I've used the Cisco Wireless LAN Controller 9800. I was quite surprised. It was very good to manage access points in a campus network setup that was good. There's a Cisco SD Access solution that I use. I forgot the name of it, to manage also the campus. It was also good. Yeah, …
We have selected Cisco Application Centric Infrastructure compared to Catalyst Switches mainly because of the vPC and Port channel capability. With port channel, it loadbalance the bandwidth. While with Cisco Application Centric Infrastructure vPC, they don't have spanning …
Cisco Application Centric Infrastructure is a more mature and proven product in different types of customer data centers. Currently this is the best solution for on-prem or hybrid cloud environments as other products nowhere close to Cisco as feature wise. Though most vendors …
Actually we start our learning in networking career with Cisco. So it is very useful or easier to learn this product. And honestly speaking, I didn't work in any other data center solution other than Cisco. So I cannot compare what it gives us more than other popular stuff. …
I have not selected Cisco Application Centric Infrastructure. I only just started working with it. But speaking from a classical networking background, the possibilities are endless.
LAN, Storage network and compute were already Cisco so we moved from Nexus to Cisco Application Centric Infrastructure as natural alignment and simplified the dc operations.
My management chose after a deep evaluation involving the Cisco account manager and no one else. I was actually quite impressed by Aruba solutions but not in the position to correctly compare.
We use Cisco Nexus Series Switches on Cisco ACI. It helps to make new and easy connections. It will better if we can use Generative Artificial Intelligence with them.. We manage many domains in one place. We manage more than one company’s network, so Cisco ACI is really helpful.
Switching from NX OS to ACI OS made configuration easier after initial migration and getting to know ACI principles. There are no L2 loops and configuration mistakes as often as it used to be. There is only one management console, and policies are easily reused. The “Submit” …
The availability and support for Cisco Application Centric Infrastructure is significantly better than that of other options that we have tested/implemented. Some features, however, are significantly more expensive, which at times has driven the need to use other clunkier …
They are pretty much great because when it comes down to configuration in the IOS, it's much simpler in Cisco than these other ones. You got to do too much configuration. You do the same thing you can do with two commands, for example on the Cisco IOS. So yeah, I recommend more …
I think Cisco Catalyst Switches works really well when they are implemented singularly to enhance connectivity. When designing an architecture from the ground up, I like to recommend FortiGate because their product is easier to use and when going all in on the Fortinet …
We have selected Cisco Catalyst Switches for their performance. Cisco Catalyst Switches are recommended by a lot of institutions. Many institutions like the government, and many big companies. All who works in IT recognize the quality of this equipment. It's important for us …
Like I said, the Cisco Catalyst 1300 we evaluated and Cisco Catalyst 9200 & 9300 we evaluate and we choose for the mainly excess part Cisco Catalyst 1300 because they are much cheaper than the Cisco Catalyst 9300.
I use some Aruba switches as well and some Huawei products as well. That's the reference, honestly, that's really all the products that are quite good are mostly copying what Cisco does. And when it does not copy, it's not as good. The only other competitor that does the same …
Compared to switches from other vendors, Cisco Catalyst Switches are more suitable for Enterprise and Industrial markets. Although other vendors offer switches with similar specifications and a more advantageous price in the short term, Catalyst Switches have a high reliability …
I feel that Cisco ACI is quite good at different architecture designs. You can have it as just a straight layer two network. You can have it like we have with a vast layer three network and I think just for the layer three network it has easen up the use. I think the use cases for layer three networking is better for ACI. If you just want to do the layer two, you can still use Cisco Nexus and so on and that should be almost simpler in some way.
I think the most suited ones will be of course, for example, a supermarket where you have more than 50 plus devices because there are like 48 ports in a switch. We can just use a lot of devices and connect them to it. A less use case will be, I think it depends at the end of the day how your topology looks like. If you have a very few devices, you shouldn't be going for these catalyst switches because they are of course much bigger, more processing power and all those things. If you have, again, it comes to topology. If you have the number of users who are using these switches is less than 15, it's less than 15, then you can just go for any other option and not use them.
So with the old one, we've had a secure zone, core zone, so we have special hardware specific for those zones, so security zones in our data center. This allows us to basically have the spine leaf and we could put any ports in any zone. So it allows a lot more, I'd say efficient use of equipment, being able to plug in things to whatever, and then program it to how you want it to work on.
One of the things that it does well, it's not something major, but there's a light tracking feature that the 9300 comes with that you can turn on the light and that has become critical in a data center environment where you want to help someone to make sure that you're talking about the same switch, you can turn the light on and off something that is not available in other versions of Cisco switches before the 9300. So it's not as major, but it's quite critical when you're dealing with multiple systems and multiple switches.
I think something I've just went to a session with hyper fabric and the ideas that hyper fabric has. Keep it really simple because Cisco ACI is a complex system and adopt some of the ideas behind hyper fabric, bring it to ACI that will be really beneficial. So as I said, automation is a great thing, but it's still, you need to have the background and the really complex stuff that happens behind the scenes to leverage the value of that solution. And by adding more simplicity to it, I think that will be a great thing. And also integrating with other applications in terms of the automation.
Functionality. Well, one of the functions that we are missing is a faster route based on OSPF. Other than that, it could provide an upgrade without a hitless upgrade. Well, now it is a very fast upgrade, which is also okay. We had a case when the platform crashed, but that was a specific case. We were happy with this product.
Cisco ACI is doing exactly what was intended for it to do, that is support our next generation data centre, improve security, and increase resiliency. Migrating to another platform would be a waste of time, resource and energy, which could be better spent migrating more legacy applications into the Cisco ACI fabric.
We are extremely happy with the Cisco Catalyst series and don't have any reason to switch. As long as we continue to get great use and service out of the products we'll continue to use them for the foreseeable future.
Cisco ACI has changed the traditional data center model into a new era of automation and agility. The product was considerably easy to deploy met all the expectations. In terms of usability, ACI provides a unified interface for managing the whole infrastructure in one place which is the main benefit for users (admins)
Based on my previous experience with other vendors, Cisco is worlds apart. I can manage every feature I need with great flexibility. Other vendors that only provide web UI, limited functionality exists. The other benefit is that since Cisco has been a strong player for so long, their training is being done in some high schools now expanding the knowledge to more of the workforce.
It allways works. If there are problems with links going down by accident (say someone accidentally unpatches something they shouldn't have), we rarely miss more then one packet over the link. Also, using VPCs we are able to upgrade the software on the switches without the attached EPs ever noticing.
We have very few is any outages due to a Cisco hardware failure. Some of our gear is exposed to some pretty harsh environments, and they keep on ticking!
I do not give it 10 because the platform evolves more and more every day in the data traffic of the datacenter. But the implementations that they carry out for different clients of the platform are very happy with the result of the same over time. Another point that you notice about the platform, despite its good performance, is the low use of energy used by this 24x7 on, it is a good fact to take into account for our environment.
No, the packets flow. Sometimes you will see collisions and broadcast storms can happen which will slow performance but that can be fixed and the packets will flow.
Cisco provides users and partners with a multitude of data for you to consume. I think that the stuff in the public domain goes a long way to assisting you find any answers you may need, plus insights and information from areas such as DevNet provide you with access to more than just the traditional release notes and the like
We rarely have issues with the product. I have only had to contact support one time since we put it in and that was to see if another vendor was giving me accurate information on an issue I was having.
The Cisco ACI training provided by Cisco was in depth, covered all of our requirements, and allowed us to implement and maintain the platform without issues.
Cisco Networking Academy partners with many local Colleges and High Schools to provide great hands-on training. You do need to drive to learn the topic. The in-class session only go so far. You really need to apply this to the real world. Cisco makes it easy for business to connect via CLC or Cisco Learning Credits.
Being involved in the implmentation gives you more overview on how things are supposed to be working and communicating, you can easily performce troubleshooting and understanding the troubleshooting scenario
The implementation of the Cisco Catalyst 1000 Series Switches is fairly seamless, especially if you are familiar with Cisco products. We have had Brocade switch gear in place too, and the differences between the manufacturers [are] not a major issue.
I've used the Cisco Wireless LAN Controller 9800. I was quite surprised. It was very good to manage access points in a campus network setup that was good. There's a Cisco SD Access solution that I use. I forgot the name of it, to manage also the campus. It was also good. Yeah, I've used quite some Cisco product, but the one I can remember was the Cisco Wireless LAN Controller 9800.
We do have other vendors. For example, Juniper, Fortinet, and there are quite a few others. And Cisco is pretty good because we know the workflow, we know how the operating system works. We are much more familiar with Cisco products and we know the support system behind it. So in terms of comparing with others, I think it stands out. It's one of our top products to go to
Cisco ACI scales well and is suited in scenarios such as multi-cloud or large data centre implementations. It is not suited to smaller deployments as the efficiencies that it provides are not fully realised. It is well suited in large environments that contain both virtual and bare-metal machines allowing a great deal of flexibility. It is also perfect to support multi-tenancy platforms.
We are exclusive Cisco at our organization. In truth part of the reason is, with one type of switch and one manufacturer, it is easier to support. It is also easier to give consistent training to our staff in our tech department
We've definitely spent quite a bit of time relearning how to do things in ACI, but I think the investment has been well worth while considering that we can now deploy tenants and leaves from the ground up in a matter of seconds.
We can if we choose to upgrade an entire datacenters worth of switches in a single night. (We've chosen to break it up for availability requirements, but if you didn't require 99.999% uptime like us you may be able to do it)
