What is our primary use case?
We use the Kemp Load balancer with our on-premise Exchange 2016 using two servers on a DAG at different locations. The Kemp load balancer allows us to have a hands-off failover between servers either in a Disaster Recovery model or during upgrades for security patches or service pack updates for the Exchange software.
We are now expanding this for our corporate webserver that will also be hosted at both of our locations. We have more confidence in having on-premise applications than trusting the Cloud.
How has it helped my organization?
Our organization is better protected from an email outage than before. The old process of manually having to redirect Outlook Web Access traffic and Email traffic to a second server is a thing of the past.
I can sleep at night because of the Kemp Load Balancer, just knowing that in case of a failover, the email will keep flowing and our users will have access in the morning.
Having near 100% uptime for email is critical. Without email access, we would lose business
What is most valuable?
With the move from our second Exchange server to the second data center, the GEO function allows the Kemp LoadMaster / Balancer to work together.
We originally deployed Kemp when we had both Exchange servers at one site. That was good to start with, but as we upgraded to Exchange 2016, we needed to have devices that would handle this increased functionality. The GEO functionality made this happen, allowing the two devices to see each other and determine the failover in either a Disaster Recover of software patch scenario.
What needs improvement?
I can think of three things that would be nice; First, it would be helpful if the GEO function was built into every device. The cost of the GEO upgrade is not cost-prohibitive but it's something that would be a nice add-in, out of the box.
The second is the throughput. If the device was licensed based on the throughput then we could upgrade hardware to get better transactional throughput.
Third, if they had dual power supply options on the lower end models it would be helpful because I may be a smaller shop with only 35 servers, but I still rely on dual power supplies whenever possible.
For how long have I used the solution?
Switchcraft has been using Kemp Load balancer for about three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Kemp is very stable and we have never had an issue.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
You need to upgrade devices to increase the scale.
How are customer service and support?
Support has been easy to deal with. I have only needed to contact them a few times during the initial setup. Once it's been in place and operational, we have not needed to mess with the system, which is a huge advantage.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Kemp was my first experience with load balancers.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was easy.
What about the implementation team?
Our partner was great. They had used the devices before, which made it easy.
What was our ROI?
ROI was immediate, as it gives us peace of mind that email would stay up. Call it insurance.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Set up was easy; nothing is cheap nowadays but it is well worth the cost
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We did not look at other solutions, as it was recommended by our Consulting partner on the project.
What other advice do I have?
The Kemp load balancer is well suited for an on-premise Exchange system, either at one location or at two.
It is also suitable to use for balancing web site traffic between systems..
Kemp works well when used with two or more units in a multi-site environment I have not found a solution that the Kemp will not handle well.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
*Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.