VMware NSX Reviews

We were using VMware NSX for high availability. 

We recently used it to migrate a way to the public cloud.

The migration methods are the most valuable aspect of this solution. The rest is just overly complicated.

We had some issues with the cloud version.

It needs to be cheaper.

We are stopping its use. We won't need it because we'll be using cloud-native.

The company has been working with VMware NSX for six years.

I have hands-on experience with VMware NSX.

It was on-premise, but we just used it to do cloud migration to VMC, and it will be removed after that.

The on-premises version of VMware NSX was not stable, but it was for VMC migrations. 

The on-premises version of VMware NSX is not scalable.

The cloud version is most likely fine. I couldn't really say, but after the on-premise system was implemented, everyone was afraid of change. It was really flaky.

We don't have a large number of users. It is not used as such by people; it is a piece of infrastructure software.

There would have been less than half a dozen, not very many.

I personally have not had any contact with technical support.

The initial setup is complex.

TCS assisted us with the installation.

If five is a good price and one is a high price, I would rate the price a one out of five.

I would not recommend this solution to others.

As a technical solution, I would rate VMware NSX a five out of ten.

I used to sell the solution as a bundled package. My role was to find the best solutions for customers from various vendors and work with our pre-sales and solution architecture departments to present these options. I provided high-level advice and my colleagues provided technical details. 

Our customers used the solution for segmentation and automation to secure workloads in their lower computing layer. One customer was CaixaBank, an important financial institution in Spain. 

The dashboard is comprehensive and easy to use. 

The solution integrates perfectly with F5, Check Point, and other applications. Integration with vendors is very important for customers. For our CaixaBank deployment, the solution performed these integrations which included defining, automating, and applying different rules and security functionalities. 

The solution is only sold as part of a bundle and not as an individual product. Some customers only need vSphere or NSX for their use cases, but account executives focus on bundles so this is a problem. 

Account executives need to talk with both systems and security staff to get a full picture of the environment's requirements. For example, systems staff have no need for the solution so they will never deploy it. 

I have been familiar with the solution for three years. 

The solution is very stable. 

The solution is scalable and can handle deployment to thousands of devices with no issues. 

Technical support is very, very good. Staff work hard to understand new functionalities or bug fixes that are released monthly. 

The setup depends on the project scope. For example, CaixaBank's project had a very large scope that was divided into many different parts. Deployment took one year but the project is still ongoing. 

Good deployments depend on an assessment phase where you talk with different departments before defining objectives. Discussions should occur both with systems and security staff. With proper pre-assessment, the solution operates and integrates perfectly. 

The pricing is higher than other options from Palo Alto, Fortinet, and Cisco because it is sold in a bundle. 

Customers do not know the individual price of the solution so they compare the package pricing to competitors. The solution should offer stand-alone pricing so it can be accurately compared to other options. 

There are many solutions in the market that offer similar functionality and characteristics. 

Palo Alto, Fortinet, and Cisco offer lower prices because they are considered legacy. Segmentation is very detailed so many customers prefer legacy options for peace of mind. 

The solution is a very, very good product that is perfect for customers who have good technical support. 

I recommend the solution and rate it a seven out of ten.

I primarily use the product as network virtualization software.

VMware NSX is a great product for network virtualization. No other vendor can offer this kind of solution up until now, and it's great for enhancing security at the virtual machine level. There is micro-segmentation, and a distributed firewall, and all network and network security components can be virtualized with the help of this NSX-T stack. It is a pioneer software solution for network security in a virtualized environment.

This solution comes with an API that can easily integrate with other solutions. 

NSX features include micro-segmentation, distributed IPS, IDS functionality, URL analysis, gateway firewall, logical routing, and all the staple networking solutions like DNS, DSCP, and routing. All these features are very interesting.

The solution is stable.

We can scale it if we need to.

It should support Hyper-V also. Nowadays, NSX supports the KVM and ESXi hypervisors only. It should also support Hyper-V and Citrix hypervisors.

There have already been lots of improvements. For example, they edited the intelligent plans and added an advanced load balancer. The latest version, 4.0, really has all the features you need.

It's a bit complex to set up the product.

I have a total of around three years of experience using the NSX-T solution. 

The stability is good architecture-wise. We haven't had any issues. 

The solution can scale well. 

It is not a user-based solution. We deploy it to about 20 servers. 

We did not previously use a different solution before this product.

It is a little bit complex to set up. It depends upon deployment. Either it is greenfield or brownfield deployment. If it is greenfield, it is very easy. If it is a brownfield deployment, so you need to take care of multiple scenarios of your network, and you need to understand the network architecture, then the deployment of services. 

While deployment requires a complete team, maintenance only requires on VMware administrator. 

We handled the initial setup with the help of a third-party SI team.

This product provides end-to-end visibility and security to your virtual environment. So it's a very huge return on investment in terms of security enhancement and maintaining cybersecurity posture.

The cost of the solution is moderate. I'd rate it three out of five in terms of affordability.

There is no other option available for this kind of product.

The product should be implemented in any IT infrastructure virtual environment. It is a must-have.

I'd rate it a ten out of ten.

The solution is used for network virtualization. Normally, in my cases, I was billing it for the government clouds, for NIC, the National Informatics Computer of India. For them, I was making a cloud where a different government, a smaller government entity, wanted to buy a cloud from the government clouds.

Apart from the normal functionality, a few things are quite useful, including multi-cloud networking. They have container networking and load balancing. Those are quite useful in terms of when we are designing a solution.

It's a pretty mature platform right now. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

We found the solution to be stable. 

It's scalable. 

I haven't found any shortcomings. 

It might be nice to have more AI in the future. It would help keep us from redesigning every time. 

I've worked with the solution for four years now. 

The solution is stable and perfectly fine. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can scale well. 

We had a user base of around 1200 people.

I dealt with tech support during pre-deployment, and they were fine. They were helpful when we were dealing with staging cases. I wasn't an active part of the actual deployment and can't speak of how helpful they were in that part of the process. 

I was the previous architect for the NSX, not the implementer.

My understanding is the setup process is quite straightforward. 

Our deployment was quite big. Including the staging and all the stuff, we were able to deploy in a four-month timeframe. That is not only NSX, that is the complete deployment of the cloud. We had a few issues here and there, however, overall, it was fine. 

It's easy to maintain for the most part. The orchestration layer for it was a bit hectic work for us. That needed a dedicated VMware team. Apart from that, everything was quite smooth for NSX or vSphere, et cetera, and it is quite simple to manage it.

The finance team handles the licensing agreements. I can't speak to the exact cost.

When going for multiple OEM solutions, like Juniper, Cisco, HPE, et cetera, NSX will be quite useful. Don't go for the ACSIs and all Juniper proprietary options since future upgrades will be a bit tough if something needs to be added. Therefore, if it is a multiple OEM architecture, go for NSX, it'll be more helpful.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The most valuable feature of VMware NSX is the load balancing and routing of firewall rules. Many of the features are beneficial.

I have been using VMware NSX for approximately four years.

VMware NSX can be stable. However, before you start, you need a very thorough sturdy design. Once this is complete you can go on building your VMware NSX in your environment. 

I went to VMware to look at their best practice designs, but they didn't apply to our environment. I had to take some parts of different designs and build my own that was exactly what was right for us.

Get the designs first, study them very thoroughly and after that, you can implement what will work for you.

The scalability of VMware NSX is very good. However, you have to take into consideration that you have to study their documentation.

The amount of users or devices VMware NSX  can handle depends on the resource that you allocate to the Edges and to the management cluster. They are small, medium, and large. A large allocation can handle thousands of virtual machines. We mostly deploy medium to large-scale systems.

The support from VMware NSX could improve. We are a large company and when we have an issue we do not need to waste everyone's time with level one and two support. I try and explain to them I need level three support but they say they have to follow protocol and pass me through the different levels.   

I have used previously Cisco 1000V. It was much more expensive than VMware NSX. We cannot compare them because the Cisco 1000V is obsolete and I don't know if they have a newer version or something similar. They are not the same technology, Cisco 1000V is from 2015, and NSX-T is from 2021. There is a big difference between time and technology.

If you have experience with the setup of VMware NSX it is simple, but if you do not it could be difficult. I would advise new users to contact professional support from VMware.

The price of VMware NSX is reasonable.

I rate VMware NSX a nine out of ten.

NSX is under the platform. NSX is used on a cloud-only platform for clients.

The solution works well overall and we are happy with it.

We enjoy the micro-segmentation and the ability to extend the network on Layer Two.

It is stable. 

The solution can scale well. 

We have found the UI to be very good. The interface is intuitive enough.

It offers good documentation. 

I'm not sure where the solution can be improved. 

We did recently need a patch to deal with an outage on NSX.

The price is rather high.

We've been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is stable. We have just had an issue that caused an outage of some of our NSX. However, now it's okay. VMware gave us a patch to correct it.

It is a scalable product. It's not a problem.

There are about 3,000 VMs on our data center. There are a lot of customers.

When we had an issue recently, VMware asked to upgrade to a high level of support to correct the problem.

The initial setup offers an average level of complexity. It's neither too difficult or too hard. 

I'm a system engineer, so I don't know exactly what the price is. However, I am aware that it's high. It's better suited to larger enterprises.

We are service providers and partners.

I'd rate the product eight out of ten.

It is for internal networking. Basically, we will be migrating the workloads to the cloud vCenter, and to manage those workloads, networking is required, which is called NSX in the VMware environment.

It provides a single pane of glass. You can do the switching, routing, load balancing, IPS, IDS, etc. Everything is under one umbrella. So, there is no vendor dependency over there.

They have some limitations in the firewall features as compared to the on-prem or dedicated hardware appliance. They can add more features, such as IPS and IDS, to the cloud firewall.

I have been using this solution for the last seven to eight months.

As per my last seven to eight months of experience, it is a stable solution.

It can be scaled.

I'm not technically involved with technical support. I'm not from the operational part where the day-to-day activities are performed. I'm from the project team, and my job is to deploy something on the product. Untill now, I haven't used VMware support for any issues. So, I'm not aware of the quality of their support.

It was easy to set up. It hardly took a week.

It provides all the networking features under a single umbrella. So, you can go with it. It is cost-effective because you don't have to spend money on different vendors.

I would rate it a seven out of ten because some of the features are missing.

The solution is mainly used for rolling virtual environments and private clouds. I use the product for my company and for other customers.

It's important to have whenever I need to segment or control the traffic from virtual machine to virtual machine. This was not the case without the NSX.

NSX is good in managing security or controlling the security and the access control for each single VM. 

It is essential and it can be useful up to a certain level of access control. That said, if we need further detailed or further security features, we should use another product like Palo Alto or Fortinet or other competitors.

It integrates with certain vendors like Palo Alto seamlessly.

The product is stable. 

We can scale the solution. 

It's just access controlled. It should be leveraged by adding more detailed, deep security products to facilitate the NXS. The security needs improvement. 

It's not feature-rich. It's not doing many tasks like a Next Generation Firewall such as Palo Alto for VM or other vendors like Fortinet for virtualized environments. 

It has to have the features from next-generation firewalls, and it needs to complement other features, as in the unified security gateway, to be a good competitor against other solutions.

It does not integrate well with many platforms. 

I've been using the solution for a couple of years now. 

Stability is not an issue. It's not buggy. It doesn't crash or freeze. the performance is good. 

It is a scalable product. 

We have around 1000 or more people on the solution. Our customers use the solution. We do not use it internally. 

We didn't have experience with VMware technical support. Mainly, the issues we need are covered via assistance from Palo Alto. I've never directly communicated with VMware support. 

We didn't use any solution for the virtualized environment.

That said, for other solutions in the market that have the same feature, we have experience. This includes Juniper, Cisco, and Palo Alto. These all have next-generation firewall features, which have been standard for 20 years now.

It's intermediate in terms of ease of setup. It is not so straightforward, and it's not also complex.

 It integrates with certain vendors like Palo Alto very well. That said, other vendors, like Fortinet or others, do not have the same level of integration.

I'd rate the process a there out of five in terms of ease of setup. 

The deployment took three weeks the first time we did it. The strategy is mainly segmenting between operational virtual machines which have, for example, the database and the application front end on the same VLAN. If I need to segment this traffic, it wouldn't be possible without NSX.

We have two people that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks. We need someone who understands the schema of the solution itself, the software itself, the front end and the database, and so on. Then, we also need one person from the security team.

We had a consultation and fielded recommendations from a Palo Alto engineer.

From a security point of view, the ROI you would see would be based on making things secure. The risk is at the lowest possible levels. However, the level of security that would be improved using this solution alone isn't so good. I'd rate the ROI a two out of five as it doesn't do much on its own. 

I'm not sure about licensing, as this is out of my scope as a technical engineer.

We did look into other options before choosing this solution. 

We are a partner. I'm using the latest version of the solution. 

It has good features for tagging and auto-tagging and so on. That said, without another complementary solution like Palo Alto or other micro-segmentation firewall vendors, it would not be of that much use. It needs the support of other software.

I'd rate the solution five out of ten. It lacks standard security features, which is why I rate it so low.