Arista Campus LAN Switches Reviews

I work as a consultant and integrator, using Arista Networks platform in my customers' networks. I deal with switches by Arista, which is mostly what we use Arista for. I am familiar with Arista Campus LAN Switches, and for me, it is the same platform. Arista Operating System (AOS) is used both on campus switches and data center switches, so I work with campus and data center switches.

The most winning feature of Arista Campus LAN Switches is their management, specifically CloudVision, along with features like comparing changes and diagnosing problems quickly with telemetry and network visualization. For campus switches, the fast deployment of an EVPN-VXLAN solution on top of campus switches is the feature that excites me most.

When comparing the telemetry and monitoring capabilities to competitors like Cisco, Juniper, and HP, it is the best, providing the best monitoring solution for collecting and seeing telemetry and visualization.

It was easy to integrate Arista switches into my customers' existing network architecture.

Regarding improvements to Arista Campus LAN Switches, nothing comes to mind about the switches themselves; they are really fast and have all the technologies and protocols that exist in the market. However, on the management system, I would improve it because as a network engineer, I want a chatbot that can communicate in a native language with the monitoring system to get answers regarding my network faults.

There are no problems particularly with the product, but there is room for improvement regarding licensing and the chatbot for all Arista products.

I have been dealing with Arista Networks platform for five years.

I would rate their technical support as a ten out of ten; they have good support.

Positive

The implementation process is pretty simple and easy.

Regarding zero-touch provisioning with Arista switches, it is also one of the winning features; I can install switches in no time.

In terms of deployment time savings, I can take a switch from the box, and in several minutes, it is already in my network. The preparation I do before installing the switch physically is crucial. If I do the right job before, when I connect the switches, it takes minutes; they receive configuration from the management system and become online in no time.

Regarding pricing, it is not cheap. While it is an enterprise solution, comparing it to low-level switches like Fortinet and Netgear, it is much more expensive. However, comparing it to Cisco and Juniper, it is pretty much the same.

I do think they could improve their licensing model. Today, I need to pay for a license, for a switch, for support, and it costs money; it is not cheap. If they improve their licensing prices, it would be great.

Arista Networks platform has many products. I am speaking about Arista Networks platform. My overall rating for this product is ten out of ten.

The whole network is established through the switching platform, and on top of that, we use Fortinet.

We have numerous implementations of Arista switches. Cisco has a significant issue. It cannot maintain its service commitment regarding daily LAN returns, leading to client dissatisfaction. There are substantial delivery delays. Furthermore, Cisco currently charges double for the same product, which impacts cost-effectiveness.

We found an issue with Arista Campus LAN Switches regarding license renewals. We have to renew the license every three years, which can be a challenge for customers. Arista, like other vendors, now follows a license-based system.

In the past, we could purchase a Cisco system that would run without needing continuous license renewals. However, the current model requires regular license renewals, typically every three years, similar to Arista's approach.

The renewal cost for Arista licenses is quite high. For instance, Cisco's renewal cost is about 22% of the total system cost, and Aroware also has a 22% renewal cost. In contrast, Arista's renewal cost is almost 55% or more, presenting a significant challenge for customers.

The technology is scalable as much as you want.

Support is good. You just need to notify them. They will instantly get back to you.

The initial setup of Arista Campus LAN Switches is straightforward. The interface is user-friendly, especially for those with a networking background. While the command line interface might differ slightly from other systems, it shares many similarities and is easy to adapt.

We have designed our LAN deployment and planned how the client will implement it. We are currently in the first phase, which involves implementing the access points and switches. After this, we will connect to the phone network. This is the second phase. Finally, we will complete the setup of the entire LAN.

I have cross-checked because this network is a ten-gig network. We are using the multigig switches, which Cisco also has. We found that Cisco's cost is 100%, while the cost of the multi-gig switches we are using is about 65% of Cisco's cost. It is much more affordable.

There are third-party solutions, such as ClearPass. 

The product excels in the network industry, particularly in data centers, ensuring top-tier performance. There is no doubt about its reliability. Notably, Google utilizes Arista switches in their data centers. We employ Leaf-Spine technology, providing seamless connectivity from end to end.

Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

In general, the product works fine and is efficient. It was mainly used by someone else in my company, and I just used to operate it.

The solution's most valuable feature is its stability because Arista falls in an industry that is very similar to Cisco. If the engineer knows Cisco's solution, then Arista is also known to them.

The complex setup phase is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using Arista Campus LAN Switches for a year. I used to work in network operations in the IT data center of my company.

I just know that the product works fine. The number or quantity of incidents with the hardware was just about the average statistics.

You always select solutions to meet your needs, not the other way around. Based on what I have seen, it is a scalable product. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

The product is used by a bank that operates worldwide.

The solution's technical support was fast since if a support ticket was opened, then the support process was carried out smoothly. I got a good impression of the engineers who were co-operative.

The product's initial setup phase is complex.

In terms of value, I feel that the product is critical for the bank where it is being used because it is a place where there is a lot of online use. Any outages can cause a loss of money.

It was not my decision to start using the product in our company.

People can choose the product since it is cheaper than Cisco, though both offer the same level of efficiency.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

I use the solution for connectivity in data centers and LANs, providing Layer 2 and Layer 3 connectivity based on network needs.

I think there's still room for improvement. Arista Campus LAN Switches are not highly scalable as they are hardware-based. If hardware requirements exceed capacity, the product needs to be changed, which can impact service.

I have been working with the product for a year. 

The tool's support is very knowledgeable and customer-friendly. 

The solution's deployment is very easy, similar to Cisco. Most commands are like Cisco's.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten because it's easy to use and stable. I've observed that our legacy products are being migrated to SD-WAN and Secure Access Services. 

From my perspective, I see innovation in Cisco's DNA Center for SD-Access. However, I don't see similar LAN-switching innovations from other vendors. They mostly focus on WAN-based SD-WAN solutions.

I believe automation in LAN switching is crucial. Cisco has introduced features like multiple profile port-based LAN mapping and security posture mapping based on user profiles.

My advice to those considering Arista Campus LAN Switches is to go for it. It's an amazing solution for both data center and online switching.

We have a controller-based deployment template for switches. All that you need to do is simply create templates for switches that would have a similar configuration and roll it out.

It's like configuring one switch. The amount of energy and time that you spend to configure one switch can allow you to configure tens of hundreds of switches. The single template can be pushed out across the entire campus.

The template functionality saves a lot of time and man-hours, which results in cost and time savings.

The good part is the CLI is similar to an industry-standard CLI or Cisco, which usually is considered as the industry standard due to the size of the deployment and the tools they have. 

The feature sets are pretty cool. They've got almost everything that the competition offers. The good part is they help you get rid of the switch-tracking deployment models.

They use an approach that ensures that the number of switches that you require is on the lower side. You could have your core communicating directly with the access and that results in cost-saving overall when you look at it from a project cost perspective.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is very good.

Technical support is great.

It would be ideal if the solution was less expensive. 

I've been using the solution for three to four years at this point. It's been a while. 

The product is stable. There aren't any bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution scales very well. There aren't any issues with expanding it. It's massively scalable. 

We have about six clients that use the solution at this time. 

Technical support is lightning-fast. They are helpful and responsive. We are satisfied with the level of support on offer.

The product is very easy to deploy. If you look at the competition, if you take, say, 20 minutes to configure one switch, and you have to deploy 200 switches, just multiply 20 into 200. When it comes to Arista it's just 20 minutes for all 100 switches. It's very simple and offers a lot of time savings.

In terms of deployment and maintenance, for probably 200 switches, a couple of employees are good enough to manage the show. You don't need a big team.

The solution does have some cost-cutting capabilities, however, we would prefer it if it was less expensive. 

The licensing cost is pretty heavy. That is something that they need to definitely work upon. Customers tend to move away from Arista due to the initial procurement costs or the recurring price, both of which are on the higher side. People are willing to pay at initial procurement, however, when it comes to the recurring price, clients expect to pay a lower price point.

There are options for cloud management as well, however, in most places where I have seen it, the deployment model has been on-premises.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

I would absolutely recommend the solution. However, someone with deep pockets should look at Arista. Otherwise, there are many alternatives that are less expensive if a company is short on budget.

We are resellers.

This solution is used for one of our clients in group services that is a community center here in Brazil.

QoS is the most valuable feature because our clients work with VOIP and Critical applications.

The interface is very good.

One of the issues that we have been faced with here in Brazil is that we don't have any list times for delivery. I am not aware of this is valid in other regions, or if it is only here in Brazil.

We have been working with this solution for two years.

The stability is very good. Our customers have not reported any issues with stability.

It's a scalable solution.

Our clients are medium-sized businesses and we have 5,000 users.

The technical support is very good.

The initial setup was easy. The client was very satisfied with the ease of use of the solution.

It took three days to a week to deploy.

We have a team of three people to deploy and maintain this solution.

The price is not that good, but our clients value the solution despite the price.

We evaluated other vendors. Cisco was more expensive than Arista.

I am not aware of all of the features but I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. Clients are very satisfied with the implementation process.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I am working as a system engineer and I work with a variety of networking products, such as the Arista Campus LAN Switches.

The management portal has improved the way our organization functions. Arista software is of good quality, and you can manage all of your products through a single management portal. It offers good visibility of the telemetry data, which is important because you can see lots of data in real-time. Also, you can easily see your topology.

Its operating system is what I like the most.

The CloudVision Portal allows us to centrally manage all of our Arista products.

This is a stable product and it has a lot of uplink interfaces.

I would like to see a version available with eight or sixteen ports. As it is now, all of the models have either 24 ports or 48 ports, and I would be interested in one with less.

In the Campus line of switches, there is no option for stacking. I would like to see this available optionally.

I have been working with Arista Campus LAN Switches for almost one year.

These are stable switches with built-in redundancy. Each device has at least two power supplies and two fans.

We have not had any trouble with scalability because we are using two types of topology, spine and left. When you use spine and leaf topology, you can easily scale your network with no problem.

I have not had any technical support cases with Arista.

The initial setup is easy. There is a zero-touch provision (ZTP) feature, which means that you install your device, connect the management interface, and CloudVision quickly discovers it. 

The only licensing costs are for CloudVision, although the upfront price of the device is not cheap. It is not cheaper than Cisco, for example, but it is of high quality.

Overall, I am pretty satisfied with Arista and I recommend these switches. My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to also use the CloudVision portal, and not manage switches on their own. The portal is of good quality, and it is the most stable network monitoring and provision tool.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

1. Built on the open source platform which is known as Arista EOS, open standard and extensible.
2. Does not lock in investment - You can inter-operate Arista switches with other switches and applications via Arista Open APIs.
3. The Software Defined switch architecture, runs optimized 2-tier network instead of traditional 3-tier network (Core, Distribution and Access) gives you efficiency and savings.
4. With their condensed fabric switches for datacenter, helps customer achieves lower TCO per port.
5. Scalable / Density.
6. Up to 64x10 Gbe ports or 256x10Gbe ports in 2U appliance.

More Products have been launched recently such as the 7280R Universal Leaf Platforms.

Able to work with a lot of technology partners like Riverbed, Nutanix and Citrix.

Can't think of anything at the moment

I haven't experienced any deployment issues.

I haven't experienced any stability issues.

I haven't experienced any scalability issues.

Good

Good

Yes, Cisco and HP Procurve. Cisco is fixed on their software kernel and not customization.

Yes, very straightforward. Easy to configure.

Yes, interop with other switches.