We did a data center migration for one client between two countries in Latin America. The challenge for this company was that they needed to send a large amount of traffic from Argentina to Mexico in a very short time. Without Riverbed WAN Optimization, it took one hour to send one gig of traffic, but with Riverbed, one gig of traffic was sent in five minutes. From one hour to five minutes, it had a big impact.
IT Network Consultant at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Powerful compression and application optimization
Pros and Cons
- "The compression of Riverbed is very powerful. It can also handle large quantities of traffic."
- "If we load a primary firewall, the secondary firewall usually handles all the active connections, but in Riverbed, this isn't the case. We lose all the active connections at the moment of failure."
How has it helped my organization?
What is most valuable?
A feature we like is data streamlining. Riverbed does packet deduplication, packet compression and uses something like simple data referencing to compress the data. If one gig of traffic is sent to one link, that gig of traffic coming from the packet is only 100 mbps, so the compression of Riverbed is very powerful.
Another is transport streamlining, which includes TCP optimization. The window size of the TCP protocol is achieved in order to transfer more data in the TCP section despite the endpoint. The endpoint transfer was very slow, but it doesn't matter because with Riverbed in the middle, it can handle more quantities of traffic.
For application streamlining, where the HTTP application previously had a lot of traffic, Riverbed recognizes HTTP protocols and it can optimize the process because it can create the HTTP server. Normally, the browser and web server agree and compress the traffic, but if Riverbed is in between, it strips the compression from the browser and Riverbed does its own compressions, which is more powerful, and hence, the application runs faster for the user.
Also, for HTTP, Riverbed does caching so it can store data from all the user traffic. It keeps track of the HTTP data locally. Traveling into the server isn't necessary. They can retrieve the information locally because there is a local Riverbed.
What needs improvement?
It's for a very specific use case. It's not for everything. Although the solution is very powerful, it doesn't apply to all enterprises.
There is only one feature that needs to be improved. In the case of a High Availability event, if we lose the primary Steelhead, all the connections need to be restarted. If we lose the primary Steelhead that handles the optimization, the secondary Steelhead cannot handle the same High Availability. Some applications will restart automatically, but for some other applications, like STP, the users need to start a new session. If we load a primary firewall, the secondary firewall usually handles all the active connections, but in Riverbed, this isn't the case. We lose all the active connections at the moment of failure.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Steelhead for five years.
Buyer's Guide
Steelhead
January 2025
Learn what your peers think about Steelhead. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2025.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate Steelhead a nine out of ten because the product is very stable; it never fails. It does compression and application optimization very well.
Riverbed can be deployed on-premise or in the cloud as well. We can deploy it in Amazon, Azure, and Google Cloud Platform. The solution is in the marketplace of every car provider and it also optimizes Office 365 traffic, since there's a partnership with Riverbed and Microsoft. We can deploy on-premise, we can deploy on IaaS or we can deploy on PaaS.
In the past, the internet links of the MPLS link were full capacity (one or two Mbps) and it was very expensive. Nowadays, the prices of the MPLS links are cheaper and the capacity is increased.
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.
Network Engineer at a consumer goods company with 1,001-5,000 employees
It's improved the stability and throughput of the WAN, especially for remote small branches with low link speed.
What is most valuable?
- Easy deployment
- Fantastic bandwidth optimization
- Low maintenance requirements
How has it helped my organization?
It's improved the stability and throughput of the WAN, especially for remote small branches with low link speed. Reduced impact to network performance from Windows updates deployment on users PCs.
What needs improvement?
Better logic of the web GUI.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using it for three years.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
We have had no issues with the deployment.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We had some stability problems with a few devices. Probably RAM leaking issue by some processes which caused problem with remote access to the devices trough SSH or web.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.
How are customer service and technical support?
I haven't had much experience with Riverbed Technical Support since our devices are managed by outsourcing company.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We previously used Cisco WAAS solution.
How was the initial setup?
The deployment of the Riverbed products is very easy and straightforward.
What about the implementation team?
I implemented it myself. The advice is just to follow the vendor instructions.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
What other advice do I have?
Check your network requirements before deploying one of the Riverbed devices. CX255M is more than enough for most of the branch sites with 10-50 people.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Buyer's Guide
Steelhead
January 2025
Learn what your peers think about Steelhead. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2025.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Senior Infrastructure Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
It's helped to reduce WAN traffic by approximately 60%.
Valuable Features:
I've found the appliance to be the most valuable. Also, it's easy to use and configure.
Improvements to My Organization:
It's helped to reduce WAN traffic by approximately 60%.
Room for Improvement:
I would like to see more IP services, perhaps aligned better Netflow stats. The Central Management Console (CMC) newly named SteelCentral Controller (SCC) has rudimentary netflow capabilities, but it doesn’t have particularly in-depth data. I realize the need for a dedicated NetFlow environment but because the SteelHead technology deal with flow and not IP this is not capable.
Deployment Issues:
We've had no issues with deployment.
Stability Issues:
We've had no issues with stability.
Scalability Issues:
We've had no issues with scalability.
Other Advice:
The SteelHead product is very good, easy to configure, however a home page which can be altered would enhance the gui
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Network Administrator at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees
It has become a valuable traffic shaping tool via its ability to set QoS marking on traffic we specify.
Valuable Features
Management purchased the product initially for its ability to reduce WAN traffic, especially to overseas partners. However, lately it has also become a valuable traffic shaping tool via it's ability to set QoS marking on traffic we specify.
Improvements to My Organization
It has allowed us to purchase lower bandwidth from our WAN vendors than we normally would have without the Steelhead units.
Room for Improvement
Setting up QoS marking is not all that intuitive. I would like to see all settings needed to set QoS up on one page rather than three or four.
Use of Solution
We've used it for approximately five years.
Deployment Issues
We have had no issues with the deployment.
Stability Issues
Some types of data flows between servers don't always lend themselves to being optimized by the Steelhead unit. These data flows must have bypass rules set up in order to properly pass traffic.
Scalability Issues
We have had no issues with the scalability.
Customer Service and Technical Support
Riverbed has excellent technical support. Even on non-critical cases I have always gotten a support engineer. Most support staff are very understandable.
Initial Setup
The initial setup is very straightforward. Give the unit an IP address for management, an IP address for your WAN segment and place it inline between your local network and your WAN. Steelhead will automatically find peers and set up peering.
Implementation Team
We implemented it via in-house team. My advice is to try setup yourself and if you need assistance, call the support line. They will get you up and running.
Pricing, Setup Cost and Licensing
I am not involved in the purchasing or licensing.
Other Solutions Considered
This was our first WAN optimization solution. This product was selected by upper management. I did not have a role in the selection process.
Other Advice
Although I'm sure this is obvious to most it may not be to some when you make your initial purchase you need to buy at least two. The SteelCentral Controller is not strictly needed as all the units can be managed individually, but the more units you deploy, it becomes more difficult to maintain a standard configuration across devices. This is where the SCC comes in very handy.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Senior Network Operations Specialist at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
Customer Service and Tech Support get a 5 out of 5. It should handle more traffic simultaneously.
What is most valuable?
The data compression through the WAN. It is like being on a LAN. It is even more effective when the technology uses an adaptive transfer scheme known as "warm transfer".
How has it helped my organization?
Critical data such as emails and Sharepoint files being able to move faster across the WAN via Riverbed Steelhead's compress/decompress mechanism.
What needs improvement?
Need to handle more traffic simultaneously.
For how long have I used the solution?
2 years
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
No, everything is plug and play with minor configuration involved.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Not at all
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Not at all
How are customer service and technical support?
Customer Service: 5 out of 5Technical Support: 5 out of 5
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I used Cisco WAAS technology before. The Riverbed Steelhead is much easier to configure and works faster on packet delivery.
How was the initial setup?
Setup was very straightforward.
What was our ROI?
Less bandwidth usage
What other advice do I have?
Please do some diligent research before purchasing the product. It is quite expensive but it is worth it in the long run.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Sr. IT Infrastructure and Systems Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Many of our offshore installation are on low bandwidth but this has really helped to optimize the network.
Valuable Features
First of all we are great fan of Riverbed WAN optimization feature which I would say is the most valuable for us as we have couple of low bandwidth scenarios. Apart from this we are using specific Office 365 optimization since we are using Exchange online. We also use EX functionality of the box where we host our VM servers.
Improvements to My Organization
Many of our offshore installation are on low bandwidth but this has really helped to optimize the network which basically means we are able to achieve faster data connection or link.
Room for Improvement
There are issues with the tech support and scalability.
Deployment Issues
We have had no issues with the deployment.
Stability Issues
We have had no issues with the stability.
Scalability Issues
The device mostly comes with a standard configuration with no options to upgrade the hardware. This means that we need to go ahead with a new or high end model in case the infra changes happen.
Customer Service and Technical Support
Riverbed needs to really work on local support when it comes to technical knowledge transfer. They need to have teams who can give proper knowledge transfer to customers so that they can use the device in best ways
Other Advice
Riverbed is great product and base functionality of these devices which is WAN optimization is handled by them in best and intelligent way.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Validation Engineer at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
It compresses more than 50% of the daily throughput.
What is most valuable?
The WAN optimization feature is the most valuable.
How has it helped my organization?
It helps to save a lot of money in terms of buying bandwidth from a network provider due to the fact that it compresses more than 50% of the daily throughput.
What needs improvement?
The RIOS upgrade/download process must be overhauled to be a direct step process instead of the multiple stage procedure that currently take place.
There are lots of bugs detected in each release which give the assumption that it is not being thoroughly tested.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been supporting it for seven years.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
We had no issues with the deployment but there are bugs in each release.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We have no issues with the stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We have had no issues with scaling it for our needs.
How are customer service and technical support?
Technical support is very good in the WAN optimization department, needs a little more expertize in the steelcentral department.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I used Cisco WAAS, Juniper WX, and Ipanema. Riverbed are way ahead overall.
How was the initial setup?
It was straightforward.
What about the implementation team?
I work for a network provider so we are the people who do the implementation. I find that the implementation is very easy in this solution.
What other advice do I have?
This product is far way ahead from its competitors.
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: We are the biggest reseller of Riverbed product
Infrastructure Administrator at a logistics company with 501-1,000 employees
The compression features are valuable, as at most sites it doubled our effective MPLS bandwidth capabilities for transfers.
Valuable Features:
The compression features are valuable, as at most sites it doubled our effective MPLS bandwidth capabilities for transfers.
Improvements to My Organization:
The graphic designers used to ship burned DVDs with projects to our manufacturing in China, which took around three days one way. Once we had Riverbed at both sites, they were shipping the full projects in less than 12 hours.
When I was using them at a previous job, Riverbed Steelhead models were grouped into tiers. Each tier had three models, low to high. Through upgrade packs of RAM, CPU, HDDs, or a combination thereof, you could upgrade the lowest model in the tier to the middle or the high, or the middle model to the high model. If you needed to go above the highest model in a tier do to things like needing more drive space, the box needing to deal with more bandwidth, or the box dealing with more concurrent connections, you had to get a whole new appliance from the next tier up and start the process over again. This means unless you had another site you could move the original appliance to, you basically had to rip and replace and lose your investment in the original box.
Room for Improvement:
I didn't like the way platforms were scaled – if you started with a top end model of one of the tiers, if you needed to upgrade you had to rip and replace the box with a whole new one.
Deployment Issues:
We had no issues with the deployment.
Stability Issues:
We have had no issues with the stability.
Scalability Issues:
We had issues upgrading when we wanted to scale.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Steelhead Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: January 2025
Popular Comparisons
Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform
Exinda
Noction IRP
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Steelhead Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- How can I replace Steelhead with minimal impact?
- Which is the right tool to perform domain/application/IP/protocol based routing across WAN links?
- Blue Coat PacketShaper alternatives & competitors
- When evaluating WAN Optimization, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- With bandwidth prices getting cheaper, is a WAN optimization solution still relevant and worth the investment?
- Why is WAN Optimization important for companies?
When you are have issues gaining access to the remote Steelhead, check the remote site WAN router for link saturation. This is the only time I have had a hard time connecting to a remote Steelhead. I found that by using Steelhead Inbound QoS to reduce Scavenger Traffic (YouTube, Facebook, ESPN, etc) to reasonable levels (10% or so) you will find a much more responsive remote Steelhead.