Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs Netskope Borderless SD-WAN comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN
Ranking in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (4th), WAN Edge (2nd)
Netskope Borderless SD-WAN
Ranking in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions
32nd
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

VENKATESHREDDY - PeerSpot reviewer
Oct 10, 2022
Straightforward to set up and has lowered expenses, but needs to work on controller compatibility
SD-WAN itself is vendor locked in. At one point, Cisco should make it open so that if we have multiple mergers and acquisitions happening, it's easier to consolidate. Right now, if we are running Cisco, and the other organization in an acquisition scenario is deploying some other competitive vendor, the communication, the manageability of running two separate ESD instances, becomes a burden that falls back on us, especially the network administrators. It's better to consolidate and come up with better products, especially targeting AWS as their underlying transport. Traditionally, what Cisco has done, is they have always considered internet gateways or links and the MPLS links as their transport technology. In some devices, they have also used ELTs. Now, since we have 5G in place, they could look at private 5G ELTs, and they could expand that line, again, particularly in the ESD space since AWS has recently released their own SD instance where they are allowing their customers to backhaul. With SD-WAN being a very custom solution and a vendor-specific solution, we would end up having multiple software-defined instances where one is running in Cisco, and one you are running with AWS, and then again tomorrow, another SaaS-based player or a similar player will come up with something else. For example, when two organizations merge with each other, there is likely a scenario where organization X is running (for example) Juniper, and the other organization is running Cisco. The administrators would end up having to separate ESD controllers. You do not have a single ESD controller that is open in nature, where you can manage Cisco and Juniper devices. That is a concern. So if the controllers were made open, with compatibility between the vendors, that would be a very good thing for the industry overall. As a market leader, they are better positioned to go ahead and make that kind of change. If you look at the history of Cisco, before MPLS came into the game, it was Cisco, Juniper, and a few other vendors who came together and created a very good protocol. We need them to start focusing on the SD-WAN compatibility with other environments and not being so vendor locked with Cisco environments. They should get better controllers that can especially talk with AWS and Azure. Right now, I have taken a subscription with AWS Project Gateway. I will have to place a Cisco CSR image if I want to make it a true SD-WAN solution. Instead of using a separate image, if they could make the Cisco's controller open or a transit gateway solution, that would be ideal.
Use Netskope Borderless SD-WAN?
Share your opinion

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cisco's pricing is not entirely satisfactory when you compare the SD-WAN solutions in Asian markets — like the South Asian market in Sri Lanka — because there are several competing brands including Fortinet and Citrix, who provide much the same product for a generally lower price. And when it comes to firewall vendors like Palo Alto and SonicWall, they're also selling here. It's the same with VMware, too; they have much the same features."
"The pricing of this solution is very expensive."
"The initial cost is quite significant, but the investment is worthwhile."
"The solution is quite expensive so it is important to enhance its cost efficiency."
"SD-WAN as a service is probably something in the neighborhood of $100 to $200 a month per location."
"The product's license is expensive."
"The price of the solution is the only negative factor, it is much more expensive compared with the Cisco Meraki SD-WAN solution."
"It is much cheaper than other solutions. Most of our clients are the top 500 companies, and they all have a corporate contract."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions solutions are best for your needs.
801,394 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
40%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco SD-WAN?
When considering the most valuable features of Cisco SD-WAN, the decoupling of self-monitoring stands out significantly.
What needs improvement with Cisco SD-WAN?
Customers collaborate with ISPs and currently work with three ISPs, using options like LSM VPN and MPLS VPN to reduce line costs. They are considering moving from their current setup to an MPLS VPN...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cisco SD-WAN
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Doyle Research, Ashton Metzler & Associates
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Cisco, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions. Updated: August 2024.
801,394 professionals have used our research since 2012.