The Cisco 5520 Series Wireless LAN Controller is a highly scalable, service-rich, resilient, and flexible platform that is ideal for medium-sized to large enterprise and campus deployments.
N/A
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
The Cisco Catalyst 9800-80 is a modular wireless controller with optional 100 Gigabit Ethernet (G) modular uplinks boasting seamless software updates for large enterprises and campuses, and security with ETA and SD-Access.
N/A
Pricing
Cisco 5520 Wireless Controller
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco 5520 Wireless Controller
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco 5520 Wireless Controller
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Considered Both Products
Cisco 5520 Wireless Controller
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Cisco 5520 Wireless Controller
Cisco Identity Services Engine is well integrated on Cisco 5520 Wireless Controller because the WLC supports a lot of authentication methods and security protocols (such as PEAP, EAP-TLS, Captive Portal redirect). They perform very well with ISE. Cisco ISE is able to manage …
It is chosen mainly for the capacity of users, performance and stability of the equipment. It has the possibility of working in mobility group mode and has the option of redundant sources and high availability configuration.this makes it usable in medium and high density …
The Cisco 5520 Wireless controller was the one that we were able to deploy the easiest between our qty of access points and the location these devices are located in.
Cisco is the most stable company in switching parts including wireless, and it has the most powerful support team with a lot of online documents, community, and market share so when you get stuck, you can find support from anywhere. And usually, you won't need it as its product …
We used standalone Cisco 3850 switches prior to implementing Cisco 5520s. While 3850s are individually a cheaper solution, the limitations [are that it is] only able to manage the access point directly connected to that particular device was too much of a limitation. We also …
[The] best bet is the integration with ISE. Users use their active directory credentials to access the wireless and very simple guest portal to gain access to the Internet. We plan on integrating Cisco DNA Centre in the future that will give us more visibility and improved …
Cisco Wireless LAN Controllers, Cisco VoIP PBX, Cisco Unified Contact Center, Cisco UCS C-Series, Cisco TelePresence Collaboration Room Endpoints, Cisco Small Business 500 Series Wireless Access Points, Cisco Nexus and Cisco Ethernet Switches
Cisco 5520 Wireless Controller has better high availability features compared to the others. Also Cisco has a worldwide service center and is located in nearly all countries to offer fast and reliable support in case of any hardware issue. Also Cisco offers more features, for …
These Cisco 5520 Wireless Controllers were our choice at the time over Aruba's offerings. We went with them for ease of use and how they integrated nicely within our existing, mostly Cisco, network environment.
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
We are moving into a more unified and centralized design, and the benefits offered by the 9800 compared to the above listed 5520 series and 8500 series of wireless controller is much preferred. The staggered upgrade option is again another feature much improved moving to the …
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Used all the Cisco 5504s, the 25, 06s s, all of the old legacy Cisco controllers. And on the competitor side, we did have a few sites that had Aruba and not a fan of that. Cisco is much easier to use, implement and to deploy.
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
I've used Ruckus Zone director, so another controller. It's way more robust. There's more features and there's more devices that integrates with. So overall, a more comprehensive solution, I think.
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Honestly, I haven't used a non Cisco wireless controller since about 2004 when I used to put autonomous APs in. It's the difference between eating broken glass and having a five star meal. I mean there's no comparison.
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
From a wireless standpoint? Just any, well, we have the 9300 switches from Cisco. We also just went to the new firewalls that Cisco just came out. I forget the product name right now. So I like the wireless controller from a ease access or be able to configure better than the …
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers is more modern, looks better, supports newer access points. Using different tags - site tags, policy tags, etc. is a nice way to configure different access point groups or locations. Also Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless …
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Ubiquiti WLAN is very much a consumer platform. It is not production ready, it is buggy, it has issues. It is cheaper than Cisco, but you get what you pay for. Aruba doesn't integrate nicely with our existing largely Cisco based networks, so when time came to replace AireOS, …
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers can be easily integrated with Cisco Identity Service Engine. It is easy to configure policy sets for multiple authentication methods like MAB, dot1x, Centralized web authentication. Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers …
I consider that its implementation is recommended for configurations where the amount of access points exceeds 50 devices and the performance exceeds 4 Gbps. In environments where the access point density is less than 10 units, we can use the option of Express Mobility.
I really like central switching. Central switching is converging all of the tunnels, fewer people can administer the product. It's much easier to scale, it's much easier to configure and it's much easier to get predictable results out of that. I have run FlexConnect before under AireOS. I'm proficient with it. But yeah, I think as a centralized controller it works very well. And I think as building redundancy with regard to not just HA-SSO but with an N plus one design, I think the scheme and logic and architecture of the platform is very well thought out and I don't know what use cases I would find it to be lacking. There's a few things when you drill into it, it actually is not that simple. AireOS I feel like was a lot simpler. I think the catalyst, how it breaks out the hierarchy of configuration requires each of these tags and profiles and policies and how you bring them together. Actually, even though they've decoupled a lot of these elements from how AireOS did it, I think fewer of those features, even though it was less extensible, it was not as easy or intuitive to deploy. So I think the intuition and how you actually construct a 9800, an entry engineer would struggle a lot more in a 9800. So I would not recommend the product if somebody did not already have a good foundation of network engineering.
It is good kind of design with the multiple flow profiles and also location base whereby the long very, I think the traditional controller doesn't have this, so we need to have that specific. Every day is getting the same profile but this have a little bit difference. It's very good with the site tagging and also designing all the location-based requirements.
[It] can improve on the possibility of using the physical controllers with the virtual one.
[It] can improve on the possibility of having site-to-site failover capabilities, [like in the case of] controllers at production go down and controllers at our DR site take over.
The possibility of an app on your phone for alerts and minor configuration of the controllers.
If possible, please add a column for WAP Name and WAP Model within the 2.4/5/6 GHz radio sections, as we have different models of WAPs in the fleet, and it would be easier to identify WAPs within a building.
We conduct digital exams for our students. If there is a way to identify clients and block traffic for applications like ChatGPT, it would be greatly appreciated. Currently, there is no filter for ChatGPT or generative AI.
This equipment from Cisco has been dependable and we are able to easily continue to add access points or make changes easily to the Wi-Fi password settings.
We have been operating this equipment for a number of years and it does not give us any issues.
Despite common software and hardware issues this is still the best product on the market for large scale enterprise deployments. Cisco has worked with us extensively to reduce the amount of bugs in every iteration however new bugs are introduced or new incompatibilities always arise with major releases. Thus, while I'm hesitant to recommend the product it's still much better than all the other competitors such as Aruba and Juniper in the WIFi space. There is also extensive integration with DNAC/Catalyst Center and ISE in an SDA deployment. Recently there has been a number of critical issues with the controller software and Cisco has proved themselves to be incapable of timely troubleshooting and diagnosis. This has reduced our confidence in the product and it's current and future stability and maintainability. At it's current state the product is taking up too much of our engineering resources to maintain despite also paying for premium support from Cisco. As such I have reduced by rating as we are likely to look at alternative vendors for our long-term wireless management solution
In the dailies activities it's simple to manage a wireless network and also to perform changes: the GUI is well known and intuitive for engineers that know how to operate on Cisco WLC. It has High Throughput and consolidated features such as CleanAir, Roaming supporting natively Cisco ISE authentication methods and DNA Center. It's recommended for Wi-Fi 5 wireless infrastructures.
Due to our HA set up we have always managed to access our wireless networks without problems, when issues occur. When we have lost access to the GUI, due to internal network problems, console access is always welcomed and brings with it the normal Cisco CLI syntax. From previous versions of CLI, it is now a lot simpler and reflects other Cisco products, making it easier to troubleshoot and navigate when necessary.
Monitoring is very good Seamless integration with Cisco ISE RRM configuration very easy. It has REST API support IOS-XE is very powerful operation system. Multicasting and mDNS features are really good and very easy to configure. It supports Pyats and Genie so getting constructed data from python script calls very helpful.
Cisco support is always ready to support and engage in any problem or issue. Starting from the implementation support, troubleshooting any software issue or hardware. Their engineers are engaging whenever we ask for support, keep following up with us, and troubleshoot any problem till we find a solution and be satisfied [with] the service.
Just take your time when setting up the HA pairs as those can be tricky. Also take your time setting up AP groups and make sure they are on all the SSIDs you need to be on.
Cisco 5520 Wireless Controller has better high availability features compared to the others. Also Cisco has a worldwide service center and is located in nearly all countries to offer fast and reliable support in case of any hardware issue. Also Cisco offers more features, for example AVC, CleanAir and TrustSec which the compotitiors don't. And we could use some of our als Cisco APs with the Cisco 5520 Wireless Controller and didn't need to buy that much new APs.
We are moving into a more unified and centralized design, and the benefits offered by the 9800 compared to the above listed 5520 series and 8500 series of wireless controller is much preferred. The staggered upgrade option is again another feature much improved moving to the new model and management through DNAC
Implementing the [Cisco] 5520 [Wireless] Controllers offered us a huge improvement in administrative time over our previous Cisco 3850 deployment. Being able to see all of our APs on a single controller as well as centrally manage them is a great benefit. This also removed the need to deploy specific equipment in different IDFs throughout our Industrial locations and instead only requiring switches with Power Over Ethernet (POE) capability.
Wireless performance has improved with the deployment of our 5520s, which allows our plant operators to do their jobs more efficiently while on the move.
Having three Cisco 5520 Wireless Controllers provides tertiary redundancy for our wireless networks. The solution is elegantly simple. Preventing downtime is, obviously, a profound part of our supply chain capabilities.
I mean, return on investment is really hard to quantify. Being in a healthcare scenario, it definitely has very good uptime, very good performance. It's easy to manage, fairly trouble free with a few issues not withstanding. There's really no income based off of it, but it does allow our nurses, nursing staff, our physicians to take care of patients better and more reliably and enables a lot of communication options that we wouldn't have had we not had that controller.
