Cisco Enterprise Routers Reviews

The solution is very stable. I have not seen any downtime due to the product freezing or anything like that. It performs well and hasn't required reboots unless it's to troubleshoot with a support service provider needing configuration. It doesn't overheat and it's on 24/7. 

It would be great if there was a graphical user interface or something to interface with the router.

If I only have one LAN port in which I want to connect more than one device, I have to buy an add-on card so that I can have two LAN ports. The smaller devices and low-end routers have about four LAN ports. This solution is a high-end device but has only one. It would be preferable if they offered more LAN ports.

I don't know whether the solution can be cloud-managed. When I am away from work, it would be great if I could still have access and manage things, check the configuration, etc. Right now, I don't have a way of monitoring things if I am not at my desk.

I need a feature introduced where I can be able to tell if my provider is giving me constant capacity. The solution should be able to alert me to when the capacity fluctuates so I can go back to my provider and tell ask them why they are giving me less capacity than I am paying for.

The stability of the solution is very, very good. 

There was a time I was experiencing some issues with the low-end Cisco router, the 800 series, but I upgraded to the enterprise option and its performance has been remarkable, I have no complaints whatsoever.

We haven't attempted to scale the solution, so I can't really speak to if it's easy or difficult.

I've not engaged with Cisco technical support directly, but the resellers supporting us have been excellent. I prefer to work with the internet service providers because they are the ones who sold the Cisco router to me and they've been supporting me very well and I am happy with their assistance.

We didn't really use another solution, at least not on a large scale. We did use some small routers like Linksys for a handful of people. For the purpose of our internet connectivity from the service provider to my company, I wanted to use Cisco.

Deployment took some time. One person came in to terminate cable. Then, the next day, they sent someone to configure the router which took three hours. Some of the settings weren't quite working right, which is why it took that long. 

The initial setup was done by my internet service provider because they did not want anyone to tamper with their configuration. 

We operate a hotel and we have clients who are logging into the WiFi all the time. We need to give them good connectivity. Sometimes we get as many as 500 connections and we know that with Cisco unless the service provider lets us down, the device won't fail. It's a very good product.

I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it ten out of ten.

The valuable feature is CLI.

For deployment, you need a tech-savvy individual with extensive CLI experience. Occasional troubleshooting may require remote access, which could pose a minor challenge. The centralized management system simplifies patching, deployment, and configuration tasks, making it easier for tech-savvy personnel to support and maintain the equipment.

I have been using Cisco Enterprise Routers for two or three years.

They are stable. We don't have constraints in terms of deployment.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

We have a team of ten with the main configuration.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

We need assistance regarding the GUI feature.

The initial setup takes around 30 to one hour, depending on the configuration and the person’s technical ability.

I rate the initial setup a five out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

One person is enough for the deployment, depending on the nation and the quantity configured. We don't have a centralized model through which you can deploy configuration.

I would recommend it for security.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

It is used for small to medium businesses. Nowadays, there are so many other routers with different operating systems, XR, and DSR that are available for service providers in other data centers.

The DNS features are different in the ASR series. Apart from that, Cisco provides most of the needed features in all the routers, except the live local license.

In my opinion, Cisco is not granular if we compare it to Juniper. In terms of the access lists and some other parts like if we delete one ACL, most of the parties are gone on the Cisco side. But in Juniper, I can delete fifty access lists.

All the rules and policies are also granular and are based on the UNIX operating system or Linux operating system. Cisco needs to consider those in the market because Juniper is doing well. Some granular functions are required because they have all of the routing protocols with almost all the features.

I have been using Cisco Enterprise Routers for 10-12 years, since the company launched the Cisco 1841 router.

It is a stable solution. 

There are no issues with scalability. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. 

I have never contacted customer service apart from once or twice. But it was not regarding the router’s features rather there were some issues in FPD.

The initial setup is straightforward. Most of the people can understand and do it on their own. As far as the management platform is considered, hybrid solutions are being used by large enterprises. Some other enterprises use Meraki-based solutions as well, and some of them use the on-prem solution.

I implemented it myself. 

It is quite costly for the same feature as compared to Huawei and Juniper. I rate the pricing an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. I recommend Cisco. 

Our company was contracted to change switches and routers for government offices, clinics, police departments, and armed forces. 

The solution was part of a massive upgrade in technology government-wide and we were one of many subcontractors working on the project. 

Our country is five or ten years behind in technology and generally slow to react. 

Cisco partnering with our government was very important because it motivated us to learn the solution, expand our portfolio, and move technology forward while serving as expert technicians for deployments and maintenance. 

The solution provides the best security available and simplifies the process for branches and networking. 

The solution is difficult to implement without a broad knowledge base. 

Subnetting for large organizations is complicated because you must understand the company hierarchy before starting to subnet. The process can be difficult so it helps to have experience or rely on other team members for advice. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

I do not monitor stability in my position but the solution has a reputation for being top-notch so stability must be good. 

I only handled installations but the solution must be scalable because it was deployed across all government offices. 

Supervisors at our company partnered with technical support to ensure seamless implementations. 

The initial setup is complicated and requires knowledge of the solution. 

We opted to work in teams so we would have more knowledge in the field for implementations. Each site team consisted of 14 technicians and there were more than 1,000 technicians across all sites. 

We first analyzed existing routers and switches to provide supervisors with a list of equipment to be replaced. We then prepared installation and configuration plans to ensure seamless implementations. 

Our company replaced old hardware and worked in partnership with Cisco to configure and implement the solution.

Implementation and maintenance requires two to four technicians. 

It helped our company to learn the solution and partner with the government which includes some of the largest organizations in our country. 

Cisco has a partnership with our government and provides the main solution in Botswana. 

No other options were evaluated because our government believes that Cisco provides the best security in a comprehensive package that matches desired standards. 

I rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for our final customers. The solution is used for communication. We are a service provider, and we offer our customers public networks as a service. Our customers typically need an internet connection or MPLS.

The solution offers very good networking capabilities.

The stability is excellent.

The consistency of the configuration has been very good.

The performance of the devices is very reliable.

The initial setup can be a little bit difficult. They should try to make it easier to set up for new users.

I’ve used the solution for maybe ten to 15 years. I’ve used it for over a decade. It’s been a while.

The solution is quite stable and the devices are reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn’t crash or freeze. It’s been great.

The solution is extremely scalable. It’s not a problem expanding it as necessary.

We’ve used the solution’s technical support. We found them helpful and responsive and we are quite satisfied with the level of support provided.

The initial setup can be hard. That said, we have a good amount of experience. It’s easier to manage the process if you have a good understanding of the solution in general.

I’m not sure how long it took to deploy the solution. For a big project, it might take as long as two weeks, however, a small deployment might only take a few hours. Every deployment differs according to size and requirements.

We tend to set up the solution for our clients. We have some engineers that work directly with end customers.

We use the most recent version of the solution, however, I do not know the version number off-hand.

I’d rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We’ve been very happy with its capabilities.

I'm a Cisco specialist, and I implement Cisco devices, not always just for myself. We consult, implement, and design Cisco devices for our customers according to their needs and requirements. Just for the record, I am the CEO of my company: Atin Secure Systems ltd.

I feel free with Cisco's operation system (IOS), and specifically, it's CLI. The power of Cisco is it's software and OS, not just their hardware. Their end product is very stable, straightforward, and scalable. However, it takes time and energy for a beginner to be able to administer the CLI.

Cisco could update or release a new GUI. It needs a more extensive and comprehensive GUI, specifically for people who don't like using CLIs. I don't mind CLI but, I know based on my experience that not everyone prefers it. Unfortunately, Cisco promotes only to use CLI.

I am teaching Cisco up to CCNP level to my students, but up until today, I haven't been able to take the Cisco exams because we are banned from doing so in our country due to sanctions. We cannot even take the Cisco exams out of the country. I wanted to travel to Turkey to try, however, I was told I wouldn't be recognized even if I pass the exam.

I have been implementing, designing, troubleshooting, and teaching Cisco for ten years.

Cisco has the best stability I have ever seen. There aren't bugs or glitches, freeze, or crashes. It's very reliable.

The solution is very scalable. It's another feature that's great. You can add as many Cisco devices as you want to your project or your scenario if your initial design is correct. This can be done without any side effects and without any big changes.

We're based in Iran. We suffer from a lot of sanctions, so we don't have access to Cisco specialists or Cisco support. It's not allowed.

Cisco is somehow expensive in comparison to other vendors. Hence, we have switched to other brands only to satisfy the financial needs of our customers. Our only suggestion to customers is Cisco.

In my opinion, the initial set up is useless for a person (a specialist or a technician) who wants to run a full scenario. If I were Cisco, I would eliminate that initial setup.

Due to the sanctions on our country, we can't get outside help directly from Cisco. We need to handle the implementation ourselves.

The initial costs of using a full Cisco scenario like purchasing gears and licenses may be a little bit high. However, with accurate design and implementation, you should make sure you are good to go for years.

Cisco is the definition of computer networks in the industry. I have experience and knowledge in other brands like Mikrotik. However, Cisco is the best on the market.

You can't compare Cisco to any other gadget or any other solution. They're the best in the market, hands down. I have no choice other than giving them full marks of ten out of ten. I'd recommend Cisco to everyone.

We primarily use the routers for internet and wire connection.

The routing feature is the solution's most valuable aspect. 

The solution is more flexible in configuration and in deployment. The deployment is very easy.

Currently, we use the 4000 series of the solution, however, there were issues with the 1900 series.

The solution needs to offer some security features in a future release.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is very scalable. In our company, we have about 10,000 users. We don't plan to increase usage right now.

Technical support is excellent. I'd rate them ten out of ten.

We previously used, and still use Juniper. We use both Juniper and Cisco within our organization; we haven't replaced one with the other.

The initial setup was straightforward. Deployment takes about two hours.

Our strategy was to have both high and low-level information in regard to the configuration. We usually have it in our script and we can use this information to assist us with deployment.

You require about two people for deployment and maintenance of the solution.

In most cases, I handle the implementation myself. However, in some cases, we used system integrators due to the nature of the contract involved.

There's a yearly licensing agreement. You can add more features at an additional cost if you need to.

We're mostly using the 4000 series of the solution.

In terms of advice, I'd say users need to be clear about customer requirements to avoid overpaying for features they don't need. They should take care to select the proper router type and use the proper license. For deployment, they need a high level of understanding, for the implementation and configuration. They need to be prepared for all scenarios to be network ready. Something might turn off, for example, so they need to be prepared for those instances in order to properly handle them.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

This product gives us connection to providers in the international network. We are customers of Cisco. 

In general, I like Cisco products. I've had a lot of training on their solutions. This product has good capabilities and provides good performance. 

For our company and for our customers, this solution is very expensive. 

I've been using this product for several years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable.

Our license doesn't include technical support and it's not essential for us. We use the documentation that Cisco provides. 

The initial setup is not too complex and we have around 20,000 end users. We have engineers and IT technicians who are able to provide us with maintenance services. 

Licensing costs are expensive for us. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10.