or the use cases are missing information. I'm not sure why you have to connect from the descendant to another SRX. The why part, why would I do that and what's practical, is not really answered in any documentation I have access to. At my last job, we used to hook up a VPN to the data center, and then at each site we would have a device connecting to that data center. Now that project is not 100% right now, I'm still wondering if I were to go and do that project, how would I do it? Should I make it cloud-based? If I want to use it virtually in the cloud as a hub, I want to see if that's possible, and, if it's possible, they should have documentation on that. I looked at the config. I played around with the config and then I say, "Okay, I see what they're doing, with the actual Azure part, and yet, on AWS, I'm having the same problem." It's something to do with the public IP. It's only functioning on the management side, on the virtual firewall. I can't get the other side, the other network interface to connect out. I don't have a connection out technically. I could ping, but through management and that's not how it's supposed to work. It's just through the management. I'm not seeing the departments.

2020-08-05T06:59:28Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

We worked with Cisco's support and Juniper's support and there are some differences, to be honest, Cisco is more available and is more competent at addressing our cases. So that is something negative about Juniper but otherwise, the architecture of Juniper's OS is flexible and scalable and technically Juniper is good. The GUI is really bad. Cisco's is more advanced with their ASDM platforms. Cisco has more advantages.

2020-07-27T07:17:00Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

The support can be improved. The GUI needs to be improved, as Cisco is more advanced with their ASDM platform. In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to the GUI because it isn't very good. I would like them to discard some of the existing commands because we have to delete them. It should be more practical.

2019-11-27T05:42:00Z
author avatar
Real User

We have some weird errors and some weird behavior on the solution occasionally. The device gets buggy without anyone touching it. It would work and then suddenly stop. Sometimes you need to just move the cards out and restart it again, and it will work. The solution itself, the hardware and the software, there must be some bugs that need to be dealt with. We are using high-end devices. For the high-end devices, all the features are there; we don't need more features. What we need are for the features we have to work exactly as we want them to. Especially on the IT desk. There's something wrong between the hardware and the software. As I mentioned, some hardware is not working correctly in some integrations, and I'm not sure why.

2019-09-11T10:12:00Z
author avatar
Real User

It seems that most of the problems were the device from management and not from support. We would spend a lot of time with support trying to solve the problems we had. We didn't resolve it because it was a problem from the device and management. The technical support did not seem to help. I've talked to people that say Juniper now, as a device, can be a solution for a data center, but in the past, I have not seen this as being possible.

2019-09-02T05:33:00Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

The syndication or domain controllers, quick policies, and user rules - like being able to see the IP source and destination could be improved. This feature already exists in Palo Alto. They really need to improve the GUI.

2019-07-14T10:21:00Z
author avatar
Real User

The stability could be improved. For the moment I think it has all of the features I need. The only thing I'd like to see is the ability to create firewalls. That's the only feature I lack. Also, when you need to upgrade and when you need to reboot it, there's some downtime, and I'd like to be able to upgrade it without downtime.

2019-07-07T06:35:00Z
author avatar
Real User

Up to the point we have used it now, there is no need for anything extra in the product.

2019-07-02T11:47:00Z
author avatar
Real User

The user interface could always be better. They could make it simpler and more intuitive. While it is pretty good now, they could always make improvements.

2018-12-11T08:31:00Z
author avatar
Real User

Right now, we are going through issues and problems where the product gets dropped with the connection or during the authentication initial phase. While it could be our problem, we would like to see more stability in this area.

2018-12-11T08:31:00Z
author avatar
Real User

The GUI interface needs improvement. It also needs improvement with the VPCs.

2018-12-09T08:34:00Z
Find out what your peers are saying about Juniper, Netgate, Fortinet and others in Firewalls. Updated: October 2021.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.