Cisco Enterprise Routers Reviews

We use Cisco Enterprise Routers or WAN connectivity and switching in multiple areas, such as data centers and branch offices.

The most valuable feature of Cisco Enterprise Routers is that they are robust and resilient. 

The overall price of Cisco Enterprise Routers should be reduced, it is expensive.

I have been using Cisco Enterprise Routers for approximately 10 years.

Cisco Enterprise Routers are stable.

The scalability of Cisco Enterprise Routers is good.

We have approximately 250,000 users using this solution in my organization. We have an additional 10,000-20,000 contractors and a couple of partners who use the solution.

The support from Cisco Enterprise Routers is good.

Cisco Enterprise Routers has a simple implementation. The timeframe it tale for the implementation depends on the solution we are deploying. It varies up to ten hours. We use Cisco's wireless, routers, switches, and a few firewalls.

We used an integrator to do the implementation.

We have approximately 20 engineers that do the deployment and maintenance.

The license of Cisco Enterprise Routers is too expensive compared to other solutions. As we try to increase the bandwidth, it gets even more expensive. There is an annual license needed to use the solution.

I would recommend Cisco Enterprise Routers to others who need an enterprise solution.

I rate Cisco Enterprise Routers an eight 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. 

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. 

We use this solution to secure and separate our network. We use the router to install the internet gateway.

When there is a problem, it hampers the scope of work. So if they could reduce the response time, it'll be helpful to us. In addition, the UI could be more user-friendly.

We have been using this solution for the last two years. It is deployed on-premises.

It is a stable solution. Cisco devices are very stable.

It is very scalable. We have two sites, our head office site and our factory site. We have a total of about 1600 users on the factory site. We only require four to five people for maintenance, and the maintenance has different levels, admin, physical and support maintenance. There are three people in admin maintenance and three to four in support and other maintenance.

We have not used any technical support from Cisco.

We used Cisco Router 2911 before this.

There was some complexity in setting up the existing network to the new network. It took almost six months to implement. However, the timeline was impacted by COVID. There were no issues with the product, but the issue was upping the tunnel and upgrading systems.

Our vendor and partner helped us with installation. The vendor did the initial configuration, and now we are taking care of the maintenance.

I rate the pricing a seven out of ten.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

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 use this solution for communication between banking branches, and connecting those branches to Head Office.

We appreciate that this solution performs well, regardless of the volume of traffic being fed through it.

The main area for improvement with this product is with the price, which is currently very high compared to the rest of the market.

We have been working with this solution for more than 20 years.

This is a very stable solution.

We have found this to be a scalable solution.

The technical support for this solution is very good.

Positive

The initial setup for this product is very easy, once some training has taken place.

We implemented this solution using our in-house team.

There is a router-only, perpetual license available for this product, but additional features will mean additional charges.

We recommend this solution for medium to large organizations, as it requires a large financial commitment to work at its best.

We would also advise organizations to be very clear on their requirements. This way they are not paying for features that this product provides, but that they won't use.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I install this solution for clients. We are a service provider.

The performance is good.

The solution could be more secure.

It's stable. We haven't had any issues.

It's scalable.

Installation is simple.

I would rate this solution seven out of ten.