What is our primary use case?
Typically it's used for connecting the hundreds of branches to multiple data centers and also the headquarters.
How has it helped my organization?
The mean time between the failures is much lower than was before. Also, the man-hours required are fewer. Overall, the user experience is better than before this solution.
What is most valuable?
The application link selection, I would say, is quite useful.
The load sharing over the multiple links is great.
We like the centralized management and aggregation aspects.
Technology-wise, it's decent.
The solution is pretty stable.
You can easily scale the product.
They did a new interface of Cisco SD-WAN. It's good.
What needs improvement?
They need to improve the licensing, definitely. It needs to be easier to license. It should also be much more affordable for a larger number of customers. This is one of the main issues when working with customers. When you want to offer them the solution, they really do not like the price.
I would love to have better templating. It needs a more user-friendly interface.
They need to add the features that help to configure and navigate the daily features.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It's stable enough. They hardened it to their operating system. It's not an issue.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It scales to a very high number, in terms of the hardware branch elements or hubs, or data centers, or even the cloud connection points. Scaling is not really an issue when it comes to Cisco SD-WAN.
We currently have two customers on the solution. Right now, mostly, it's in the phase of testing to see how it fits the customer environment. They are considering growing in terms of the sizing and migrating all their traditional or legacy network to SD-WAN.
How are customer service and support?
Technical support is decent from the Cisco side. We have no complaints about their level of service.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We definitely worked with the other vendors, other competitive vendors. All of them have pros and cons. I have not switched from one vendor SD-WAN to Cisco. It's a relatively easy technology, however, it's not that easy to switch from A to B. We've worked with, for example, HPE, Aruba, and Fortinet.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is definitely not straightforward. It takes a lot of experience and knowledge to properly run up the system and clean up all the moving parts, and all the elements of the fabric. After that, the operation is easy. Operation is not that hard, however, to get there, the initial startup is not that easy.
The deployment time depends on the scale, however, typically, the controller spins up after one or two weeks. That's not counting the high-level designs or lower-level designs.
The deployment only needs one or two engineers, and then you might need one person to handle maintenance requirements.
What about the implementation team?
We are the partners, therefore we are the value-added resellers. So what we do, is to help the customers do the implementation.
What was our ROI?
The ROI is really good. However, it depends on the company. I can't really evaluate the ROI in general. For some, it will be very high, and for some, it'll be very low. It depends on what they do, and what their expenses are.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The costs to use the product are quite high.
That said, I can't speak to the exact licensing arrangements.
The most annoying thing is that you have to pay an annual subscription in order to operate the whole fabric. Regardless, the customer isn't getting the signatures or any updates. It's just for the functionality to continue as it is. It's also very annoying. This is not only for Cisco. It's true for others as well.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
A solution we're currently considering right now is Versa.
What other advice do I have?
We are Cisco partners.
It's a decent technology. If a company really wants to go with SD-WAN, Cisco is one of the greatest in this area, definitely. If they have the budget for that allocated, and the operating expenses are allocated for the coming years, then I would suggest going ahead and trying it. There is always an option to go back to the traditional networking when it comes to Cisco. Therefore, if you don't like SD-WAN, you don't have to throw away the hardware. You can keep the legacy or traditional connections. That's one of the benefits of having Cisco SD-WAN.
I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.
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.