Cisco DNA Center Reviews

We use this solution for network architecture and data implementation. I was working on a project, designing a city. We used Cisco DNA Center as the software-defined solution for this city.

The most valuable features were the monitoring, maintenance, and configuration. It was easy to work with and allowed a lot of engineers to connect. Before it, there were a lot of problems. However, when the problems were solved, it allowed full automation and easy monitoring and handling. Also, it makes patching and upgrading to the newest version easier.

They can improve the network visibility. Licensing and its maintenance are also needed.

We are trying to reduce the company's and employees' assets and give it extra features. We are also separating the wireless SSI test network and trying to manage all the company properties through it.

I have been working with Cisco DNA for the last year.

It is a stable solution. 

It is easily scalable in Mastercard. We are designated in card distribution and access the claim assistance. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

We didn't ask for any support from Cisco because our team had rich experience in working with Cisco's products. We already have experience with Cisco Prime before using DNA solutions.

The setup was easy. The catalytic switches are mostly related to the CNA and server management. It is mostly done in two parts. While we are implementing the solution, we just need to create the configuration template. While updating the solution, we need to change the business management and push the configuration to the wireless switches. We can also access the same by buying a console connection.

The deployment took almost three months. But before it is implemented, the arching and design take almost six months.

The solution is a little bit expensive but depends a lot on the customer's usage. If you use it in the right place, you can easily pay for it. 

My advice is to categorize before implementing the DNA cluster. If the architecture is not good enough, you might face some issues with the transceiver. It might not be compatible with other solutions.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I used Cisco DNA Center for LAN automation for the DnaC.

I like that we can easily configure any new hardware. It's also easy to deploy and easy to troubleshoot.

Technical support could be better. The price could be better, and it could be more stable.

I used Cisco DNA Center for about a year while working with two organizations on a freelance basis.

Cisco DNA Center could be more stable.

The scalability of Cisco DNA Center is okay.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give scalability a seven.

Technical support is also struggling because it's a new product. They are not hundred percent sure about it. For example, it took them one week to fine-tune this appliance with the help of Cisco tech support.

Neutral

The initial setup isn't straightforward. It was a painful deployment. We have a couple of tickets with Cisco tags to be deployed because this is an unstable product. This is because it's tough to integrate with Cisco ISE which was running on the VM appliance, it was excruciating. Another common issue is that the end-use could not detect an IP address or authenticate it after we integrated it, on the branch side we are using Cisco Catalyst 9500/9300/9200 Series Switches.

The challenging part is that it has to be deployed on a standard load and integrated with Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE). I'm not sure why they have used Cisco ISE for authentication. It should be deployed and not integrated.

I implemented this solution.

The price could be better. It's a very expensive tool.

I would tell potential users not to buy Cisco DNA Center as it's a considerable expense that isn't worthwhile.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco DNA Center a seven.

We use Cisco DNA Center for management. You can configure any device, and if you put the device without configurations, you can start to configure it through Cisco DNA Center. For example: if you get a new Cisco switch, and you have other Cisco switches configured, you can plug in the new switch, copy the configuration, make the changes, and make the template, or you can use an existing template and just upload it to the device.

What I found most valuable in Cisco DNA Center is the ability to manage any device through it, because the infrastructure is for Cisco, and we have Cisco routers and Cisco switches.

In terms of areas for improvement in Cisco DNA Center, we don't use the product on 80% to 100% of its capacity, because our infrastructure is a small one. For us, it's enough. We have report capabilities, and other capabilities that we need are configured on the solution. If there is an expansion for any Cisco solution, we can integrate it with Cisco DNA Center, for example: with ISE, so we're fine.

What could be improved is the licensing cost of Cisco DNA Center. It's a little bit expensive.

I've been using Cisco DNA Center for the last six months.

In terms of the stability of Cisco DNA Center, we had a few bugs, but we managed to overcome them. For example: there were times we needed to reboot the device because it was not connecting.

How scalable Cisco DNA Center is would depend on the license you get. If you need more devices, you can always buy more licenses, or expand your current license.

There was no need for us to contact technical support, because we're not using Cisco DNA Center 100%. Our infrastructure is small, so we're just using the solution to reduce staff.

The initial setup for Cisco DNA Center was straightforward. On a scale between one and five where one is the worst and five is the best, I'm scoring the setup a four. Anyone could do it.

Licensing for Cisco DNA Center is a little bit expensive, just like any Cisco solution. Its cost could still be improved.

Cisco DNA Center is deployed on-premises. There is a link for the cloud because you need to have internet connection, but the data stays on-premises.

The advice I would give to other people who want to use Cisco DNA Center is to go for it, particularly if they have Cisco infrastructure, though these days it's really hard to do that because integration could be an issue. If they have other Cisco products they use in their infrastructure, it'll be a plus, so they should use Cisco DNA Center.

I'm rating Cisco DNA Center eight out of ten.

We deploy the Cisco DNA Center through Cisco Prime Migration, and we use Cisco DNA Center to monitor all the wired connections, endpoints, and switches such as access switches, data center switches, and routers. We also manage the wireless access points through the Cisco DNA Center.

We get reports on availability, health, manageability, logs, and critical errors. We monitor and maintain all the network devices using the solution.

We deploy DNAC for customers who want to manage and monitor all their Cisco Advantage licensed network devices. 

The best feature of Cisco DNA Center is the visibility page, which is unavailable in Cisco Prime. You can see everything on a single plane of glass on the dashboard, and you don't have to be a technical person to view different data and statistics. For example, you can see the issue alarms, errors, topology, and availability. So the tool gives you good visibility into all that's happening within your network infra. It also provides visibility into your computing environment. Application and performance analytics in huge detail is available in the DNA center.

The reporting is fantastic in both Cisco Prime and Cisco DNA Center, so I rate that feature a nine out of ten. My company migrated clients to the Cisco DNA Center, and the reporting is incredible.

Fresh deployments is not easy to set.

During single-node deployment, you must configure the node as if it is in a cluster.

I've been using Cisco DNA Center for two years now.

Cisco DNA Center is a very stable tool.

The solution is very scalable.

We have had a very great TAC support experience on Cisco DNA center.

Positive

We previously used Cisco Prime. DNAC is much more intuitive and better.

The initial setup for Cisco DNA Center is more complicated compared to Cisco Prime.

We had an in-house deployment.

My company uses Cisco DNA Center.

I'd tell anyone planning to use Cisco DNA Center to use it, especially when you have Cisco products or devices, such as wireless, security, and voice. Cisco DNA Center is the best product for  network monitoring and management. You can use Cisco Prime, but I prefer Cisco DNA Center because the visibility available there. You can see almost all information on a single page of the dashboard. If you have a Cisco environment, it's best to go for Cisco DNA Center.

I would give Cisco DNA Center an eight out of ten overall.

I like the visibility, instant build, network, policies, and the ability to control access. I also like that you can visualize your whole network.

Cisco could improve the security side of their solutions.

We have been using this solution since 2005.

It's definitely stable.

It's definitely scalable.

The initial setup can be easy depending on the knowledge you have.

It takes one or two people to maintain the solution. However, it depends on the client and the type of service required. 

The licensing cost for Cisco DNA Center is not more than that of other solutions.

If I were to give pricing a score from one to five, I would give it a score between three and four.

We are happy with this solution; we cannot design data center switches without Cisco DNA.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco DNA Center at nine.

We use the solution as a management platform for campaign work. 

The solution helps with the management and orchestration of campaigns. It helps with visibility and analytics. I also like its SDA configuration. 

Cisco DNA Center should improve its configuration management. It is better to have a dev version before pushing it. 

I have been using the product for the last two years. 

I rate the tool's stability a six out of ten. 

I rate Cisco DNA Center's scalability a five out of ten. 

Cisco DNA Center's installation is complex. 

Cisco DNA Center is too expensive. 

I rate the product a six out of ten. 

The solution is mainly used for setting up SPN or intent-based networking for the customers.

In day-to-day operations, especially post-pandemic, the majority of our customers have to work from anywhere. It's not just work from home, it's work from anywhere. Due to this work from anywhere concept, the traditional silos of a network for the data center architecture, and managing everything from anywhere, and having that single integrated dashboard for each and every activity while being able to correlate those activities in line with a business objective, has been very well addressed by Cisco DNA.

The solution's most valuable aspect is its simplicity and the complete automation of the network workflow, which we can use that correlate with the business. It's not only limited to STXs or a data center. It completes everything, which really helps us.

If a user is comfortable with Cisco technology, the initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

Cisco is extremely reliable.

The solution has the capability to scale. 

Technical support is always excellent.

The architecture should not be limited only to the USXC as a platform. Let's say if I'm referring to the Catalyst 1000 Series or an MB Series of an SG or FX. Due to the fact that there are mid-market and commercial customers who are using such kinds of product lines apart from the Catalyst 9000 or Cisco UCS architecture, they should all come under a single pane of glass. Any new product should be added right from Cisco itself.

The network automation should not be limited only to Cisco, as there may be customers who are using Palo Alto firewalls, or they might be using Ruckus for wireless. There has to be some sort of integration with a third party. 

The integration of Cisco DNA with a couple of leading CRMs or ticketing solutions would be ideal. 

The solution can be quite pricey.

We've been dealing with the solution for three to four years or so.

Stability is never an issue with Cisco. It's reliable. there are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

Scalability isn't really an issue. However, it all depends on the version or the flavor that you are selecting. We don't see a challenge. All options are available to us.

The technical support on offer from Cisco is always excellent. it would rate them at a ten out of ten. they are helpful and responsive.

We are using Cisco DNA as well as Ansible as a platform. We don't have that much experience working on other product lines. While Cisco is on the cloud, Ansible is on-premises.

If the engineer is good enough to understand the Cisco terminology, and if they have past experience working with Cisco, I don't see a challenge working with Cisco DNA as a platform.

Deployment may take maybe five to seven working days. However, the real process is all about fine-tuning. It's a continuous improvement process as we need to align DNA with the business objectives. It's not that product where we actually talk to the customer on a technicality. It is more about how best we can ensure the business outcome via the automation tool. There is always lots of engagement that happens at the customer experience level. That's the reason it takes some more time to find units.

The pricing is quite expensive. It'd rate it at a two out of ten in terms of affordability.

We have customers who would like to deploy DN architecture, however, DN architecture requires a DNF appliance. For the mid-market customer who is investing hardly a few thousand dollars, if they have to deploy an appliance, it is very costly. Ideally, to address the need of SMB or mid-market customers, Cisco should offer something on a cloud basis where it could be more affordable. 

My feedback to the Cisco product team is that technology is fantastic. There are no issues. The only thing is that they have to make the technology at an affordable price point, which should be affordable to SMBs and not just enterprises. Enterprises don't mind spending money. However, for mid-market and commercials, working out a pricing model which is more on an OPEX base rather than on a CAPEX base would be ideal.

We are a system integrator and we are providing network automation solutions and services to our customers. 

Overall, I would rate the solution at a six out of ten. It's quite good, however, it's not ideal for smaller organizations as it's cost-prohibitive.

This solution is best for customers who are end-to-end, Cisco customers. For the customers who have a heterogeneous environment where security comes from let's say CrowdStrike or Palo Alto or Ruckus we would suggest that a customer goes with Ansible. Cisco has limitations in terms of integration and automation when working with solutions outside the Cisco family. Some sort of API interface has to be available. 

It can assess traditional networks.

The automation features are significant and reduce configuration time. This means outstanding functionality. By deploying the controller automatically, the rest becomes automated.

When it comes to deploying wireless fields, integrating defaults into the DNS interface can be challenging.

I have experience with Cisco DNA Center.

In the dashboard, we observe that the integration with IT is functional. However, when inspecting the system, we encounter occasional errors in the desktop.I would rate it 8 out of 10.

I would rate it 8 out of 10.

Deployment is not difficult; it could take approximately a day to complete, assuming we have all the necessary information and the initial email from Cisco.

Maintenance can be challenging because we're unsure about the number of applications utilized in the studio.

I would rate it 7 in terms of pricing.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten.