Cisco Enterprise Routers Reviews

Our primary use for this solution is MPLS and Internet routing.

I am a network architect and this is one of the solutions that I have worked with.

We are required to build an MPLS network in our company, and this solution has been very useful.

The most valuable features of this solution are MPLS, BGP, and VRF.

The support for SD-WAN technology is not mature yet.

I would like to see the setup time reduced.

I have been using this solution for twenty years.

We have no issues with respect to stability. It is ok.

Scalability is ok.

I have not recently been in contact with technical support because it is the operational team that would deal with opening tickets. However, when I dealt with them several years ago, I was satisfied most of the time.

The setup of enterprise routers is primarily hardware and it takes a long time to set up.

Our in-house team performed the deployment.

The price of this solution is high.

In one or two years, once SD-WAN is more mature, we may switch from our traditional routers and protocols to be completely integrated with SD-WAN.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to consider the routing that is needed because it can change the way you set up and deploy. There are differences between MPLS, internet routing, and office connectivity. SD-WAN will also be something to look into.

This is a good solution, but it's not perfect.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution to terminate connections at the edge of the network. It helps us handle tasks such as removing MPLS circuits and voice routing for unified communications.

The solution's most valuable feature is stability. Its hardware remains stable for a long time. We rarely encounter downtime issues. Also, it has the best operational features.

The solution's cloud management capabilities could be better. Its smart licensing process needs to be simplified as well.

We have been using the solution for 23 years.

I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten.

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

The solution's technical support team is helpful and has a good response time.

We use FortiGate as well. It provides more efficient firewall functionality and is more inexpensive than Cisco.

The solution's initial setup process is simple.

We have some customers who implement the solution themselves. In some cases, we assist in its deployment.

The solution is costly for small businesses. I rate its pricing a five out of ten.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution to connect our network to the internet.

Flexibility is the most valuable feature of this solution.

The solution has good performance.

I want the ability to create interfaces for the MAC addresses.   

The price has room for improvement.                                                                 

I have been using the solution for one year.

I give the stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is very scalable.

The technical support is good and they are very responsive.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward and does not take much time.

The price is very high. 

The license is annual.

I give the solution a ten out of ten.

We have over 100 people using the solution.

We require around 20 people for the deployment and maintenance of the solution.

I recommend the solution to other people.

On-premises

We primarily deployed the solution in IP VPN configurations from the head office to branch offices and other centers. 

Currently, in Nepal, there are no advanced Enterprise Routers. This is just for routing and VPN supports.

Cisco is a great product. 

It is excellent hardware. 

The agent support has been terrific.

There are no policy or hardware issues at all. The performance is great.

The solution is mostly stable.

If it's a standard setup, the initial implementation can be straightforward.

I want to get some advanced features. I want to use advanced features such as SD-WAN or Viptela and vManage or vBond. However, these are not available in Nepal just yet. The supports could be better in Nepal. 

The automation capabilities need improvement. Right now, everything is too manual. We'd like to really see much more automation availability.

The scalability could be better.

I have good experience with Cisco routers and switches. I've been dealing with the solution for about five years.

Mostly the solution is stable, however, there is no 100% certainty in any product. Some could be defective and some could be improved. Some could be weak. However, mostly by-in-large, there is no problem with Cisco products.

In the current device, the scalability is not so good. There are no SD-WAN features in Enterprise Routers. In Nepal, there are normal VPN and normal routing protocols and not many features in SD-WAN.

We also work with Sophos, Fortinet, Nutanix, Peplink, and F5 products. We're also Juniper partners.

If we deploy normal routing just for routing purposes, it is very easy and convenient to configure. However, if you get something on IPC again, such as more robust security, there is a little bit of complexity. It's just a little bit more complicated than normal static routing and other routing protocols.

We are Cisco partners. We are a full IT solutions-oriented company.

I'd rate the solution at a five out of ten. While the hardware is good, it doesn't offer very easy scalability and lacks decent automation capabilities.

I'd recommend the solution to other users, however, it depends on customer requirements. If the customer requirement is a very large network and a lot of brands and there are various data centers, I would recommend they install a different device. There are devices coming - such as SD-WAN. There are Viptela and other devices such as vBond. I would recommend those types of devices and suggest that automation and DNA should be installed.

That said if a customer's requirements are not that broad, and they just need routing, or the requirement is just routing and IPC VPN, I would recommend this product.

Installed at many locations using a hub-and-spoke design to connect remote sites to central locations over GRE tunnels.

• Its routers are versatile, reliable, and capable. 
• I find their user interface easy to use in getting simple to complex tasks completed, even after not using it for a while.

I extensively used site-to-site VPNs, access control, etc., linking remote sites to the central location to create a highly distributed organization.

Recently, there seems to be a lot of people who are leaning towards Juniper CLI, which is easier to pick up.

One to three years.

Cisco 2811 has the capability of providing several high-quality simultaneous services at wire speeds up to multiple T1/E1/xDSL links.Four high-speed WAN Interface Card Slots provide excessive density.Security features consist of on-board encryption, Intrusion Prevention, as well as stateful inspection, and up to 1500 VPN tunnels with AIM-EPII-PLUS Module.Two Integrated 10/100 Fast Ethernet ports with an option of layer 2 switching with POE support.Analog and digital voice call support is also available.

Works great never had any problem.

Cisco 2800 series provides fast excellent delivery of multiple simultaneous services. It is comprised of four new platforms: Cisco 2801, 2811, 2821, and 2851 Integrated Services Routers that are designed to meet the IP communication requirements of small to medium sized organizations and enterprise branch offices. The 2800 series also features secure network connectivity for data, voice, and video.

I use this solution to design and build my network. 

The operating system is good and well-made. We have found it to be solid and consistent. 

The product would be more scalable if it could operate with other brands. 

I have been working with this solution for five years. 

I would rate the stability of this solution as a four out of five. 

I would rate the scalability as a three out of five.

The initial setup was easy because we learned about Cisco routers and switches in school, so we are familiar with them and have certification on the equipment.

The deployment didn't trouble us much. Our in-house IT team of two or three engineers handled it, and it took us about a week. We prepared in advance, and we implemented the configuration once the equipment was acquired. I think it might take two weeks to deploy on a large network.

We pay for our license annually. If it could be cheaper that would be good, but I would rate it as a four out of five for price, with one being very expensive and five being very affordable. 

I would rate this solution as a seven out of ten. I would recommend this product to others. 

On-premises