Cisco FabricPath Reviews

We have the solution installed in many data centers, configured in spine-leaf technology configured with Nexus. We use FabricPath and VXLAN to make our infrastructure reliable in different data centers. We have multiple layers to our environment. Data Centers A to C are connected with fiber, and we used FabricPath to enhance our data center in spine-leaf technology six to seven years ago. Internally, we had VRF to separate our routing table. We use many virtualization environments, not only Cisco, but we especially use Cisco to expand layer 2 and layer 3.

For us, there is a change between a single data center with different IP addresses to a spam data center, where the VLAN could be extended between the two, so we are able to grant the service with high availability. We can also enhance our service line with disaster recovery.

We are working on layer 3 integration to completely expand our preferred center. At the moment, we are using VRF on an internal switch, so layer 3 does not have higher availability. I want to see that improve.

We have used Cisco FabricPath for the last five or six years, and we have it installed in our data center.

FabricPath is stable. Problems come when you try to integrate a different service or something else.

The solution is very scalable because we can add new data centers by simply adding a leaf. My company has approximately 1,000 users, and we are growing year by year.

We use tech support when we need to, and we usually get a good answer.

The initial setup was slightly complex. We required around 60% of our staff to deploy the solution.

At the moment, we are looking to deploy FabricPath on-premises. We are extending the private cloud to the customer. From our data center, we are connected with Azure and Amazon. We want to create a solution like a cloud, where our data center appears as a cloud for the customer.

Before choosing FabricPath, get the right design initially to support the right tools. I rate FabricPath an eight out of ten.

We are customers of Cisco and I'm the infrastructure and telecommunications manager. 

Cisco has created a good balance for traffic with this solution. We can select a priority package for these products and give additional bandwidth if we need it. We're not using the load balance, it's the fabric switching that is the most important thing we do.

I'd like to see better integration with SIEM, perhaps to generate more plugins that can adapt to the traffic analyzer. We also have some issues with the technical support because in Mexico the hardware is not always readily available. We had to wait around 50 days for a part. It's crucial to have sufficient stock on hand for your customers. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

We haven't had any issues with stability. We maintain the updates of the firmware and we haven't had any problems in production.

The solution is scalalble, we have around 300 users.

We used to use Avaya but we changed to Cisco because we needed some extra intelligence in the network and Avaya didn't have the hardware for that. 

The initial setup is very easy because we have good engineers. We created a template for our business and we make changes to the solution every two weeks. This is good for us and for the business. The initial deployment took two weeks. 

We have a problem with the licensing costs because all contracts are in American dollars. Mexican pesos have a disadvantage in that market, and it's a problem getting dollars in Mexico. It's also an expensive product for us. 

It's important to understand the core business of your organization, not every organization needs a solution as large as Cisco's. We only use around 30% of what this solution offers. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution for a firewall and to control viruses. It has many uses in our organization and we can manage it all through the cloud.

The fact that the solution is on the cloud is its most valuable aspect. If you are on the cloud, you can manage your network from anywhere, any place. It's very good. 

The solution also offers services for wireless, internet, firewalls, etc. Everything is in one device, which is very helpful. It's a great package solution.

The solution is very simple and offers very high levels of security for organizations.

The solution is quite expensive. They should work on lowering the cost to make it more affordable for users.

Cisco should add a few more security features to make it more robust.

The solution should offer better reporting.

We've been using this solution for six months now.

The solution is very stable. We haven't had any issues with it.

We have about 120 people in our organization using the solution. They are mostly architects and engineers.

We haven't been in touch with Cisco for this particular solution, although we were in touch with a different solution. We found their assistance to be quite good and we're very satisfied with their level of support.

We previously used Cisco's Firepower. It was much more complicated, in terms of setup, and we find Fabricpath to be much easier.

The solution is a bit complex to set up initially. It shouldn't be a problem for most IT teams to handle, however. It's much simpler than a solution like Cisco's Firepower, which we found to be quite complicated.

We didn't have vendors or integrators help us implement the solution. We did some internet research instead and watched Youtube videos. These helped us get through the process. They were quite effective.

The solution is expensive.

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

We deploy this solution for clients who specifically request it. The solution is often deployed on-premises as per client requests.

The cloud version of Cisco Fabric Path could be improved because most of our clients choose to stay on premises because of the unstable internet service available here.

We have been using this solution for three years and are currently using the most recent version.

The solution has excellent stability. We have a client who ran a Catalyst 4506-E switch for seven years straight without switching it off. Hence, the solution's stability is impressive.

The scalability primarily depends on the size of the company we are dealing with.

Our experience with customer service and support has been excellent. The clients have been able to reach the support team. However, we also had delays before.

The initial setup process differs. It could be very basic or complex, depending on the client's needs and requests. For example, clients may request to be educated on the tools before deploying the technology in their network. At other times, the company may be moving from one solution to another. Therefore, it depends on the client's needs.

We usually request that any additional costs we may incur be included at the onset of our purchase. The licensing fees differ from one client to another. We have clients who have paid 1,000 and others who paid 3,000.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. We recommend Cisco Enterprise solutions because they're very good, stable, offer high-quality equipment and provide good value for the price.

We use FabricPath in the Cisco Data Center Switches. FabricPath is a license to inject into Cisco Data Center Switches like Nexus 7K, 9K for reducing the Spanning Tree phenomenon.

Cisco FabricPath is used to eliminate Spanning Tree broadcasts into the Layer 2 network. We can configure the FabricPath in a lot of different interfaces for communicating with different switches and disabling the Spanning Tree Protocol so we can't have a loop in the leaf and spine architecture.

The setup is very simple. 

We have found the solution to be stable.

It scales well.

There could always be more interfaces included in the switch.

If Cisco can include management for this protocol in Layer 3, that would be ideal. For example, we have our first data center in the USA and the second data center is in Europe. If we could juxtapose FabricPath for managing the Layer 2 loop between these two data centers locally, that would be great. 

We have used the solution since 2018.

It's stable. Really, we don't have any problems with FabricPath when we configure it into our Nexus switches. It's very stable without looping into our Layer 2 network. I recommend its usage for this reason, really.

The product scales well. If a company needs to expand, it can do so.

We don't have any problems with FabricPath. If we have to reach out to Cisco support to resolve a problem, we can, however, it rarely happens. That said, if you call Cisco to resolve a problem, it's my understanding that they have very good support can resolve problems immediately. Support from Cisco is very, very good.

So far, we have found the initial setup to be very simple, very straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

The solution is very, very cheap compared with all other brands - including Huawei or HPE Switches. We buy Cisco for the performance, really the performance, scalability, backup, and a lot of technology like VPC, OTV, or VDC, Virtual Device Context. It's good.

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

I would recommend the product for a company that has a very big data center. It's good for those in banking or insurance, for example.  

We are a leading solution integrator and Cisco FabriPath is one of the products that we implement for our customers.

This solution makes up part of an enterprise LAN. 

The technical assistance is good.

The exact role that this solution plays, as compared to other products by Cisco, is unclear to our customers. It is sometimes difficult to highlight exactly what individual products are used for and it is something that should be simplified.

This product doesn't have its own LAN monitoring tool.

There would be more support for this solution if there were options available for those with a smaller budget.

We have been working with Cisco for at least ten years.

Cisco FabriPath is a stable solution. Apart from a few cases, we have had no issues with reliability.

We have not had any issues with scalability.

We are satisfied with the technical support.

We primarily use Cisco, but apart from that, we also use networking solutions from Aruba.

If a customer has a critical demand for a product from another vendor such as Juniper or HPE then we can provide it. However, normally we use either Cisco or Aruba.

We are satisfied with the pricing.

Most of our customers are satisfied with the solutions from Cisco. That said, nothing is ever completed because everybody has their own difficulties and challenges.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The most valuable features are the lead time and the high quality of the product.

My company's been using FabricPath for the last twenty to twenty-five years.

FabricPath is stable.

FabricPath is scalable.

Cisco's technical support is very good - they always make the deadlines.

The initial setup is a little complex.

FabricPath is very reasonably priced.

In terms of future models, Cisco are already building up, so they're up to the mark in terms of digital turnaround. I would give FabricPath a score of seven out of ten.

Cisco FabricPath is preferred mostly for its security features and user-friendliness.

The product's most valuable feature is its ports. They are reliable and do not give problems like many other switches. They can be used for a very long time without failures.

They should consider upgrading the memory feature of the product.

I have been working with Cisco FabricPath for two years.

I rate the product stability a seven. 

I rate the platform's scalability as an eight.

The deployment took approximately six weeks to complete. I rate the initial setup process an eight. 

We take assistance from a third-party vendor for implementation. 

Cisco is expensive but offers good-quality features, so I would rate it high on the pricing scale.

The topology management of Cisco FabricPath is perfect. 

Overall, I rate the product a seven.