Cisco DNA Center Reviews

We use it to manage and monitor our branch network equipment.

It gives us automation capabilities for pushing out a configuration to branch networks. It also provides visibility into the health of user network devices.

There should be an option for automation of template deployment by using the stored data. It is not easy to save configuration information for lots of devices without using other tools. There should be a tighter, better repository of information that can be merged with the templates.

I have been using this solution for three years.

Its stability is good.

I haven't really got a view on that one because we haven't had a need to scale. 

In terms of its users, we probably have 15 people, which also includes our partners, who use it as well as manage it.

I have used their support. I would rate them a four out of five.

I didn't use any similar solution previously. 

It was relatively quick. I don't remember exactly, but it was probably in the order of a month or so to implement. 

We had help from Cisco themselves on Advanced Services, but from my memory, it was relatively straightforward. 

It is a good product. It does a good job. I can't think of any specific technical challenges we've had. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Automating customers' campus networks, redesigning their networks and giving much more visibility on traffic flows.

As a company, we significantly reduced operation and maintenance costs for our top customers, and simplified network resources planning.

• Analytics, because it really can improve your network based on what your company really does.
• Security, because with ISE integration you now have really centralized authentication, authorization, and profiling.

Better compatibility with third parties and to other Cisco products because if versions are not perfectly matching requirements, it gives a lot of problems.

We've still not received long-term feedbacks from customers, but for now, I can totally suggest the solution.

It can scale very well from really small to huge and distributed networks.

Nothing to complain about. Instead, they helped us to find alternative solutions and design when something was not still supported by the platform.

We always deployed traditional campus networks because there wasn't a real alternative.

The initial setup is well driven; you can do it wrong only if you try to improvise.

I've been very well supported by the vendor's technical team especially when versions were changing on a monthly basis.

As system integrators, we're now able to use an operations team to follow specific and highly difficult problems and not losing a lot of time in garbage ticket to configure a single port, a single policy, etc.

The price is really high, but it's worth every single dollar you pay. Keep attention on licensing model because you don't really need top licenses on every node and that can help to spare some money.

Yes, we evaluated more traditional equipment like Catalyst 38xx/36xx/68xx and so on.

If you plan to implement, I suggest you follow the guide step by step and do not proceed on your own, else you'll face a lot of problems and you'll need lots of support from Cisco TAC.

I am a solution architect. I design for the data center and I also write technical presentations.

Cisco is a leading network company. Every organization uses networks and data centers. The data centers are mainly on-premise enterprise environments.

Cisco has been used in our organization for 14 years.

From the recent DNA point of view, there are some stability challenges with Cisco, but very minor. 

I have not worked with Cisco technical support for over three years. From my experience, Cisco support is available. They have their own SMEs in each area. There is a gap in between the information shared between Cisco and the technical teams. Cisco should provide a clear view of what has caused the problem when they do the RCA. By providing more information, we can be more proactive and do the upgrades if it is impacting security compliance.

Neutral

We have been using Cisco for so many years that setup is straightforward. The DNA solutions are there and SD-Access is in place. With these, we have come to zero touch provisioning. Deployment is easier than it was five or six years ago. 

We have a large Cisco portfolio in our organization. We have a three-year license with them.

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

We use this solution for network assurance and automation, network segmentation with ISE integration, and LAN automation deploying new devices out into the switching estate.

This was for a TSA project that we were doing for a client.

It relieved some of the operational burdens on the IT staff. It makes troubleshooting a lot of issues much quicker from a central single pane of glass, whether it's a switch issue or authentication issue with ISE, or a wireless connectivity issue. 

DNA center is very capable of being able to address well, identify the issue, suggest remediation steps, run remediation, run commands against a switch to check the proper connectivity for example, and also address all our remediation steps that the IT person could take.

Rather than having to log into the individual switch DNA center, you can basically run your commands, run your troubleshooting, all from DNA and attempt to remediate the problem.

I think that their LAN automation is a very good feature. It takes advantage of the plug-and-play capability from the catalyst switches. 

We'll do a zero-day configuration, which is a good feature. 

Also, wired and wireless assurance, client health, and network health are valuable, especially with the wireless sensors deployed. It can give you a good idea of what's going on in the RF environments.

The template feature is really good, you have free templates and then associate those templates to a tag, tag a device with a certain role, and just program devices that way rapidly.

It's pretty robust. The wireless assurance and telemetry, as well as the security and the segmentation capabilities, are outstanding.

They deploy rapidly. They are scalable throughout the entire organization. With just a few clicks, it really removes a lot of the human error that you would normally have with access control lists.

It takes a lot of the human element out of configuration.

You can create VRS and VNS and deploy those system-wide, application policies with a few clicks and segmentation with a few clicks.

With their provisioning status, if there's a failure in provisioning or in some type of task that DNA is trying to push out to a switch or whatever device, sometimes the task status errors or the provision errors are a little bit big. 

I think they could provide a little more detail to someone when a task fails. It's an error code that tells you that this task has failed, but it doesn't get too deep into why it failed. The task failure reporting or provisioning failure reporting could be a little bit better in the UI, with more information given to the user.

From the CLI you can get much more information from MagLevs.

Also, the UI could use a little bit of improvement. I know that things have gotten a lot better in version 2, but I haven't worked with version 2 yet.

A feature that I would like to have seen is the true debt disaster recovery, which is now available in the 2.2.1 version.

More detailed information would be helpful, but you can get that information from the CLI but not everyone is comfortable working in the Linux shell.

I have been using Cisco DNA Center for approximately two years.

The last version that I worked with was Version 1.3.3.6.

Currently, the latest is version 2.X.

It is very stable. I would rate the stability an 8.5 out of 10. 

We had an issue with the DNA center database. 

With the DNA center, you have to be a little patient. 

We may have been trying to ask it to do too much at one time, and it created a problem with the database that escalated to the business unit to get cleaned up.

That was really not so much an issue with the DNA sensors, it was because we had spooled up a lot of tasks and you have to be a little patient with DNA.

My impression of the scalability is all positive. 

It's highly scalable. DNA itself is deployed as either a single node or a three-node cluster.

We were deploying it in a single node state, but my impression of it is quite positive. I like it a lot.

DNAC itself is an orchestrator and its collecting audit assurance, and telemetry. The entire IT staff of the end organization will be using the DNA center. It's probably a staff of 15 to 20 people. 

In terms of endpoint end-users, that DNA is collecting assurance and telemetry from several thousand. It's being fully utilized.

I have had a fair amount of interaction with technical support. I would rate them outstanding. Their DNA team is solid.

I didn't use any other solution previously.

Standing up the DNAC appliance itself is pretty straightforward.

The deployment was a phased approach. We did three DNAC appliances across three regions globally. 

To stand up the appliance itself doesn't take long at all. It takes a few hours, but it was a phased migration strategy, one site at a time over a period of several months, we would do one or two site migrations a week.

There were an existing network infrastructure and a new network infrastructure that we were standing up in parallel to the old and then cutting it over on a weekend.

We have a handful of people who have access to the regional appliance made up of network admins and help desk personnel.

Once it's deployed and built out, it runs on its own. There is not much to with it unless you need to do a package or a software upgrade for the appliance itself.

There is no further deployment unless they are going to stand up a new site and integrate that into the DNA architecture. As it is now, everything is already up, which is what we did.

We did the deployment, the integration, and the site migration from start to finish. Then we do a low-level design and handover and workshops.

We have approximately 10 users that would have some type of operational role in DNA.

It's being highly utilized and leveraged in the organization.

We did not use a consultant or an integrator. I completed it myself. We are Cisco Partners.

This is taken care of before I am involved. It's handled by our presales engineer, and I work on the project delivery.

I do know that Cisco does offer some really good promotions for DNA Center to bring the costs down. But again, I don't really know the details of those promotions. I just hear about them and I know they're out there, but I don't have specifics on that.

Cisco DNA does not have a Cloud solution. It's an on-premises appliance.

They may stand up if they bring in another heritage. They may have some heritage or legacy sites that they may bring over to the new network.

We are multi-national. Our organization is based in London, New York, and Sydney. Our clients are all multi-national global clients.

We do have some regional clients as well, but we are well-positioned to serve multi-nationals across three regions.

My advice is to read the release notes thoroughly. Understand how to deploy, in a single or three-node cluster. Most importantly be aware of release notes and read the documentation.

Do your homework, read the manual, it's there for a reason.

Be patient when standing up a new fabric site. Don't do too many tasks at one time.

The biggest lesson that I have learned is to be patient. When you have a series of tasks that you need to do, don't initiate too many at one time, initiate three or four, allow those to finish, and then continue on.

From when I first started working with DNA, it's come a very long way.

From a programmability standpoint, it really is quite solid. I really like the LAN automation capabilities.

In terms of software-defined networking, I think it's an outstanding product. I would rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten.

The solution helps in user microsegmentation. 

I believe the main function of this solution is ideal for businesses aiming to enhance workspace mobility for users, employers, contractors, and partners. It offers comprehensive workspace capabilities while maintaining the complexity and perfection required by various business points and IT system policies.

The tool's IoT integration should be better. 

I have been working with the product for three years. 

I rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a nine out of ten. 

Cisco is good at helping with technical stuff, and they have a special team to ensure customers have a great experience. They provide all the help and advice you need, starting immediately, even before you go.

Positive

Cisco DNA Center's deployment is not difficult, but you need an engineer with a good background. 

The tool is medium-priced. 

I rate Cisco DNA Center a nine out of ten. 

We use it for incorporating around four hundred wireless access points into our network infrastructure.

It enables monitoring of various components such as access points, switch cards, and other elements within the company's solutions.

We encountered issues with their response times, which had a big impact on our workflow.

We started using it this year, so for a couple of months now.

Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we implement for our customers.

Our clients use this solution to manage their network, including their access points.

The most valuable feature is the integration with Cisco devices and infrastructure.

The Wi-Fi analytics are helpful.

The monitoring features are very useful for network engineers.

We have had a lot of problems with the Cisco switches and have needed to upgrade the operating systems, which means that we have to upgrade the DNA. When we upgrade the DNA it means that we have to upgrade the ISE, also. If it is a large cluster then this process is painful.

DNA Center has been on the market for a few years and they need to update it.

I have been working with DNA Center for about two years.

This solution is scalable.

Cisco's technical support is good. We have had problems and still have an open case but this has been related to the switches. Cisco is good at helping both the partners and the customers, too. 

Cisco DNA Center is something that I recommend. We do not sell just the product, but rather, the entire DNA solution. We don't just upgrade a switch. Instead, we upgrade the entire network. DNA is definitely good for the customer.

Overall, this is a good solution but it has been a few years since it has been updated.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I am a solution architect. I design solutions using Cisco DNA Center.

We use Cisco DNA Center to provide network management.

It is very versatile in terms of analytics.

It would be helpful if it could be integrated with a variety of solutions, such as Meraki.

Cisco does not support other OEMs for analytics software integration.

Integration with analytic tools and API integrations would be ideal.

I have been working with Cisco DNA Center for more than one year.

Cisco DNA Center is a stable solution.

It is scalable only on a Cisco portfolio.

Technical support is excellent. 

We have pretty good technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was not complex.

We have an in-house team for the installation.

The price is high, but it depends on the requirements.

I would rate Cisco DNA Center a seven out of ten.