Auvik Network Management (ANM) Reviews

I run an engineering team with a dynamic cloud-based environment. I was interested in tools that can help me understand what we have deployed. 
There are about five people administrating it. In terms of the number of locations, it's hard to say. We're a distributed remote team, but we have multiple cloud environments. We don't have locations in the physical sense of the word anymore.

One of our core objectives is to understand the services and systems deployed in the cloud. It's not always obvious. I'm hopeful that Auvik will help.

Having a single platform is somewhat important. It's also essential to integrate Auvik with other solutions. However, I don't think there's a situation where one tool can be the single integrated platform within a space. I checked out the API and the integrations around that. It all looks good, but I didn't use it that much. I did some basic integrations, but I don't think having a single integrated portal product is everything. The right amount of features are integrated into Auvik, but it doesn't need to have everything integrated, and nothing ever will be fully integrated.

We use various tools, including our homebrewed management scripts, some monitoring tools, and cloud portals. They aren't all applications per se, but we have various overlapping tools. Switching to Auvik would save us some time, but some key hangups prevent us from proceeding with it. 

The automatic discovery would help us avoid repeated configuration steps. The automated device inventory feature is potentially valuable. Employees are expensive, and we want them focused on high-value tasks. 

Visibility is crucial. Auvik has alerts that help us be proactive by telling us when something is behaving abnormally. 

The automatic discovery feature is the most valuable, but I've got some issues. The monitoring and management functions are effortless. It couldn't be more straightforward. We use lots of tools, and they need to be as simple as possible. Auvik has an advantage there because I certainly would pick it over something else. However, we often find ourselves using functions that aren't so easy to use because we need them, and they're the only option available.

The network visualization was intuitive enough, but it's hard to say because the network I was testing had a reasonably flat structure. It was good for what I was doing, but I don't know how that scales.

We use a service called Tailscale, a peer-to-peer private networking tool. My biggest issue with Auvik was getting it to scan devices across the Tailscale network. I suspect it's not supported there. That would be a valuable extension for us.

I haven't used Auvik for long. I did a demo for about a day where I set up the features and played with the interface extensively.

Auvik is highly stable.

I haven't stretched Auvik's capabilities, but it's been fine.

I rate Auvik support a six out of ten. They were very responsive, but I didn't feel that the answer was quite accurate.

Neutral

We had a mixture of cloud consoles and self-management scripts. I saw Auvik advertised and thought the automatic discovery sounded handy, so I took a free trial.

I run the engineering team, so I wouldn't do the deployment, but I manage the people who would. It's pretty straightforward, and I implemented Auvik out of the box. It takes very little time to deploy. I could see devices within an hour. I spent most of the day playing with configurations, adding SNMP credentials, and exploring. I could get something running in half an hour to an hour. Auvik was much quicker to set up than some other tools. 

I'm concerned about the price. It seems quite expensive.

I rate Auvik a seven out of ten. Currently, it doesn't work for us because of the limitation on Tailscale. If it weren't for that, I would give it a perfect ten. Unfortunately, it doesn't meet our needs, so I can't score it too high.

The setup was smooth, and you can tell they've put a lot of thought into helping people with that. I'm curious why all the devices have API keys next to them when I know some devices don't have APIs. It wasn't clear what that meant. Maybe the way the APIs work could use a little bit of polish.

We use Auvik to create a graphical representation of our network. It's easier to trace issues when we know what's connected at a glance. Auvik gives us alerts when a device goes offline, and we use Auvik to identify the place in the network path where the issue lies. Was it a core switch? A downstream switch? Was it not a switch at all?

Auvik makes troubleshooting more manageable and the workflow smoother. When troubleshooting an outage or a node that went down, we can immediately identify the problem. It reduces the time we spend troubleshooting, allowing us to spend more time on other tasks, which is a roundabout way of saying it makes us more efficient. I'd estimate that it reduces the time we spend on these tasks by about 30 percent. 

Troubleshooting is just like anything else. You always focus on the tools you use the most or the ones that are the most effective. Auvik is one of the top two we use for specific issues, namely network outages or known downs.

Auvik improves our visibility into your remote and distributed networks. It provides quick visualization, so we don't need to log into any individual switches. We can do everything through Auvik, especially port tracing. We need to see what device is connected to which port. This can be easily done within Auvik.

It also helps us delegate tasks within our IT team. As soon as we locate where an outage lies, we can instantly determine whether it needs to go to a low-level technician or a higher one based on what we see on the network map or alert that Auvik triggers.

It doesn't automatically keep our network inventories up to date because we still need to enable SNMP on the device. But once it's in the inventory, it's easy to manage with the existing devices we already have.

A cloud-based solution reduces our hardware costs because we don't need to deploy a VM for monitoring. Also, we're a managed service provider, so we would have to have an on-prem solution for each client, which would be cost-prohibitive.

I like Auvik's alerts. We can configure the alerts for a specific timeframe, i.e., we can set it to alert us when devices have been offline for a specific amount of minutes. If a device or port is flapping, we can ignore it or allow only the first alert to come in and mute the subsequent alerts.

The monitoring and management are quite straightforward. I rate it nine out of 10 for intuitiveness. During onboarding, we went through how to set everything up. It's a set-it-and-forget-it solution, and we can use templates to move forward with other devices that we add based on our documentation.

Auvik is one of our go-to solutions, depending on the issue. If we see a device go down, we usually get an alert from Auvik or our RMM solution. Auvik lets us trace graphically to know where the issue could lie, reducing the amount of troubleshooting we have to do.

It's a single platform but isn't integrated with anything besides our PSA. I don't think it needs to integrate with anything else other than our ticketing solution. 

Auvik could be more customizable. Also, the network map isn't as clear as it could be. I don't know if it's even possible, but it would be nice if Auvik could pick up on dumb switches. I don't know if that's possible based on SNMP, but if they can figure out a way to do that, it would make our life much easier.

Our organization has been using Auvik for about a year.

We've never had any downtime outside of their regular maintenance windows. They always notify us in advance when there will be maintenance. Even when they're down for maintenance, it's after hours, so we don't notice. 

Scaling Auvik is pretty simple. We just activate SNMP, put the credentials in devices, and we're set once the Auvik collectors are in place.

I'd rate Auvik support seven out of 10. We haven't needed to reach out to them much. I can only recall around three or four times in the past year that we contacted them. They've been pretty good. We have only used web-based support, not phone support. 

Neutral

We were using Nagios, but it was getting too pricey. Nagios also provided more information than we needed. Auvik provides SNMP, which is fine for our purposes. With Nagios, we had to install agents on each node to recognize it. If we could activate SNMP, we'd get more reporting from Nagios when we install the agent, but it wasn't intuitive how to do that. 

Once it was slotted in place, there wasn't much of a learning curve at all, so we saw an ROI right away.

We looked at Zabbix. Zabbix had a free tier, but it had absolutely no support. We went with Auvik because of their support.

I rate Auvik nine out of 10. If you want simplicity, Auvik is probably the way to go.

Zabbix has a free tool, but their paid solution is actually quite expensive.

We needed a solution to monitor all of our systems. We were using another system, but it wasn't up to par. Auvik gives us everything we need plus some. Right now, we're using it to monitor all of our virtual machines and switches. We can do configurations on any of our switches directly through Auvik.

Right now, another engineer and I currently use the solution. We're going to allow other IT staff to view it, but nobody else will have access. There will be another five staff members who will see all of the data.

We're able to have a visual dashboard in one central location, so we don't need to have multiple dashboards. If we're going to configure an API, we can have it displayed on a board for our team to see. We didn't have anything like that before, so the ability to see insights on a dashboard is very important to our organization.

Auvik has saved us 50% of the time we used to spend because we get notifications fairly quickly.

We have seen a reduction in our MTTR. We notice that some of our devices are going offline five minutes sooner per incident than when we would first get reports.

The most valuable feature is the ability to see usage alerts on all of our devices. That's not just from our servers, but on all of our machines and user computers.

The ability to see utilization at one central location is easier than having multiple windows. We couldn't configure alerts on everything because it just wasn't available. Auvik provided the solution for us.

The use of the monitoring and management functions is of a medium difficulty level. With some aspects like trying to filter devices, it's a little cumbersome to type in the product. You have to click and apply it like a filter. When you click on the search button, it automatically populates it. It's a different step, so it's a little cumbersome and slow. The interface is quite slow, but that's likely due to it being on the cloud.

Auvik provides a single integrated platform. It's very important for us to have a single integrated platform because the interface shows us everything: all of our interfaces, switches, servers, and virtual machines. We can see it all in one central location instead of needing to pull up multiple windows.

Auvik helps us visualize the network mapping and topology for our organization. The ability to see all of our switches and what's connected to the switches is very helpful for us because not only can we see the device, but sometimes we can even see the device name. When we have an issue, we don't have to try to find it with an IP because we can already see the name of the device.

The solution helps reduce repetitive, low-priority tasks through automation. There are certain tasks that we know are repetitive, and we can't do anything because of the way that the system is built. We can suppress those unless they are over a certain threshold. There are other notifications that we always look at when they pop up.

The user interface could be a little bit faster, and there should be a legend on the map. Trying to filter devices could be easier. Those are probably the top three improvements I would like them to address.

I would rate the overall intuitiveness of the network visualization an eight out of ten. There are some aspects that could be better mapped out or better described. Some connections are confusing to look at. We don't know why one is yellow and why one is blue. It would be nice to have a legend included on the map.

I have worked with Auvik for about two and a half months.

The stability is top-notch.

It's highly scalable and available because it's on the cloud. As long as the correct configuration is done, it's highly available.

Technical support is very good. Our questions were answered right away. It seemed like they already knew what we were going to ask. Maybe they were just judging the situation by the deployments that they've done.

I would rate technical support as ten out of ten. 

Positive

We used Libre, but it wasn't giving us what we needed. Auvik gives us the ability to monitor the network.

The setup was straightforward. We implemented Auvik out-of-the-box. It was immediately available to use. The moment we connected our entire network, it was up. There were some configurations that we had to do on the backend, but it was pretty straightforward. The moment we connected, it was immediately available.

We required two people for deployment, including an engineer and myself. Our responsibilities were to make sure that our credentials were correct, our host was the correct address, and that we could connect to it. We also made sure that certain settings were turned on.

It doesn't require maintenance primarily because it's on the cloud, so Auvik takes care of that. If there was any maintenance, it would just be with our devices on our end.

Auvik is fairly priced. The cost is what we expected considering network management. The benefits outweigh the cost for us.

We evaluated other options, but they didn't offer what we needed.

I would rate this solution an eight and a half out of ten. 

Comparing Auvik's cloud-based solution to an on-premises network monitoring solution, I would rate the usefulness a ten out of ten. I would rate the interface an eight out of ten. I would rate the speed a six out of ten because when it's local and on-premises, it's faster because it doesn't have to go through the cloud or through Amazon.

The benefit outweighs the cost because we're able to see everything in one central location. It gives us one interface to do multiple functions.

The time it took to set up and maintain Auvik was twice as long as our previous network. With our previous solution, we just connected our devices and that was it. Auvik took a lot more time.

We use it for monitoring clients' networks.

One way it has improved our organization is with respect to managing switches for clients. We didn't have a solution before that would back up our clients' switches. So if a switch failed, and we didn't have a safe manual backup somewhere, we were scrambling to figure out what was configured on that switch: Were there VLANs, was there some advanced configuration that we don't have now and that we have to rebuild? With Auvik, we just grab and restore the config file.

There are fewer steps for us to do as an organization. We set the tool up and it does all the work for us. It's taking a lot of that manual leg work out. It has recaptured some time that we can give back to other tasks. I wouldn't say it's a huge amount, but it's still a good chunk of time.

And it has been extremely useful when it comes to visibility into remote and distributed networks, especially managing devices. Being able to log in to a switch without having to log in to a client-server, since you can do that from Auvik, has been extremely helpful for our IT team.

And our MTTR has been reduced by at least 50 percent because, as a switch goes down, we get the alert without having our client call us. We have the alert and we know what's wrong, which is great.

I like the switch device configuration backups.

Also, the monitoring and management functions of Auvik are pretty straightforward. I haven't really found too many issues with them. The ease of use is pretty valuable for us.

It also integrates with our ticketing system. We use ConnectWise and having that integration is valuable for billing and for all-around general management. Having one product that can integrate with everything is valuable because we don't have to worry about building out APIs or custom maps to do that for us.

Overall, it's very intuitive and very easy to find help on how to configure things. Their knowledge base is very deep. There are no issues there.

There is room for improvement on the development side. As new devices and models come out from different manufacturers, they aren't always supported by Auvik right away. For example, Sophos switches came out within the past year and we only have CLI support right now for those, so obviously Sophos configs cannot be backed up at this time through Auvik. It's an issue of being more proactive before products are released. I would like to see the manufacturers working with Auvik in advance, before new products come out, to make sure they're supported.

I have been using Auvik for three or four years now.

The stability has been great. Obviously, there are planned outages but they warn you about them ahead of time. There has been no issue where we needed to get in there and it was down.

The scalability seems great. We're still a small business and if we had larger clients our experience might be different, but for what we have it has been great.

We have it deployed in multiple locations. Each client's site has a collector installed and they have one, or maybe two, offices.

Auvik's technical support is a seven out of 10.

Neutral

This is really the first product that we've had that does full network monitoring. We used ConnectWise for machine management, but its network capabilities were somewhat limited. That's one reason we chose Auvik. The dynamic map of the network it provides and the ease of troubleshooting were additional reasons. It helps in pinpointing where issues are. When a switch is down we get that alert from Auvik and it definitely saves a lot of time for our help desk.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. It's definitely gotten better, but I didn't have any issues setting it up for our organization or for clients. The experience has been the same.

Out-of-the-box, it worked just as it should. After the collector is implemented, within the day the network mapping starts to populate. It's pretty much instantaneous.

Setting up other products was a lot more involved. Another product we used was SolarWinds, but it was something of a bear to set up. It's not really straightforward, out-of-the-box like Auvik. With Auvik we definitely saved on having to research licensing and then install software somewhere. We don't have to do any of that. It's all hosted.

For the most part, maintenance is handled by Auvik. Obviously, if new devices are added to the network, they have to be configured to talk to Auvik. But other than that, you just set it up and it's good to go, unless you change the credentials. Overall, we just set it up and sit back and watch it.

We did it in-house. It was just my boss and me involved.

The pricing seems fairly competitive with what may be out there. We haven't looked around too much, but the pricing is very reasonable.

We were set on Auvik right away.

Make sure that the networks you're going to be managing with Auvik all have managed switches and that those switches or devices are supported by Auvik.

Auvik does a fairly good job of mapping network topology. It's about 90 percent of what we need. There are some inconsistencies with port mapping. For example, it will discover that this switch is connected to this switch in this port, but sometimes it's inaccurate. There's some work to be done there, but overall, it's been extremely useful for us.

Auvik helps keep device inventories up to date, although that's not generally a time-consuming task with our clients. As an MSP, we handle small to medium-sized businesses. But if we were to grow, that feature would definitely help more.

We use the tool for network diagrams and troubleshooting, which has been helpful. One of the main issues we had before ANM was the lack of up-to-date network diagrams. With its dynamic function, we solved this problem. We also use it to troubleshoot network incidents such as APs going down and for automatic backups.

There are many things I like about the product. It's cloud-based and automatically refreshes the network container. We like the automatic backups and the comparison between backups. It's straightforward to set up, and it integrates with many protocols.

The tool provides an intuitive interface that's easy to use. The search box is particularly helpful—we can search for everything from MAC addresses to IP addresses to interface names, making it easy to find any device.

The network map and dashboard give us a real-time picture of our network. It's pretty easy to use these features to gain visibility, though we've had some minor issues with Meraki devices due to their lack of support for SSH and SNMP.

The solution has helped us automate our processes and integrates well with ConnectWise so that we can get alerts in our CRM and via email.

We noticed the full value of ANM after a few months, as we needed time to train and understand the system. It has helped our technicians due to its many capabilities and the data it collects. After about a month of training, we were able to share some of the senior team's workflows with junior team members.

ANM has helped us decrease our mean time to resolution by about 20 percent.

I'd like better integration with Meraki and a history feature for network diagrams. If a device fails on Saturday, we can't find it by Monday. A history or PDF export of diagrams would be great to see how devices should be connected.

I have been using the product for eight months. 

I rate the tool's stability as nine out of ten (it gets cloggy with large diagrams). 

We use the product on the cloud. Deployment was straightforward with the setup guide, initially taking about one month with a team of five people. Now, each new deployment takes about 15 minutes. We use it across many client enterprises and sites, with Windows, Mac, and Linux devices and multiple network brands. About ten people in our organization work with it. The cloud version needs no maintenance, but on-premises agents need checking.

The tool has saved us about 15 percent in return on investment.

The tool's pricing is reasonable. 

I recommend ANM for its updated network diagrams, ease of use and implementation, and high availability. Overall, I'd rate it nine out of ten.

We're an MSP, and we handle and monitor the network for many different organizations. So, we use Auvik for any client that has on-prem resources such as firewalls, switches, and servers. It's basically for any client that has a physical office.

We used it mostly for alerting and to have visibility over resources on a network. It's centralized oversight over what's going on.

The network map is really good. It gives us a good idea of the topology for new sites as we deploy the software. The ability to remotely connect the network devices is great. If we don't have direct access we can pretty much just do it from anywhere that we have an internet connection to. That's really helpful.

My team does the knowledge training. They have a university, and when we have new staff, they take the Auvik certification course. Otherwise, there is a lot of stuff to do in the solution and a lot of things to see. Without training, people will have to guess their way around it. Maybe they will see some basic features, but to actually leverage it to the fullest, you do need to take the training.

The dashboard and the network map give a real-time picture. It is really good so long as you have the credentials for everything. I don't really have any complaints. I think it's really helpful. It has been a lot of use for us in the past. Regarding things such as suggestions, it tells you where you have devices you do not have credentials for. That's something you can see if you go to the discovery settings. 

The benefits were realized pretty immediately. The benefits are very self-evident. The only thing you have to do to see the proper benefits is make sure you have a good setup. It's important to know how to deploy things, which credentials to add, etc. Otherwise, the topology will not be of much use. You will not get the configurations. However, if you have the proper knowledge of how to set this up, it's great.

We do not give our entry-level technicians access to Auvik most of the time. It's usually for tier-two technicians or our network engineers. However, it does help them with the Epic training. Before we are going to give entry-level permissions, we have them take training, and the training gives them a lot of information on the network on how to use the platform. 

Auvik helps decrease our mean time to resolution. What's good about Auvik is you can define thresholds where you can close alerts. So, if something goes down, you can see the condition. That definitely helps us take time out of the resolution process and lowers our oral ticket numbers.

In terms of the dashboard, maybe seeing on the map, for example, if you have an access point that's connected to switch one, and the access point you do not have credentials for, that could help us make management a bit easier. However, it's not terrible. It's just something to make it easier.

It has a monitoring feature. Besides just monitoring the network, you can tell Auvik to monitor a host name, like a domain name or an IP address on the cloud, and it just pings the IP address and gives you information. I feel like that's something that could potentially be improved a bit. For the service monitoring feature, we can check for port status or cloud ping checks. We can check against domains and against IP addresses in the cloud. That's a feature that has been of a lot of use to us. However, it is a little bit lacking in some features compared to other solutions that we have also used in the past. We used to use another solution, and we wanted to transition this service over to Auvik since Auvik does largely the same thing. However, as we were migrating, we noticed specific features were missing, and we could not add some of the monitoring back into Auvik since there were some technical limitations. For example, if Auvik has an IP address for the domain you want to monitor, and if the domain does not respond, it will take it as the services down, and it's going to trigger the alert at that point. It does not check when giving out a ping request. It checks by just making an HTTP request to the website. However, basically, some websites that we manage do not respond back to ping requests based on safety settings and so on. So, we have to do HTTP checks to check if the service is up. However, Auvik does not support that at the time. 

I've used the solution for two years. 

Mostly, it works well. We do have some sites that seem to stress the platform a bit. We might have been over the edge when it happened, and that's the only time I have seen performance issues. 

It's really easy to scale. Previously, and I'm not sure if this is true any longer, you could not turn a single site over to a multi-site and vice versa. In that case, you may need to delete your current site, or sites, and migrate things over. 

Technical support is really good. They are really quick. I have no complaints. 

Positive

I've also used Datto. However, Datto provides actual infrastructure, whereas Auvik is just monitoring. They aren't quite the same. 

Setting up the solution is not difficult. We just have to make sure we have credentials for everything on the network. However, that's something that comes from our clients. As long as we have the credentials, it's pretty quick to set up. We had everything set up in about two weeks. 

However, if someone is not tech-savvy, they will see many unfamiliar terms. If someone has knowledge of API integrations, they'll have an easier time.

We tend to need two people for each deployment. Someone will take care of provisioning and collecting, and someone will do the technical setup within the platform.

There isn't really any maintenance needed. There may be alert tuning. Auvik does come with a lot of alerts that are already pre-built in. Some we disable, some we modify, and some we just create from scratch. 

I do not handle the licensing aspect of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten with my biggest complaint being the documentation and knowledge base, which is difficult to navigate.

Auvik is a tool that discovers all the networking assets within our clients' sites. Many other tools do this, but we like how Auvik integrates into our existing infrastructure. The primary use case is discovering all our networking devices, managing them, and setting up alerts. We use Auvik with a combination of other tools. It's integrated with our ticket management system where most tickets are escalated. 

We deployed Auvik at a new client yesterday evening, and we can see almost everything within the network now. We've had access to the firewall. After a bit more configuration, we can see the network map populate.

Auvik's network maps and diagrams are solid. Once everything is fully dialed in and the network devices are properly speaking to Auvik, you have a perfect network diagram. 

The solution is easy to use.  Learning Auvik only requires you to play some games on your machine, but there is no steep learning curve. There has never been a time when I didn't understand something about the technology. I don't think the learning curve would be high for someone without a technical background. It's so intuitive you don't need to dive deeply into various menus to find what you want. 

Auvik gives you a real-time picture of your network. I've never designed a network map that captures every data point, but Auvik does that. A network map gets cumbersome for end users because you see everything. You might see 25 to 100 nodes connected to an access point. If you are having issues with the network map, you can zoom in on the area you want to focus on.

To get the details about applications in Traffic Insights, you need to dive into the applications as a general category. You can see the users using the application, but I cannot pull each component into the report. Let's say I'm going to an end-user or a client. When I print a report, it comes out with 10 pages about the usage, resources, etc. 

I want to see details about the resources I use, and I can't do that. We have this data in a graphical format, and we can get the data provided in Traffic Insights by using other components within Auvik. I want a detailed report that we could present to the client. I was told at one point that we could produce this through integration with another solution. We tried that, and it didn't work. We did a service ticket again and spoke to the relevant persons, but there were false positives. 

They should pull the Traffic Insights feature until they're finished developing it. I cannot generate a report. It's all about monitoring, not configuring or backing up anything. It's just about monitoring, so I can't pull the report. Traffic Insights should be able to do that. 

The network map could be more customizable. You can decide whether you want a comprehensive map or only want to see the core network features. It all depends on the shape the end-users want for the network map. It's not the traditional shape that we're used to in IT. They could introduce something where the map can adapt to new shapes.

I have used Auvik for two years at two organizations. 

I rate Auvik support eight out of 10. They're great. Auvik responds to feature requests. A while ago, there was a useful feature missing, and Auvik jumped on it. 

Positive

The onboarding went smoothly. Some of Auvik's team helped us. It was very quick. The core solution was deployed within a month. 

Auvik offers a solid value because it only bills for the core components like switches, firewalls, etc. It isn't billing for every discoverable device. The cost is manageable. Many critical devices are covered but not billed. I would consider all of the clients' assets critical. We don't have a tiered system. 

I rate Auvik eight out of 10. 

We use Auvik to monitor if our network equipment goes down.

We implemented Auvik to be proactive in case the internet connection or equipment goes down.

I occasionally use the network map to identify new devices connected to the network. It provides a real-time visualization of our infrastructure. Additionally, the map initially displays a collapsed view, requiring expansion for detailed information.

Auvik significantly reduces our Mean Time to Resolution, especially when devices malfunction. Now, I receive immediate alerts, eliminating the need to wait for phone calls or emails from someone reporting a downed access point or camera. This was especially helpful in a case with our D-Link access points at one of our sites. When these devices fail, they don't completely shut down; they keep rebooting, broadcasting the Wi-Fi network, and then disconnecting users. Before Auvik, this repetitive cycle could go unnoticed for days, leading to frustrated users and disruptions.

We see the benefits of Auvik fairly quickly. 

The quick alerts in the event the equipment goes up or down is the most valuable feature.

When port utilization rises beyond a set threshold, an alert will be sent to allow for proactive network planning and distribution adjustments. This could also help identify heavy data users.

The user interface is not intuitive. For example, when a device fails and I need to replace it with a new one, I'm required to delete the old device from the system to prevent recurring alerts about its downtime. While I was able to find instructions on how to do this in the knowledge base, the process itself is illogical. It necessitates navigating to the "Discovery" menu, which seems counterintuitive for deleting an existing device. A more intuitive approach would be to enable deleting a device directly from the list of all devices, eliminating the need to access a separate menu labeled "Discovery" for an already discovered item.

Some device placements appear inconsistent with their logical locations, like network switches. For example, I might see devices related to the same switch cluster scattered across different areas of the map. This inconsistency in positioning for co-located devices confuses me.

Setting up a new site or viewing device configurations, particularly those involving SNMP and similar protocols, often requires significant technical knowledge. I believe simplifying this process would be a major benefit, but I'm unsure if Auvik can do so.

I have been using Auvik for almost one year.

Auvik is stable.

Auvik is scalable.

One of my sites experienced an issue where the internal internet connection port on the firewall had been changed. Consequently, our Auvik agent wasn't capturing any traffic data, affecting our utilization reports. I contacted tech support to troubleshoot, but the email-based communication proved ineffective. While I appreciate their attempt to help, I would have preferred a phone call or a remote session for a quicker resolution. The back-and-forth emails with unclear instructions simply became time-consuming, and eventually, I had to prioritize other tasks. This made me realize that offering a remote session option early on in the support process would be incredibly beneficial for customers like myself. I am unsure if it's a language barrier or the location of the support team, but encountering this email-centric approach with several companies has led me to believe it's a preferred communication style for some tech support teams. However, for me, it's not the most efficient method. While I give their technical knowledge a high score of nine or ten, I feel their support delivery falls short at around three or four. Instead of sending me emails with links to lengthy documents, a 10-15 minute support call could have resolved the issue quickly. Ultimately, spending hours reading manuals and troubleshooting without success feels like a waste of valuable time. Therefore, I recommend exploring the implementation of a remote session option for enhanced customer service and increased efficiency.

Neutral

The initial deployment was straightforward because it was done by the Auvik techs.

Two Auvik techs implemented the solution for three of our sites.

The price is reasonable.

I would rate Auvik an eight out of ten.

No maintenance is required.

The biggest requirement to use Auvik from a technical perspective is having SNMP knowledge. The rest is straightforward.