Cisco Wireless LAN Controllers vs. HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass Policy Manager

Setup is very quick as it is designed for smaller organizations. Of course, this comes with its own limitations, but it's really the question of what you need. If you can cover your office space with 3 to 4 access points, you got a pretty good alternative to the more enterprise-level of Cisco Wireless products, but you still get excellent throughput and signal strength.

We have quite a few visitors to our campus and we don't want to have a set PSK for the wireless so we have configured a guest network where visitors can create an account and gain access to the internet and we don't have to "manage" it since the accounts will expire after a certain time. We have RF scanners in our warehouses and we want them to be allowed on the network and be put into its own VLAN. ClearPass can do this flawlessly by keying off of the MAC address when it comes online and putting it into the correct VLAN. This makes it so we don't have to add each device individually to the system. The only time ClearPass would not be appropriate is in a small deployment where the cost to value wouldn't make sense.

Incentivized

• The WLC are very reliable. In the 10+ years the company has had them installed, we have not had any hardware or component failures.
• No need for reboots. The CISCO WLC is not like a router you may have at home which you may have to reboot every few weeks or months. It can run for months without needing a reboot.
• The Cisco WLC gives you a quick Network Summary when you first log into the system. This is very helpful to get a quick rundown on the status of your wireless network.

Incentivized

• It does a great job of authenticating users and eliminating the need for us to run multiple SSIDs to “manually” separate users.
• Integrates well with AD to support assigning users to segments based on security group membership
• It integrates well with our Aruba controller environment

Incentivized

• Configuring wireless settings is very confusing because various settings are scattered all over the interface in different tabs
• Lots of settings use Cisco's technical verbiage rather than common phrasing, so it's confusing what a lot of settings will do and requires researching the meaning before modifying the setting
• The interface could be easier to use to do simple tasks such as reboot an access point

Incentivized

• Getting data out of ClearPass is difficult. You can get some with SNMP but he API is lacking. There is only a limited amount of info that you can get from it. Even some data that shows up in ClearPass Insight is not available to import into a 3rd party application.
• In the past, if you have hardware/software issues you could troubleshoot them yourself through the CLI in a Linux type interface but now they have locked everything down and it makes troubleshooting difficult. You have to rely on them for everything. As a person who likes to understand the ins and outs of the systems I manage it is somewhat frustrating.
• Steep learning curve, although support can assist and their forums like airheads can be helpful. This is a complex system and can take a while to grasp how everything works and integrates.

Incentivized

Although it is a very good product, support is easy and can manage by Level 1 support persons and downtime is too much less but still there is a cost factor matters which is consider by each organization. Furthermore, organizations also compare with other competitors so it is hard to pursue and defend the high prices.

Incentivized

It's a great product, does what we expect from it however it's not easy to set up. You'll likely need an integrator to assist

Incentivized

As I said before, the only thing we miss in our old model is the fact that the management interface never received an improvement in design. It has the same look and feels since it was launched. It's not that it's hard to use. It's just the case of could be modernized.

Incentivized

Though Aruba ClearPass offers a lot of insight and features, it is not the easiest to navigate. A lot of other systems can be figured out as you go, but Aruba ClearPass often requires a lot of research in order to set something up correctly. It's not always easy to find what you're looking for. Once you learn the basics, it becomes a lot more manageable, but it's definitely worth investing in some sort of training.

Incentivized

Downtime fear is the first fear which IT persons look and want to eliminate as much as they can but eventually you have to face it as nothing is perfect. Cisco Wireless Lan controller are feasible to use and easy to manage and other than this their issue reported are pretty low so you can get the best up time. now it also depends on scenario as well as environment.

Incentivized

We have it as a cluster

Incentivized

Cisco Wireless Lan controller are feasible to use and easy to manage and other than this their issue reported are pretty low so you get the better uptime. if your get the uptime then it means its a stable product in your environment. Product performance also depends on the product management and Cisco Wireless Lan controller management is easy so you can get the great output.

Incentivized

It’s very responsive

Incentivized

As usual, the support from Cisco's TAC (Technical Assistance Center) is lacking. Granted, they always get the job done, but the amount of lead time on a non-emergency is enough to make you just handle it yourself. The good news is that if you ask for Cisco's assistance and forget about it, they'll jump on by the time you've forgotten where you were in troubleshooting it and have it fixed for you.

Incentivized

This product has consistently provided the results needed from it and when issues arose, Aruba TAC was able to provide support effectively. In the previous question, I stated that Aruba Wireless is used as well. With those systems in place with ClearPass troubleshooting becomes much easier. I am sure other issues may arise if calling support while using another vendor for wireless such as Cisco, Juniper, etc.

Incentivized

Originally, when we deployed our first controller it was on a very limited basis. We only deployed it to our administration building and our High School. It was pretty straight forward. Because this was new to us we leaned heavily on our Cisco partner to assist us. With our last upgrade, we upgraded the controllers, added redundancy and expanded the building count along with new SSID's and restrictions. It went much easier, but again, we did rely on Cisco TAC and our partner to clarify and assist as needed. Having already been familiar with the product help tremendously.

Incentivized

Not sure why "Ruckus WLAN controllers" is not listed above but that is another major WLAN controller solution I've used in the past. Cisco Wireless LAN Controllers provide the most flexibility when it comes to designing a large WLAN deployment. They also have some of the best reliability and TAC support out of all of the other vendors.

Incentivized

Clearpass provides seamless protection to the enterprise network without the need of many licenses to be procured. Hardware LAN and Wireless are protected from unwanted or unknown visitors to the network. Unlike other vendors, you don't need multiple licenses, one device or cloud setup will get you going to manage and monitor your network

Incentivized

Cisco is a brand name and people trust on it. if any one thing about the networking then Cisco is among those brand which is count as trusted brand and people rely on it. Also it support is good so people can use it. Cisco Wireless Lan controller are easy to use and manage so it requires less effort.

Incentivized

It’s very reliable

Incentivized

• We have had our [Cisco Wireless LAN Controller] 5508s for a very long time now and although they are getting dated, they have earned us our money's worth with consistency, stability, and ease of use. Users have minimal wireless complaints and when they do seldom are they WLC-related.

Incentivized

• Set and forget. It made a positive contribution in terms of labor and cost without needing much technical support. Since NAC and TACACS features come together, you can meet your needs with a single license.
• The number of supporting companies may be limited in the country you are affiliated with. Therefore, agreements with third-party companies are expensive and your support requests may take a long time.