What advice do you have for others considering F5 BIG-IP?

My advice to others is to have a good staff who understand the technology. If someone understands the technology, that will make life easy for them or their organization. I cannot say that technology is difficult, but technology is very critical when you put it in your environment. Having good staff who can manage that solution makes life a lot easier. I rate F5 BIG-IP LTM a nine out of ten.

The biggest advice I would give about F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is: to make sure you are aware of what your options are and what your own environment is. If you are a cloud-based environment, there is not much value in the local, load balancing. You would need to go with a cloud-based type load balancing capability, whether it is based on a fixed solution, like an F5, Avi, Citrix, or one of the cloud-based platforms. But, if you are still in an in-shop environment, there is much value to deploying it locally. Overall, in terms of performance, on a scale of one to 10, with one being the worst and ten being the best, I would give F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager an eight.

Before implementing BIG-IP LTM, you should understand your expectations and requirements, especially from the application team. Putting BIG-IP LTM into a not-so-critical environment would be very expensive, so you may want to consider more medium-range solutions that can do the same job. I would give BIG-IP LTM a rating of ten out of ten.

The advice I would give to others who are looking to implement F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is this: look at their user knowledge base first to see if the solution truly fits what you need. On a scale of one to 10, I would give F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager a nine.

If you are a partner, then I would recommend that you go through the partner portal videos because they have very good training videos that help you to learn the product and technology when it comes to implementation. It helps a lot with implementation, and they have detailed documentation that explains the implementation process step by step. Once you go through that, you'll definitely have a clear understanding of the implementation process. Without that, it may be a little bit tricky for you to complete the implementation in a smooth manner. I would rate F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) at eight on a scale from one to ten.

I would advise you to go for it because it's one of the top three solutions in my opinion. I would rate it at seven on a scale from one to ten.

One piece of advice would be that if you are not that much concerned with performance or you definitely don't need physical hardware, you can go for a virtual edition. It might save you the migration effort when the hardware is end-of-life. If you need a load balancer, go for it. We didn't have any hurdles or obstacles. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

I rate F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) a seven out of ten.

It is important to know how the solution works. For example, how to set up the interface, routing, pools, and the implementation steps. After the basic configurations, you will understand you may need or want to try to learn more of the features, such as the layers of the SNI. It is ideal to start with the very basic implementation first. We have been doing the day-to-day operation. When it comes to troubleshooting, it is important to know how to isolate the problem, analyze it, and be fast to solve them when it appears. I rate F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager a six out of ten.

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager has good performance. Your success with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager will depend on how much you understand how the application is working. Deployment of this tool took two hours. We have 600 users of this tool, and currently, there's no requirement for increasing its usage. We have one manager and two technical staff who takes care of the deployment and maintenance of this tool. They're building applications, and they're using this tool. I'm recommending F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager to others who want to start using it. On a scale from one to ten, with one being the worst and ten being the best, I'm rating F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) an eight.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

Make sure that you know how much traffic you're going to have coming through because that can affect whether you need a big box or a small box. I would rate it a nine out of 10.

My advice to those wanting to implement this solution is they need to do their research ahead of time and know what problems you are trying to solve. In our case, our solutions engineer from F5 directly has been amazing. If you receive a good team in account management, they can point you in the right direction, and in a lot of cases, they can get you moving along. The support from him has been tremendous, it has been extremely valuable. Our configuration is not simple. There is some custom code that is written in our system, but everything works as they say it should, it is a great solution. I rate F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) an eight out of ten.

On a scale of one to ten, I would probably give F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager a six. I would give it a warm recommendation, I would not give it a glowing recommendation. I'd give it a warm, "Tread with caution."

I'm a customer and an end-user. We are using the 12th version of the solution. I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been quite satisfied with the capabilities of the product. I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies.

We're a customer and a partner of F5. The product is an on-premise virtual edition solution. I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been mostly quite happy with it so far. I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations. Our experience has been a positive one.

To this point, whatever we have needed has been available out-of-the-box. In our environment, we have not experienced limitations. In summary, we are happy with the product and for me, it's ideal for HTTP and HTTPS. Performance-wise, stability-wise, and feature-wise, I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution. We plan to keep using it. I would rate F5 BIG-IP an eight out of ten.

We are resellers. I'm a System Integrator. I have experience in virtual environments and with clients. I have some moderate experience with implementation and some bigger experience in supporting this product. I'm not an expert in the field, however, I'm trying to be. I don't have any issues with the solution. It's pretty problem-free in general. Overall, I would rate it at a nine out of ten.

I rate this solution a nine out of 10.

I would recommend this solution. It is a really good solution. It is fairly straightforward, and it does what it is meant to do. I would rate F5 BIG-IP a nine out of ten. In terms of features, it is good, but its price can be better.

I would recommend this solution. I rate F5 BIG-IP a seven out of ten.

In summary, this is a very good product and we are actively suggesting it to our customers. It is something that should be more present in our market, especially because of the functionality that it provides. In the end, we get very good results from BIG-IP. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. I need to have a deeper understanding of F5 technology. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would rate F5 BIG-IP a five out of ten.

I'm not sure of which version of the solution we're using right now. I have a few customers who are using it, and they may be using different solutions. I'd recommend the solution. Our customers seem to be very happy with it. Overall, I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

We are planning to expand to other segments in the market, healthcare or logistics or even some FMCG retail companies. We hope the F5 solutions will help us to expand. We intend to continue providing this solution and to involve more partners in the F5 business. I would recommend this solution. I would rate this solution a nine out of 10.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with F5. The F5 is something we purchased for another project that has not yet been turned up. That said, the experience I've had with F5 has been very positive, specifically working directly with their corporate sales engineering team. Overall, I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. If it wasn't for the high cost of the product, I might rate it a bit higher. I would advise those considering the solution to explore all options. Specifically, the total cost of ownership. It can be lower with some other vendors. A10 is oftentimes a lower cost of ownership. One challenge with F5 is everything is a licensable feature. Whereas something like an A10 is not. You see the same challenges with a Cisco type of device as well, however, it's in a different arena, with different products.

We have not felt the need to upgrade to the most recent version or do any updates on this product because we're pretty happy with what we have. Overall, this is a good product and if one can afford it, then I would recommend it. I would rate this solution eight out of ten.

We're a reseller for Enterprise companies such as Banking and Retail. I'd advise that if a customer wants to implement this product, that they find a partner they can have a strong relationship with. The partner needs to be able to effectively implement the product and train your staff on the proper usage. That is, of course, if the client wants to manage it themselves in the long run. Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten. If they could improve their web interface, generate reports, and have all the configuration on a single page on the platform, I'd rank it a bit higher.

For those who are interested in this solution and you want more control over the applications then F5 is fine. In the future, F5 will be our first choice, but everything can change. What happens with the next features, we don't know. Maybe Citrix will overcome the problems and will become a more powerful tool than F5. Without consideration of the price, I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

If a company wants a good solution and has the money for it, I would recommend F5. I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.

I consider F5 to be my network within my network because the traffic has to go through it. This includes things like the load balancer. My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to learn and understand the architecture of the device. It will do very well for you if you understand it. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. If it were less expensive I'd rate it higher.

I don't have much advice other than to suggest that people look for high quality solutions to implement. It's really about what the client wants and if they're prepared to take the risk of a less expensive solution they need to realize that it might also mean a product that is less good quality. I would rate this product a nine out of 10.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. Not a ten because of the usability and a manageability. I've had to send somebody to F5 University to get trained, whereas with the Citrix NetScaler I don't necessarily have to send them out to training. I was able to pick up NetScaler right away. Whereas, F5, if you have it, you should probably get trained on it because it's a little more esoteric. Everybody wants the best of a name brand. If F5 was like a Tesla, would you want to buy a Tesla or a Toyota? They're both big name brands, but when you hear Tesla, you know exactly what that is; it's the futuristic top-of-the-line electric car. If you can afford a Tesla, then buy the Tesla but if you can't afford a Tesla, and you want something that's going to get you from point A to point B at a halfway decent price, go with Citrix.

We use F5 BIG-IP a lot in production right now. The product is indispensable to us. I would rate the product an overall nine out of ten. Most of the benefits of F5 BIG-IP are cyclical because of the licensing costs.

It helps you to manage workloads in a better way on your cloud environment. I also have integrated it on my private cloud.

Use F5. It has a good reputation. We experienced easy implementation and had an overall good experience. We use it only on AWS.

Take advantage of it and use it. We use the on-premise version of this product. We are looking into moving over to the AWS version.

Try doing a proof of concept or a prototype, before you go full in on a load balancer, to make sure it does everything you need. We have both the AWS and on-premise versions. We used the on-premise version to compare it to what Amazon had to offer.

I would give it a nine out of ten for its stability and feature set, as well as the way it handles our load. Definitely consider this product on your product evaluation list. It is the front-end to the cloud for all the services in our data center. So, it sort of integrates with all of our services. We have yet to integrate it with AWS.

The on-prem version and the AWS versions are almost the same. In terms of the experience purchasing through AWS marketplace, because we are a partner, the way we purchase it from AWS is different. We don't buy directly from the market. Overall, it's a good product.

Explore the API support and integration with the open source products. Those are the key thing to analyze. F5 are the experts in their area. I use the on-premise version.

Always use the Automatic Synching between F5. Don't try to use the API to do the synching. This is where we went wrong. We were trying to push the nodes to F5 individually instead of letting F5 handle the synchronization process, and it doesn't work. We were previously using the on-premise version, but now we are using the AWS version. They are about the same as far as functionality.

The product works. We have F5 all across our environment. We use them for both VPNs and for traditional load balancers. So, we have VIPRIONs and several different versions of on-premise F5 hardware, as well. From an operations team perspective, everything is easy to learn; seamless. The ability to get teams to focus on AWS F5 is easy because they already know everything there. From an operational perspective, it is a win-win because they already know how to work with the F5. Within our AWS environment, it is integrated with network load balancers. Then, depending on the traffic flow, it can either be back-end through the Palo Alto IDS IPS or it can be front-end for the IDS IPS. So, it has integration in between there, which was very nice. I was able to set up very intricate NAT rules, because I had to handle the traffic away. It did work very well. There were some issues with the routing, but that was more how AWS routes rather than F5 which I had to work around. Other than that, getting traffic back and forth between the two and the network load balancing was a piece of cake.

The three key things to look at closely: * Look at the flexibility of the products. * The ability to work with it on-premise and in the cloud is a huge advantage. * The ability to integrate it with other non-F5 products. We use both the AWS and on-premise versions. They work about the same, which is what I like about the product: same management plane and configuration. It integrates with the networking layer, which is fairly complicated. Depending on the customer, there are different products that it integrates with. More often than not, it's load balancing in front of Windows in Unix. In some cases, integrating with other tools like the LP or other network products.

It's a good product to use. It has many features so can use it to secure your environment. I'm satisfied with the product.

I would advise excessive testing before moving to production. It's a new product, it's a "language." You have to learn the product thoroughly before you really can implement it.

F5 is the number-one application delivery controller, plus they are the number-one Web application firewall, together in the market right now. So what else do you want from them? Whenever we go and pitch this solution to our customers, we tell them that we are not selling you just a load balancer. We are selling you application delivery controllers, and Web application firewalls. I give it 9.5 out of 10. It's a really costly product and smaller organizations cannot afford this solution, so it's hard to sell a plan. But once the customer has it, this product is a 10.

It is best of the breed, or best in class. Our experience has been very good, in terms of performance, and securing our application infrastructure. I strongly recommend the product, but through an experienced partner. With these type of application delivery controller projects, the application teams have a significant role. It is networking team plus the application team. With better coordination between all the different teams who are engaged, project execution will go more smoothly.