Auvik Network Management (ANM) Reviews

It gives me an overall idea of our network. It shows me where things are at. It tells me about devices being down, e.g., printers. I also use it to see web usage, e.g., what sites people are going to. It has a lot of uses. I check to see the overall network topology, when things go down, or whenever I get alerts from Auvik.

I use the reporting part of it. Every day, I take a look at the reports every day.

We are using the latest version.

It makes it simpler and easier for me, as an IT person, to manage my network.

The automation of the network mapping enables junior network specialists to resolve issues directly, freeing up senior-level team members to perform higher-value tasks. This has made our operations easier, simpler, and faster.

As things change on a network, Auvik detects that and automatically changes based on those changes. It makes things a lot easier. You don't have to figure it out by mapping it out on a paper, etc. You can just go there and see how things are connected. So, it definitely helps.

When the systems go down, Auvik is a pretty useful tool. It lets me know ahead of time that I have an issue somewhere.

It is pretty easy to use. It kind of deploys itself. You put some passwords in there and it just kind of spiders out into your network, testing everything. 

Its network discovery capabilities are pretty good. It kind of spiders out and detects pretty much everything on the network, e.g., things that we are using and not using anymore. Its network discovery capabilities allow me to detect these things so I can track them down and shut them off.

The reporting needs a little bit of improvement. Sometimes, I get too many reports. Or, I don't get reports when I should be getting reports. I don't know if this is Auvik's fault or the devices that the reporting is coming from, but I have noticed there have been some discrepancies.

I have been using Auvik for five months.

I have had no issues with its stability.

I get emails letting me know that Auvik will be down for maintenance or updates. No maintenance is required.

Our environment is not very large. I am the only user of it.

I haven't needed to use the technical support.

We didn't previously have anything in place. We looked for a solution because we had nothing in place for network topology and reporting on systems being up and down as well as having the reporting on other things that Auvik does.

The initial setup was a little complex.

The deployment took four sessions, which were an hour long each.

Auvik suggested that we put it on a relay server, then we took it from there.

I did need some help from Auvik specialists. With some of the switches, I needed to get them in the device and reporting correctly. There were some problems, so a specialist had to get on and help me configure it.

Auvik has decreased our mean time to resolution by 50%.

I find Auvik kind of invaluable. It wasn't that expensive and did provide me with a lot of information. So, it is pretty beneficial.

We have licenses per year. It is on a network device, so we pay for switches and firewalls. Everything else is included, e.g., computers, access points, and printers.

Auvik offers a trial period. I recommend taking advantage of that and seeing if it works for your environment.

I looked at competitors. Other providers had multiple systems. I just wanted a single system to do everything. So, Auvik was an all-in-one package.

The TrafficInsights feature shows us network bandwidth usage without the need for expensive, in-line traffic decryption. I use it to see what sites people are going on and how to block certain things, like social media. Though, it is not that important to us, because we don't have an issue with our bandwidth. So, if we had an issue with our bandwidth, I would have to monitor it more, but we don't at the present time.

Auvik is very useful. I would rate it as eight out of 10.

As an IT company, we rely on Auvik, a network monitoring tool, to support our many clients. We install an Auvik agent on their networks, which then provides real-time monitoring. This allows us to be alerted of any issues, like a downed server, so we can promptly investigate and resolve the problem.

The interface is straightforward.

After familiarizing myself with Auvik, I could see the many benefits it offered.

Auvik empowered our entry-level technicians to resolve more tickets independently. It complements our existing internal monitoring tool. While the existing tool might initially flag issues like a server outage, Auvik provides additional insights for our technicians, helping them verify the information and identify potential false positives. This allows them to tackle problems more effectively without needing to escalate to senior staff.

Auvik allows us to spend less time on setup, maintenance, and issue resolution.

The most valuable feature is the alerting system. This ensures we're notified immediately of critical events, such as a server failure, allowing for a swift response and minimizing downtime.

I find the network map confusing and believe it could be improved by simplifying its layout or using clearer visuals.

The quality of technical support varies greatly. Some representatives are very helpful, while others are less so.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for three years.

There have been one or two instances where the Auvik website or portal seemed to be unavailable, but the actual appliances themselves seemed to be functioning normally. Overall, Auvik has been stable.

Auvik Network Management is scalable.

The technical support experience can be inconsistent. Sometimes we connect with fantastic technicians who solve our problems quickly. The customer service representatives are always friendly and supportive. However, occasionally we encounter technicians who suggest basic troubleshooting steps I've already attempted, like restarting or pinging. In these situations, I prefer immediate escalation. Thankfully, the escalation process through chat is usually swift, and the escalated representatives are very effective.

Neutral

While the initial deployment is straightforward, the overall deployment time will vary depending on our chosen option. On Windows machines, the process takes just five minutes, while Linux machines require approximately 20 minutes.

I start with a pre-configured Auvik collector packaged as an OVA file. I upload this file to VMware to deploy the collector. Once deployed, I SSH into the Linux machine and execute the necessary commands to update its firmware to the latest version. This completes the deployment process.

The implementation is completed in-house.

I would rate Auvik Network Management eight out of ten.

No maintenance is required.

I recommend spending some time familiarizing yourself with the portal. Once you're inside, you'll find it to be quite intuitive.

I am a network specialist. I use Auvik for troubleshooting where something may have gone offline. 

We utilize it for learning. We utilize it to do various levels of monitoring in terms of whether things are up, if a port is flapping, or if there is a configuration error. We also utilize it to gather data about things on various networks that we administer. As we have thousands of endpoints, it helps greatly with quick insights and with things that otherwise would take a lot of manual digging.

We are an MSP, and my focus is networking. By implementing Auvik Network Management, we wanted to gain a good stance on insight into the network. We also use it for troubleshooting, but it was not a problem to be solved to begin with.

I have a networking background, so I found Auvik Network Management to be a great product right from the start.

Auvik Network Management has been extremely helpful for entry-level technicians, especially those with no networking background.

Auvik Network Management has definitely reduced the mean time to resolution. Things that we would have had to dig manually are presented in an easy-to-digest and accessible format. We can access the information from the cloud from anywhere we are.

The visibility that it provides depends on how you manage it. If you implement it perfectly, you will have 100% visibility. If you understand the benefits and limitations of the various probes and SNMP that they use, it works well. It is exactly as good as your implementation.

Auvik Network Management does not allow us to spend less time on the setup, but it allows us to spend less time on the maintenance of the solution and issue resolution.

It is pretty responsive to whether things are up or down.

The conventions that they use for the various menus are not super intuitive. They make sense after you realize how things are laid out, but I have to do a lot of digging to find the things that I am looking for.

The map itself is a little clunky in terms of zooming in, zooming out, and moving around because you have to use the manual on-screen buttons as opposed to being able to click and drag. I know that it is just a front-end graphic implementation, but it is slightly clunky to move around the map. However, all the information is there and presented in a very succinct fashion. It would be nice to be able to move around the map a little better. There should be more convenience from the drag, scroll, and zoom standpoints. 

I have been using Auvik Network Management for half a year.

It is very stable, but the interface is somewhat slow.

We have a number of small to large deployments, so its scalability is excellent.

The support guys are absolutely phenomenal, but they are highly technical, and they also expect other people to be so. We are an MSP, so we move fast. If I call support, it is because I am looking for a quick answer. It is a good thing that they teach you how to fix it yourself or where the resources are, but sometimes, we are looking for quick answers rather than being educated.

They are extremely quick at responding. They are very good at that.

Positive

There is a tool called NetsTools Pro. It is a device, and it performs some similar functions. I have used SolarWinds products. I have used too many tools for network monitoring.

Auvik puts a lot of the features that were present in these other tools into one great package.

It is deployed on the cloud, and there are appliances present in all of our customer sites.

Its deployment was easy for me because I have a networking background. For non-technical people, it is easier than many solutions.

In terms of maintenance, it requires monitoring in terms of making sure that the credentials stay updated for the network probes. If nothing changes, it does not require much maintenance.

We did it all in-house. Per-client, one person can handle the deployment.

I believe we have a special arrangement with them because we, as an MSP, take care of some of their technical services.

To implement Auvik effectively, I would advise comprehending some of the fundamentals of network monitoring that is vendor agnostic. Have a basic knowledge of SNMP and how ICMP works. You should be able to pass traffic through various network firewalls and junctions, and you should understand the limitations and advantages of any network in order to implement Auvik effectively.

Overall, I would rate Auvik Network Management a nine out of ten.

We use it for network monitoring. We don't do a lot of systems monitoring with it. We predominantly use it for core switches, external network adapters, and other similar things but not for the endpoints or server hardware.

We are currently not using any of the automation functions.

It definitely assists with visibility into our remote and distributed networks. We don't necessarily use the Windows side of things, but we do have a couple of systems that are monitored. It is almost like a ping test or just a sanity check. From that perspective, it definitely helps. This visibility is 100% critical.

It helps keep device inventories up-to-date. It has saved us time because we have pretty much everything at a glance. It does allow us to prioritize what needs to be replaced or anything that would be necessitated by the device inventory, such as software updates or vulnerability patches. It definitely helps, especially with the end-of-life hardware. We're able to determine that and apply a device lifecycle to it.

In terms of helping our teams focus on high-value tasks and delegating low-level tasks to junior staff, in our network team, we do everything. There are all types of tasks that would be normally assigned to juniors. It definitely provides a lot more visibility and helps in delegating specific things. For example, when an interface is flapping or a port is shut down, it is a lot easier to delegate such a task. We're an MSP staff that doesn't necessarily deal with high-end network equipment. Turning a port back on is something most of us can do as long as we can log into a command prompt. Even the server admins can do some network tasks if need be. Within that, it does allow us to prioritize and state, "Okay, a senior network admin can figure out why this entire site is down," versus, "We need to update a switch."

Our mean time to resolution has reduced due to the alerting system.

We are seeing that the monitoring is very accurate. We are seeing that in terms of problems and solutions, there is a lot of functionality to it, such as APIs. So, you can dig down. You can dig deep into it. It does provide very useful metrics, and it has improved a large portion of our day-to-day operations.

The network monitoring portion of it has pretty sane defaults, and it is fairly good as a product. It is probably one of the better ones that I've used.

The visibility on the site itself is a bit of a problem. We do have the alerts panel, but there is no central monitoring. When we had requested how we would do this to place it up in the NOC and how we would view it and everything else, their answer was to use a third-party tool, such as Power BI. That was the response that we got. A front-end component to show the actual NOC operations at a glance is not present. That would be a major con in my opinion, especially for what we do as a data center. 

The actual adding of networks, systems, and everything like that is fairly easy, but the problem that I have is getting the metrics out. Specifically, if you go to the Auvik webpage, sign in, and go through the alerts and everything else, they don't offer any plasma display with a red light, green light, or stop light indicating this device is in an error state, down, etc. To get around this, we have to use their API. I had to code an entire interface to work around that lack of information. 

One of my major concerns or my major problems is the API hasn't always been super reliable. Sometimes things get broken. Sometimes it is down for a little bit. It doesn't seem to have the same reliability as their primary service, the actual web page itself. The API reliability is problematic when you apply a user account. I have a super admin account, and I have an API user that is a super admin as well. I create a new site as a super admin, and you'd expect everything to fall through, where the top level is the super admin and the subsites don't have access. We have network admins that create sites and DCOM sites and everything else all the time. When that happens, it breaks the alerts API and gives a 403, forbidden error, and that's across everything. If it can't access the top-level tenant, it just breaks the site. There are ways of counteracting that, and we're aware of the pitfalls there. 

We have had the API function in erratic ways where we do filtration based on various criteria, for example, if a ticket has been dismissed, if it is in maintenance, or if it is critical. We have filters for all the metrics. Sometimes, we had a couple of tickets where it doesn't acknowledge those filtrations or the filters, which causes a little bit of a problem, and we have to do a little bit of a sanity check within our code itself. It almost seems a little bit like they do focus on the front end and making it visible, but it seems like the API is almost a second-class citizen.

We've been using Auvik for about two years.

Because the API is what we use frequently, we've had various issues. It could use some work, but in the front-end portion of it, where I'm assuming most of the customers would be looking, we haven't had any downtime that hasn't been pre-planned and reported to us in advance.

Its scalability seems to be fairly good. We're not having any real problems. With the way we're doing things now, it seems to be fairly scalable, and I don't think we'll have any problems.

In terms of our environment, we have operations predominantly in New York. Specifically, there are a few in Manhattan. We have a few in Queens and Suffolk County. We do have one location that is in Singapore, which is one of the smaller operations that we have, but it is predominantly located in the New York, Long Island region.

They were very friendly. They were very good. Generally, if there was a problem, I was able to talk to an engineer on their side relatively quickly, which was a good thing. I was able to very easily prove the point that I had with the calls and everything else, and it worked flawlessly. After I was able to show them the output and everything else, they were able to resolve the problem. I believe they were able to resolve it after six hours or eight hours of having the call with them. That was a pretty good response time in my opinion.

I would definitely rate them a 9 out of 10. Getting a 10 is almost unheard of. All things considered, support is one of the better parts of Auvik in my opinion.

Positive

We have been using OpsRamp. We got Auvik because one of our larger customers used OpsRamp and then changed to Auvik. In our case, my boss said, "Well, why don't we use it too? They seem to be really enthused by it." However, that customer doesn't use it with the same use case. They monitored a lesser number of sites and locations. Their use case is slightly different and their monitoring is not the same, so it works for them, but it doesn't necessarily have the same impact on us. 

In terms of the consolidation of tools, we are still using multiple software types. Auvik is what we use exclusively to monitor network areas. We are currently using OpsRamp with which we are monitoring network hardware as well. We also used Kaseya, which was the worst software for monitoring anything. That was the reason why we immediately binned it as fast as we could, but we also have a couple of other different software. We are using an application manager. We do have Zabbix, and we monitor some things through that as well. That's mostly the ESXi and servers that are on-prem. We are a data center, but we also provide managed services as well. We have a lot of different systems within a lot of different operating systems and environments. Some are PCI. Some are non-PCI. So, we do use other software, and Auvik fulfills some of the same monitoring purposes but for different clients or different hardware.

In terms of time-saving by switching to Auvik, the OpsRamp software has some faults and after the actual interface that I wrote was deployed and started to be used by our NOC, there have been time savings. However, getting to that point took a little bit more frustration in setting up compared to some of the other products that we've used.

We spent substantially less time with Auvik than with our previous solution. The initial setup was relatively straightforward, but my experience level is closer to DevOps than a traditional Systems Administrator. Between my own level of experience and my network team, it was fairly easy to get it deployed.

We were able to deploy it, but then we found that for our monitoring needs, it was a little bit lackluster. I had to code the webpage.

In terms of maintenance, with regard to the API and the coding work, maintenance is required, but it is infrequent.

We did it by ourselves.

There were quite a few options that we looked at. It has been a while, but there was a large selection of software that we've tried, both on-prem and cloud-based. We did monitor or look at NinjaRMM and ScriptLogic. There was Nagios for the on-prem and Applications Manager from ManageEngine. We checked out Enable as well.

When comparing Auvik's cloud-based solution versus the on-prem network monitoring solutions, they serve different use cases, but the cloud-based Auvik has its advantages due to the fact that we don't have to have firewall ports opened. We can very easily monitor various devices and various client sites without having to be concerned about any leakages because we have the accumulator of the agent gateway and whatever the terminology that they use. It definitely has its pros and cons in the sense of firewall access, deployment speed, and monitoring aspects. We can apply a template across all different types of devices, and the scanning works perfectly in that sense.

My advice would be dependent on how many sites you are monitoring and what you are intending on monitoring. For network equipment, Auvik is very good. For hardware and software, such as Linux, Windows, ESXi, and other similar things, it is very poor in those regards. That would be the major thing. If you are intending on having one tool to rule them all, I would probably steer you toward that limitation because it is quite limited in the endpoint monitoring and server monitoring, but it very well exceeds in network monitoring.

In terms of providing a single integrated platform, the API access to it is good. It does provide that, but the actual OS and software side of things that are not network devices is a little bit lacking.

Overall, I would rate Auvik a 7 out of 10.

The primary use is for notifications and alerts, but also to get a feel for the network because I can see it all on a map, and it looks nice. We don't only use Auvik. 

To paint a picture of our environment, we deploy Auvik for some of our clients, and some of them own multiple facilities, so we have sites for them. Within our company, different individuals have different access levels, some with read-only. We also give some of our clients read-only access so they can see their network if they are curious.

We are an IT company, so notifications and alerts are essential for us. We can preempt problems because the solution alerts us before the customer even contacts us, so by the time they call, we already have information and an ETA on the fix for them.

Auvik affected our IT team's visibility into remote and distributed networks globally. Everything we do is remote, including initial onsite setups, and we can see how a network looks from the perspective of a nice-looking map. This visibility is important because it helps us see the network more clearly and provides a more physical feel instead of just seeing numbers and settings. Having an actual map of the network components and connections helps significantly.  

We have seen time-to-value with Auvik; it's a beneficial product, and we use it daily. 

We have seen a reduction in our mean time to resolution (MTTR) because the solution allows us to begin troubleshooting very quickly.  

The extensive personalization and customization options are great because it lets me do a lot. I can set up different permission structures, assign various staff members read-only access and others full access, and customize my notifications.

Auvik's UI is beautiful. 

The solution's monitoring and management functions are relatively straightforward; with ten being the most difficult, I'd rate Auvik three point five or four. This simplicity is important to my organization.    

Regarding Auvik helping to visualize the network mapping, that's one of the features I love most about it. It shows the network on such a simple level, with the firewall on top, the switches, types of connections, devices, and so on.  

Auvik has excellent integrations with other solutions we use. 

A feature I'd like to see is a stat breakdown of our networks at the end of every month, showing package drop rates for each network and so on. For example, this data delivered in an email would be a good feature.

I've been using the solution for four to five months. 

Ten out of ten, we've never had an issue with the solution's stability. 

Auvik is highly scalable. 

I've never needed to contact technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward, largely thanks to Auvik's knowledge base. They provided an excellent knowledge base, exact instructions, and courses, which made the process very simple.

Deployment of the solution to a site requires one staff member, and the process includes the following:

• Installing the connector on a local device.
• Getting it signed in with the SMPP protocol.
• Creating the sites and the multi-site.

Following the deployment, we monitor notifications; no other maintenance is necessary.

Auvik assisted us with the initial deployment. 

I rate the solution ten out of ten. We don't use it to control every aspect of the network, but I'm satisfied with what we use it for.

Auvik is the solution for those looking to monitor their networks. It's incredible; my advice is to go for it.

The solution monitors my equipment. I can see everything that's online. It alerts me when things are offline, which is great. It also tells me if there's some firmware aspect to it, which I think is cool. That way, I know if my monitored equipment needs an update.

I like that I can see if the switches are online. I can get alerted when something is offline.

The interface is okay. I like the network map and dashboard overall. It gives me a real-time picture and visually represents my network so I can see what's going on.

I get pretty much full network visibility.

A little bit of time passed before we saw the benefits of Auvik. I first noticed its benefits when I was first alerted to something that was offline. At that point, I thought: "Yeah, this is exactly what I wanted it for."

Some parts of the interface are a little hard to navigate.

It's not the most intuitive dashboard. That said, it works. It's technical. If you know what you are doing, it's fine. 

There could be a button to skip two-factor authentication for 30 days or so.

I'd like the option to turn off the mask at the top. It takes up a large portion of the screen. 

I've used the solution for around a month so far. 

I've never had an issue with stability. 

The solution appears to be scalable, although I am not currently scaling. 

Technical support was okay. 

Neutral

We previously handled the tasks Auvik covers manually.

I wasn't directly involved in the setup. There are not any maintenance requirements. 

The pricing generally makes sense. They are charging me based on the devices. 

I did look at a few other solutions before choosing Auvik.

I'm a customer and end-user. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We are a small MSP and we use Auvik Network Management to monitor the networks of our clients.

The network map is essential – without it, we'd be lost quickly. Fortunately, it provides us with a convenient and near real-time view of the system, allowing for optimal monitoring.

The Auvik network map offers complete visibility of all devices where we have established credentials.

We started to see the benefits of Auvik as soon as we added an Auvik specialist to our team.

Auvik has helped reduce our mean time to resolution. It is now almost immediate. When a cluster goes down, we receive an alert almost immediately.

The most valuable feature of Auvik is the comprehensive network management it provides. While we initially had someone install it for our client, it wasn't set up correctly. Thankfully, our new Auvik specialist came in, cleaned everything up, and configured it properly. Now, we have clear visibility into our network, including breakdowns of VLANs, device locations, and communication paths. We even discovered a built-in GUI traceroute tool that helps us pinpoint network bottlenecks with ease.

The interface could be more user-friendly for getting to our clients. While the overall experience is positive, there's room for improvement. The main client pages load slowly, but interestingly, navigating through drop-down menus before reaching the main page is faster. Scheduling maintenance would be much easier if there was a dedicated section readily visible on each client's main page.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for one and a half years.

Auvik Network Management is stable.

Auvik Network Management is scalable.

We transitioned from SolarWinds Orion to Auvik Network Management due to its wider range of features. Beyond core functionalities, Auvik provides backup and restore options for configurations, and to our delight, we recently discovered the ability to remotely manage firewalls directly through the platform, eliminating the need for on-site VPN access.

I would rate Auvik Network Management eight out of ten.

We maintain the server we host Auvik on.

I recommend Auvik Network Management. Once you get to know the solution, you'll be able to utilize its full potential.

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.