This product helps with load balancing. As an engineer, I help implement this for our company.
Software Engineer at a healthcare company with 51-200 employees
This product is stable. It is the best product out there.
Pros and Cons
- "It is the best product out there."
- "It can be difficult to setup."
What is our primary use case?
How has it helped my organization?
It helps with load balancing.
For how long have I used the solution?
One to three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The product is stable.
Buyer's Guide
NetScaler
February 2025
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3d09a/3d09ae4d87808101515aff47a788c8a5df4338de" alt="PeerSpot Buyer's Guide"
Learn what your peers think about NetScaler. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
How was the initial setup?
It can be a complex setup in some cases.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I do not have any experience with the pricing of the product.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
In comparison to F5 BIG-IP, this is the best solution. It is the best product out there.
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: I am a distributor, but I have vast experience with personal use of this product for the past two years.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/90183/9018307dff0f8424d9744886ad50d7f0f7915caf" alt="PeerSpot user"
Network & Security Lead at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
Content Switching provides flexibility for routing traffic but development team's response time could be better
Pros and Cons
- "Content Switching provides flexibility for routing traffic as desired to designated real servers. It also provides good geo capabilities through its GSLB feature."
- "Development team's response time could be better."
What is our primary use case?
We used it to manage a data center hosting environment and had more than 250 HA pairs of Citrix NetScalers (both physical and virtual) to maintain/manage customer environments. Each environment was different, each was a customer-dedicated environment.
How has it helped my organization?
This was a standard load-balancing solution provided to our customers. They didn't have many complaints about the way their traffic was being managed. We were able to handle specific requirements for persistence/stickiness.
What is most valuable?
Content Switching since it provides flexibility for routing traffic as desired to designated real servers. It also provides good geo capabilities through its GSLB feature.
What needs improvement?
Development team's response time could be better.
For how long have I used the solution?
Three to five years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
No major issues with stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Scalability is good with the virtual appliance, where you can easily scale using the appropriate license and match up with the appropriate virtual machine.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We had a mix of makes/models, as we supported a large customer base, such as F5, Cisco CSS. We have never had a case where we had to switch NetScaler out for another make.
How was the initial setup?
Initial setup is straightforward if you know basic networking concepts. It doesn't take a lot of reading to set one up.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate NetScaler as a seven out of 10 for good technical support on routine issues, but any issues that needed the development team's involvement took a long time.
If you don't have very specific requirements such as the ASM that F5 offers, this would do almost all tasks as far as load-balancing is concerned (geo load-balancing as well).
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Buyer's Guide
NetScaler
February 2025
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3d09a/3d09ae4d87808101515aff47a788c8a5df4338de" alt="PeerSpot Buyer's Guide"
Learn what your peers think about NetScaler. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
IT Architect with 11-50 employees
Choose your NetScaler … wisely
I spend a lot of my time breaking down the different models of Citrix NetScaler appliances and different Software Editions within the Citrix NetScaler portfolio.
I decided to set up a blog about this since the path is usually pretty much (lengthy but) the same. This does not mean the answer is always easy because there are a lot of questions that need to be answered.
The first thing I would like to get off my chest is the following: Stop seeing/selling the Citrix NetScaler as a replacement for Secure Gateway. It is so much more than that. I often have discussions with various engineers and consultants telling me that Citrix NetScaler is so expensive for a Remote Access solution because Secure Gateway always used to be free. No offense but a Citrix NetScaler solution belongs to the networking department, not the Citrix XenApp sys admin department. Or maybe limited.
That leads me to the first difficult thing of a Citrix NetScaler project. The adoption of the Citrix NetScaler appliances to the networking guys of an organization. They need to embrace the solution to make this a success. For some reason they too see it as a ‘’Citrix’’ solution. For that reason one of the most important meetings to setup is usually with the networking guys to try to explain the L3-L7 functionality of the Citrix NetScaler solution. When they realize it competes with F5, Juniper, Cisco, etc then we are on the right track.
NetScaler Gateway or NetScaler Standard Edition
Usually the first question of a customer is regarding something simple like replacing the Remote Access solution. Since the NetScaler is going to be the main platform for publishing Citrix publications a NetScaler Gateway can be considered as a valid option. This is when I tell a customer it would be wise to spend a little extra on the NetScaler Standard Edition since this would leverage the solution be having full load balancing capabilities (among others). When you compare prices between the NetScaler Gateway and NetScaler Standard Edition you will see that the Standard Edition will be somewhat more expensive but I for one think that it is worth the difference given the feature set that come with the Standard Edition. Of course the NetScaler Gateway can always be upgraded to a NetScaler Standard Edition (or higher) if you will.
Another feature of Citrix NetScaler Standard Edition is the ability to run Citrix Web Interface on the appliance. Honestly, I do think is not really that important anymore since Citrix Web interface is going to be replaced by Citrix StoreFront and as of yet there are no plans of putting StoreFront on the NetScaler (that I know of). Of course for some situations it can still be a feasible solution. There is still the ability to dismiss multiple Microsoft IIS Servers by using Web Interface on Citrix NetScaler.
Virtual, Physical or Logical
I am aware this needs some explanation. Let’s start of with the Virtual.
Virtual (or VPX)
I hardly ever, ever, ever, sell the Citrix NetScaler VPX appliance. Only for use of Lab or Testing environment or really small, small, small businesses where the use case is to implement a remote access solution for a small number of users.
It happens that customers come to me and tell me they are thinking of purchasing a Citrix NetScaler VPX solution and would like my advise on which we will have this breakdown which changes their mindset about going for the VPX solution. I have by no means of interest of selling MPX over VPX, I just give a breakdown of the pro’s and cons for various solutions.
1. The first common mistake is the idea that VPX is cheaper because it is virtual (yes assumptions, the foundation of every well thought out IT project
), well, there goes the first bubble. Ask your Citrix Solution Advisor
for an estimate of a Citrix NetScaler VPX 1000 and a Citrix NetScaler
MPX 5550/5560 and you will be amazed.
2. No hypervisor resources guaranteed. The VPX platform runs on an organization’s hypervisor. Whenever I ask a hypervisor support engineer if they are not overcommitting resources, the answer is hardly ever no. It would not even be of first that I would even have to explain overcommitting in an hypervisor environment. But in an overcommitting environment it means that important hardware resources are shared among multiple virtual instances. Meaning that hardware resources can only be limited or even not guaranteed since it’s shared over multiple virtual instances.
3. No hardware acceleration. This one is pretty much inline with the above statement, the MPX has hardware accelerator card for encrypting/decrypting SSL connections. Within a VPX you would be dependent of hardware resources of the hypervisor. Of course this one becomes more important when the number of connections are significant.
4. No need for a HA solution. This one may seem a little strange but it pops up once and awhile. Customers choosing a single Citrix NetScaler VPX appliance because they have VMware HA and DRS and rely on snapshotting of the VM’s making the solution highly available. Agreed, in some cases it might work but it depends on what the accepted downtime is for the given solution. If this is a couple of hours or a day that would be fine. You would have to keep in mind that a single appliance solution could require a full restore of the VM dependent on the issue. This means restore from snapshot/backup but could also be a new installation of the VM and restore of the configuration. This would require the relevant knowledge of how to which is not always present in my opinion. Also keep in mind that Citrix NetScaler VPX does not vMotion well, I’ve seen hanging Citrix NetScaler vMotion VM’s.
5. Bandwidth. A Citrix NetScaler VPX comes in different (bandwidth) flavors (5, 10, 200, 1000 and 3000). I have done a number of PoC’s with the Citrix NetScaler VPX and see them miserably fail with at least the 5 and 10 by the solution consuming bandwidth (I try to disregard the Express version which is 5 as much as I can). It could be a solution though if you are using DSR (Direct Server Return) Load Balancing solutions (meaning that the traffic is not actually flowing through the NetScaler). The thing to remember is that the Bandwidth of the VPX is end-to-end on all interfaces it has, so if you have a Citrix NetScaler VPX 1000 with 2 virtual interfaces the 1000Mbit is being counted over all interfaces (so no 2 x 1000 Mbit).
Physical (or MPX)
Usually when I have given a customer some of the somewhat ‘’drawbacks’’ listed above and convinced the networking guys of the networking features of the appliance they are tending towards the MPX platform.
1. Bandwidth. The Bandwidth of an MPX is somewhat listed differently
then that of it’s VPX variant. Citrix calls this ‘’Kernel Bandwidth” or
“L7 Bandwidth”, this last one can be a little bit confusing because it
implies that L3 (or Dirty Load Balancing) would not be intermitted to
the Bandwidth limit. This is not the case.
Here a list of the most commonly deployed appliances and there Kernel Bandwidth:
- MPX 5550 (0.5Gbps) (Upgradeable to an MPX 5560 (1Gbps) by software license);
- MPX 8200 (2.0Gbps) (Upgradeable to an MPX 8400(4Gbps) by software license);
- MPX 8400 (4.0Gbps) (Upgradeable to an MPX 8600(6Gbps) by software license).
More information on the different MPX platform models:
http://www.citrix.com/content/dam/citrix/en_us/documents/products/netscaler-data-sheet.pdf
2. Rackspace. Yes, as you might expect an MPX appliance is physical which means it requires Rackspace. Although for the entire 55xx and 8xxx it is 1U per appliance, but still Rackspace.
Logical (or SDX)
An Citrix NetScaler SDX is a so-called hypervisor appliance. It runs on Citrix XenServer, but a special server of XenServer (SR-OIV). In a nutshell it means that the Citrix NetScaler VPX that run on this hypervisor has direct access to hardware resources. That’s why the number of virtual appliances on the different models is limited.
I think the SDX will be the more common appliance for customers to acquire. There are a couple of reasons for this.
1. A lot of security compliances by companies do not allow machines to have a connection to a perimeter network (like DMZ) and a internal network at the same time. Over time I see that customers are allowing more logical segregation of the network by machines that touch multiple networks. For instance hypervisors that have VM’s in a perimeter network and internal network. This is where a Citrix NetScaler SDX could be really beneficial. On the SDX you could have a Citrix NetScaler VPX for remote access on the perimeter network and a Citrix NetScaler VPX on the internal network for Load Balancing purposes.
2. Platinum Edition. On Citrix NetScaler SDX you can run multiple instance of Citrix NetScaler and they are licensed with the Platinum Edition of Citrix NetScaler software. This means that L7 App Firewall could/would/should be deployed on all of the Citrix NetScaler VPX appliances.
3. Upgrade MPX. Citrix has recently announced that even the Citrix NetScaler MPX 8400 can be upgraded to an SDX platform. This used to be from the MPX 11500 which made it far fetched for almost any company that I know. Since the MPX 8200 and 8400 are the same hardware this means that there are upgrade paths from even the MPX 8200. The thing to keep in mind is that on Citrix NetScaler SDX 8400 only 5 virtual appliances can be deployed.
4. Third party appliances. Citrix has opened up the SDX platform for 3rd party to create appliances for the SDX platform.
Other decisions that can be of influence
Copper/Fiber
If your organization requires fiber connections that you will have to purchase at least the Citrix NetScaler MPX 8200 series or higher. The 8200 comes with options for connecting SFP or SFP+ fiber connections.
Out of Band Management
If your organizations requires Out-of-Band Management you will have to purchase at least the Citrix NetScaler MPX 8200 series or higher.
Replacing Microsoft Forefront TMG
We do a lot of implementation where we replace Microsoft TMG with Citrix NetScaler as for Reverse Proxy solutions. Since Microsoft has announced the Microsoft TMG to be En-of-Life with no replacement products Citrix NetScaler can come in to place. Microsoft Exchange is such an example of solutions we publish through Citrix NetScaler. A big advantage of Citrix NetScaler is that it can integrate 3rd party token authentication to add that extra layer of security for publishing your mail to users. (Keep in mind, Citrix NetScaler Enterprise Edition minimum requirement for AAA functionality).
Security, Business and Technical
One of the first conversation I will have regarding a Citrix NetScaler project is with Security and Business. The reason for this is that they often have conflicting wishes and desires. Often the Business has many progressive plans for making possibilities work to make their users work more productively. Yet, when the Security finds out about these plans they can contradict with Security Compliancy. So, one of the first tasks is to make sure these departments align. If you do not give this the attention it needs it will come back to you. Technical seems to be irrelevant and it sort of is. Technically almost anything is possible with Citrix NetScaler, that’s the reason why they are last in line.
Network and High Availability
The last item I would like to point out is network (and High Availability) and the options there are using Citrix NetScaler. The Software Edition of a Citrix NetScaler is very much dependent of the type of network that exist at the customer. If a customer is running a single ISP, single datacenter (or server location) a Citrix NetScaler Standard Edition with HA (High Availability will suffice. It becomes more interesting when a customer has two datacenter locations which uses different ISP’s. Then a Citrix NetScaler Enterprise Edition in a GSLB configuration becomes often/usually) the favor of choice.
1. Single appliance. This I would never recommend.
2. HA (High Availability). This is the most common one used. You buy two appliance and they run in an Active/Passive Cluster. They can be in the same subnet, they can be in different subnet (INC mode). Drawback is that you buy 2 appliances and only use one. Available from Standard Edition and up.
3. GSLB. All appliances run standalone in a GSLB cluster. Very scalable solution. Often used when multiple datacenters are approached active/actively and/or multi-homed (multiple ISP’s). Based on High Level Authorative DNS, for that requires its DNS name (space). All appliance actively participate within the configuration. A drawback could be that all appliances run stand alone, so configuration has to be identical on all appliances. Available from Enterprise Edition and up.
4. Cluster. Available since version 10. For me I think this kind of implementation uses a rather large footprint because of the demand of a dedicated network for cluster traffic and basically need for master node. This means that minimum recommend appliances is three whereas you actively use two. Requires separate license, not present in any edition.
5. VRRP. This solution is used a lot in active/passive (core) switch configurations. Since some time available on the Citrix NetScaler. Within this solution all appliances run standalone. The same IP’s are configured on multiple appliances but have a vrID assigned, the highest priority vrID is alive, should that one fail the second priority vrID comes alive. Advantage is that you can use all appliances that you buy, however you cannot load balance a resource over two active Citrix NetScaler appliances.
Be very aware of the VRRP type of implementations for two reasons:
-
When using VRRP on a VPX you will have to configure the virtual switch
in ‘’Promiscuous Mode’’ which makes it a hub. Network Admins will not be
happy with you ;
-
When using VRRP and you have to load balance a solution like Microsoft
Lync which requires a SSL pass-through configuration (SSL_Bridge), this
will lead to asynchronous traffic. A solution would be to have the Lync
server use the NetScaler as Gateway but this will not be feasible when
the resource fails over to the other NetScaler appliance.
In my (humble) opinion I would rather see VRRP disappear as an option all together. I have not seen a workable solution based on VRRP yet.
Conclusion
As I stated earlier, I have no gain in customers buying one or the other. The outline above is purely based on my experience of advising Citrix NetScaler for years now. The choice of a Citrix NetScaler solutions may look complex but often is logical. Based on security compliance, business needs, datacenter locations, number of ISP’s etc.
So, this is it. I hope this has some value for you to make some decisions regarding which NetScaler hardware or virtual appliance and software editions to acquire.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
EUC Architect with 1,001-5,000 employees
Provides customers with greater high availability for their enterprise applications within a single site and across multiple locations
Pros and Cons
- "The MAS integration for HDX Insight has provided teams with significant visibility into network performance of the user's connection."
- "The NetScaler appliance has provided a lot of customers with greater high availability for their enterprise applications within a single site and across multiple locations."
- "Reducing the overhead required for AppFlow data collection, specifically for HDX Insight, would be a huge improvement."
What is our primary use case?
The NetScaler is used for front-end enterprise applications as well as Citrix deployments. We generally see deployments for secure remote access. In some cases, global load balancing is used in multi-data center deployments.
How has it helped my organization?
The NetScaler appliance has provided a lot of customers with greater high availability for their enterprise applications within a single site and across multiple locations. The largest, and potentially main reason to use Netscaler over the competition, is in Citrix environments. There is complete integration through the stack, and it has features which make it simple to securely provide access to enterprise data and applications.
What is most valuable?
The NetScaler Gateway has been extremely valuable for many reasons. We make use of the load balancing capabilities, including SSL offload and GSLB for high availability. The MAS integration for HDX Insight has provided teams with significant visibility into network performance of the user's connection.
What needs improvement?
Citrix has made steady improvements over the years. Personally, reducing the overhead required for AppFlow data collection, specifically for HDX Insight, would be a huge improvement.
For how long have I used the solution?
More than five years.
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: I work for a solutions advisor that partners with Citrix and many other vendors.
network specialist at a pharma/biotech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Load Balancing, Cache Redirection, Content Switching, All Connected With Traffic Management.
Pros and Cons
- "Load balancing, cache redirection, content switching, all connected with traffic management."
- "Maybe creating policies with simple regular expressions."
What is most valuable?
Load balancing, cache redirection, content switching, all connected with traffic management.
How has it helped my organization?
We have removed all NLB clusters on web applications, increased HA for some applications and now we have possibilities such as rewrite and response with more flexible tools.
What needs improvement?
Maybe creating policies with simple regular expressions.
For how long have I used the solution?
This is my second year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I had some problems with HA node movements.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
No, I had a small deployment with two nodes of NS.
How are customer service and technical support?
Very quick every time, even with Severity 4, with successful results.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
NGNX, but it was not my solution.
How was the initial setup?
It was very easy, the NetScaler community is very big. The GUI is very user friendly and not cumbersome.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It's not for startups or SOHO.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We considered F5 Networks.
What other advice do I have?
It's a good choice for ADC; no marketing.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Security Consultant at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Seamless virtual desktop integration, but not suitable for largescale enterprises or complicated uses
Pros and Cons
- "The feature that I have found most valuable is its load balancing."
- "In terms of what could be improved, I would say the user interface because sometimes it can be complicated."
What is our primary use case?
We are only using it for load balancing and application firewalls.
What is most valuable?
The feature that I have found most valuable is its load balancing.
Citrix ADC is actually not the most preferable product from our perspective but for the virtual desktop use it is very efficient. It's very integrated with the virtual desktop. It has a seamless integration and that is the most valuable part.
Since it has a significant integration with its virtualization, that has improved the usability access of the virtual desktops.
What needs improvement?
In terms of what could be improved, I would say the user interface because sometimes it can be complicated.
In the next release, I would like to see advanced language support for managing the traffic, rather than only the RegEx. That would be helpful.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Citrix ADC for about five years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
In terms of stability, it is not as good as F5.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is not as scalable as F5.
There are three people using it, and they're all engineers.
It takes one staff member for the deployment and maintenance - also an engineer.
We have a static user base in our organization, but for our customer base its use is going to be expanded.
How are customer service and support?
The technical support is not bad.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We are using most of the solutions together, so there is no switching between the products. We are currently using F5, too, and we always prefer that first. But it depends on the deployment and it depends on the needs. For deployments we choose Citrix.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is straightforward. It took two hours.
Our strategy is just deploy and use it. It's a simple process for us.
What about the implementation team?
We are the integrators.
What other advice do I have?
If they are going to use it with the VDI, it is a very good product, but it has weaknesses in application firewall development. So if they are going to only do load balancing in an SMB solution, it is a good product. But if they're consulting as an enterprise product and in a very large scale deployment enterprise, Citrix is not a complete solution. But for an SMB product and a basic cloud balance, it is a good product.
On a scale of one to ten, I would give Citrix ADC a seven. It does what it does. It is a product for some simple tasks, but just not suitable for the complex tasks.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Senior Systems Administrator at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees
Deployment of NetScalers on our DMZ enables our organization to implement a secured gateway.
What is most valuable?
- Web Application Firewall
- Content Switching Applications
- SSL Handling
How has it helped my organization?
Deployment of NetScalers on our DMZ enables our organization to implement a secured gateway for our Web Portal, Inbound/Outbound application web service calls across our partners/clients, security, and Traffic Management.
What needs improvement?
The web management console uses a Java plugin. Some improvements are needed on the web management console.
For how long have I used the solution?
6 years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We only encountered hardware issues in which were addressed with a firmware upgrade.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
None.
How are customer service and technical support?
Customer Service:
Good. Citrix has been very supportive.
Technical Support:Good.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
None were previously used.
How was the initial setup?
The appliance's initial setup was very easy and seamless.
What about the implementation team?
We have our own competency pool for this appliance. Though we have direct support services from Citrix.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Consider the sizing first before purchasing the appliance.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Yes, BigF5.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Infrastructure Expert at a healthcare company with 501-1,000 employees
Great ADC product
Valuable Features:
Does great job on most ADC functions: load balancing, SSL offload, responder policies, etc
Room for Improvement:
10.0 version has been buggy. We've had to patch multiple times and had a production outage trying to do App Firewall learning mode.
Other Advice:
Overall I would recommend Citrix NetScaler, just be careful with newer versions of the code.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/90183/9018307dff0f8424d9744886ad50d7f0f7915caf" alt="PeerSpot user"
Buyer's Guide
Download our free NetScaler Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: February 2025
Product Categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Network Management Applications Web Application Firewall (WAF)Popular Comparisons
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)
HAProxy
NGINX Plus
Fortinet FortiADC
Kemp LoadMaster
Radware Alteon
A10 Networks Thunder ADC
VMWare Avi Load Balancer
Loadbalancer.org
Amazon Elastic Load Balancing
Barracuda Load Balancer ADC
Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall
Array APV Series
Akamai Ion
Buyer's Guide
Download our free NetScaler Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- What's right for me? Fortinet or Citrix?
- Pulse vADC/vTM vs. Netscaler
- Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
- When evaluating Application Delivery Controllers, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- Comparison Between Kemp LoadMaster and Load Balancer.org
- Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
- What are your daily F5 BIG-IP LTM use cases?
- Why do I need an ADC solution?
- What is the best ADC solution?
- Why is Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) important for companies?