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

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs ExtremeControl comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Identity Services Eng...
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
142
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (1st)
ExtremeControl
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
15th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is 27.1%, down from 31.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ExtremeControl is 1.9%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

SunilkumarNaganuri - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced device administration hindered by complex deployment and security limitations
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) needs to improve the profiling preauthentication. They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases. This will give them a roadmap for software-defined access (SDA) use cases and network segmentation. Threat detection capabilities are very weak. Additionally, the product is vulnerable and has many bugs.
Jose Mota - PeerSpot reviewer
Has a simple setup process, but it could be affordable
We have noticed similarities between Extreme and Ubiquiti, particularly in their functionality, like how they operate wirelessly and can be managed from the cloud or locally. Based on our experience, Ubiquiti's system may be more user-friendly and capable of handling heavy loads. Still, Extreme could be more reliable, although you have yet to compare them side by side directly. For instance, we have observed Extreme performing well in a warehouse environment, which might have a different level of network traffic than a convention center.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The TACACS and RADIUS have been the most valuable features so far."
"Cisco ISE's profiling and posturing features ensure that all devices are compliant with regulatory authorities."
"The first benefit is that we can implement zero trust architecture because of Cisco ISE. I can assure my CISO in my company that my network is such that nobody can just bring in their laptop, desktop, or any sort of mobile device and can directly get connected to my network. That is a benefit that I can only allow people who I trust on the network."
"We found all the features of the product to be valuable."
"I've had no issues with scalability. I started using it on two campuses, and now I'm using it across the country and scaling it across subsidiaries in other countries."
"When we use ISE, one of the helpful things is that I can go through the dashboard and get every step along the way of how a device was authenticated. If it's failing, why did it fail? Why is it unauthorized? If there's an error, what is the error and how can I fix that error? If it's something that, if they should be passing, why are they failing?"
"The most valuable feature is the integration with StealthWatch and DNA as one fabric."
"Cisco ISE now competes with any other product in the space because of its centralized and unified highly secure access control with ISE."
"The solution is easy to use."
"There is information on migrating most of the cloud system's features."
"It has effectively enhanced network security and integrated with other security tools to streamline operations."
"I can know which end users are using which features."
"The company also uses Cisco ISE in other places. I have been told that ExtremeControl is easier to use than ISE. The other reason we prefer ExtremeControl is stability. That's why they chose it for this big hospital in Oslo."
 

Cons

"Cisco ISE does not recognize devices and that is an issue we faced during its integration with our existing devices."
"It could be less monolithic. It's one huge application, and it does everything under the sun, so it's hard to deal with and upgrade and manage."
"On the network services devices, when you click on filter, the filter comes up. However, when I type in a search and I want to click on something it defaults back to the main page. I keep having an issue with that, and I'm not doing anything wrong."
"Some of the reporting could be improved."
"Cisco ISE's performance could be better, faster, and more robust."
"I'm frustrated by the resource consumption and how many resources it needs to run. It takes a lot of RAM. It takes a lot of space and a lot of IO power. It's frustrating to do upgrades because it takes a long time."
"One of the issues that we used to have was with profiling because we're working with a service provider that uses a lot of bring your own devices."
"I would rate this solution a 7.5 out of ten. To make it a ten they should have more people on tech support. They need to invest more in the product. It's a good product. They should just work on tech support. More support for the customer. It's not that easy to get somebody to understand this product. I have had some issues with tech before for the solution. One of them brought the solution down due to some of his activity. They need to hugely invest in their tech support."
"I'd like to have access to more information on the traffic passing through."
"One improvement could be better clarification, namely that the system only works optimally with all components purchased together."
"The initial setup was not easy. It requires an experienced person to deploy ExtremeControl, and deployment can take from days to weeks depending on the complexity of the network."
"There isn't enough development for the on-premises controller."
"The installation is easy, it can take between five minutes to four hours depending on the complexity of the environment. The speed of the installation could improve for more complex environments."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is a disaster. It's a mess and I hope they fix it soon."
"This solution requires an annual license and it is a bit expensive than competitors."
"The price of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is expensive and we are thinking about changing to FortiGate."
"Previously, Cisco ISE had a perpetual licensing model, but now they have shifted to a subscription-based licensing system."
"There is a license to use this solution and the price is reasonable."
"The solution’s pricing is okay."
"In terms of the licensing and the pricing structure of the Cisco Identity Services Engine, there's been a huge advantage to our clients recently with the advent of the enterprise agreement."
"I get very good pricing from Cisco, so I don't have a problem with that. I also don't have a problem with licensing because we get enterprise or global licensing."
"ExtremeControl can be expensive compared to other options in the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
842,194 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
27%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Aruba Clearpass or Cisco ISE?
Aruba ClearPass is a Network Access Control tool that gives secure network access to multiple device types. You can adapt the policies to VPN access, wired, or wireless access. You can securely ...
What are the main differences between Cisco ISE and Forescout Platform?
OK, so Cisco ISE uses 802.1X to secure switchports against unauthorized access. The drawback of this is that ISE cannot secure the port if a device does not support 802.1x. Cameras, badge readers, ...
How does Cisco ISE compare with Fortinet FortiNAC?
Cisco ISE uses AI endpoint analytics to identify new devices based on their behavior. It will also notify you if someone plugs in with a device that is not allowed and will block it. The user exper...
What do you like most about ExtremeControl?
It has effectively enhanced network security and integrated with other security tools to streamline operations.
What needs improvement with ExtremeControl?
Sometimes the performance with a high number of devices can be an area of concern. We rely more on the cloud for analytics rather than on-premise, and some customers prefer relying on an on-premise...
What is your primary use case for ExtremeControl?
I have already installed ExtremeControl for some of my clients. My clients use ExtremeControl for BYOD, device authentication, network security and control, and network automation.
 

Also Known As

Cisco ISE
Extreme Access Control, Enterasys NAC
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, BC Hydro, Beachbody, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Cisco IT, Derby City Council, Global Banking Customer, Gobierno de Castilla-La Mancha, Houston Methodist, Linz AG, London Hydro, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Molina Healthcare, MST Systems, New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Reykjavik University, Wildau University
Street Crane, Robert Bosch, Molex Chengdu, Weir Valves & Controls UK, Renault, AESSEAL, Ducati, Alexander Dennis, UK Ministry of Defence, Manz
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs. ExtremeControl and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,194 professionals have used our research since 2012.