Aruba Orchestrator Reviews

We have the Aruba wireless network, both wired and wireless, and to manage that we are using Aruba Orchestrator. We are the end user of Aruba products.

I use Aruba Orchestrator's advanced analytics tools. Aruba Orchestrator's analytics tools are great tools to use. We were using Cisco, but when comparing it with Cisco, Aruba is far better.

The security features of Aruba Orchestrator are really good; I don't think there is any issue with security. It's a good tool in terms of the security aspects.

My experience with Aruba Orchestrator is that it's a great tool to use to manage the network. Its user interface is very user-friendly; in fact, the management interface is very user-friendly. It also gives a lot of troubleshooting ideas when we are trying to troubleshoot any issues with the wireless network or the wired network. It's a very useful tool.

I can say that 100% the ROI from Aruba Orchestrator is really good because we have reduced the number of people needed. There is no need to have a team of people to manage the huge network, and with a relatively smaller number of resources, we are able to manage.

I would probably have to look at areas of improvement for Aruba Orchestrator and then provide feedback, but overall, we are happy with it.

I have been using Aruba Orchestrator for the past six months.

It is a stable solution. We had Cisco infrastructure in the past before we replaced it with Aruba, and our experience is much better with Aruba compared to Cisco—far, far better.

In my opinion, Aruba Orchestrator is a scalable solution.

I would rate my experience with technical support from Aruba as eight out of ten. The support is really good; that is the reason I have given the rating as eight.

Positive

The initial setup of Aruba Orchestrator is easy, definitely easy.

We also had a POC with a Juniper product, and the Juniper Mist is actually outstanding. If you compare it with Juniper, that is the reason I have given it an eight. I'm sure that Juniper, now that it is part of Aruba, will take all the best features available in Mist and introduce them into the Aruba solution, so it will become a 10 very soon; this is what I hope.

Regarding the pricing and licensing of Aruba Orchestrator, I normally don't get into the commercial aspect because that is handled completely by a different team. I am from IT, and we look at it only from the IT perspective, not really the commercial aspect of the product. I rate this solution 8 out of 10.

The typical use case for Aruba Orchestrator is to manage the SD-WAN EdgeConnect.

These security features have helped me to improve data protection, but it's two different worlds. In terms of security, I segregate networks. In terms of data protection, I need to protect my asset that holds the data, which is part of the network segmentation. It's a small part of data protection. I cannot say it didn't help, but I cannot tell you it changed my life.

The best features of Aruba Orchestrator are that it's basically a management product, so it's everything that is integrated in the SD-WAN in SASE. It's really great that it connects today all the gateways and SD-WAN solution with the SASE and the zero trust network access.

I used Aruba Orchestrator's advanced analytics tools before.

I used the firewall zone and the segmentation, and I continue to use them.

It would be great if they would have a fully multi-tenant solution on their Orchestrator.

Aruba SD-WAN solutions are always expensive. I don't think that it will change. It's an argument for many years. This is why we are doing other vendors as well, which today were bought by Aruba, Juniper for example.

I have worked with Aruba Orchestrator for many years, since 2017, before it was Aruba.

Aruba Orchestrator is a stable solution.

Aruba Orchestrator is a scalable solution.

I would rate technical support as the best.

Positive

The initial setup of the solution was straightforward for me.

I have not seen return on investment with Aruba Orchestrator. When you look at ROI on the SD-WAN and Aruba orchestration, you're looking at a bit that costs a lot. For example, in Africa, or in the U.S. or in the Philippines, in places like that, the megabit costs a fortune. We are talking about a few hundreds per megabit.

In the Middle East and Europe where I work, the megabit costs me a few dollars. To see a return on investment, either I need to have large capacity or I need to have many branches, which we don't. We don't see return on investment, but we love the technology, so we purchase because of the technology.

The pros are they do everything, and the cons are pricing, pricing, pricing. I rate Aruba Orchestrator a seven out of ten.

Aruba Orchestrator is used to manage the SD-WAN devices, run reports, and check health status.

One of the things that people don't use a lot in Aruba Orchestrator is the full REST API. Anything you do in Aruba Orchestrator, you can do in a REST API. Even if you don't want to use Aruba Orchestrator, as long as you know all the commands for the REST API, you can do that.

The solution has a single pane of glass view that allows you to see everything happening in your SD-WAN world. You can look at all the flows of everything going into the cloud. It's not SD-WAN, but another HPE product that allows you to see the IP addresses and the usernames of what they're doing.

You need to integrate it with ClearPass to see the username because ClearPass is a network access control. Anybody can be on an IP address and go through the SD-WAN. However, with ClearPass, I'll know who logged in. No one can ever say someone else was using their PC at a given time. The solution also ties into security. We send all the logging to Splunk. Aruba Orchestrator is well-integrated.

I have been using Aruba Orchestrator for seven years.

Aruba Orchestrator is a stable solution.

I know the solution scales. However, we only need the minimum requirement to run what we do because we have a relatively small install. It runs up to 50 EdgeConnects with a minimum install. You can run a thousand devices through one Aruba Orchestrator with few compute and storage needs, but we don't have that many. Around 1,000 users are using the solution, and we don't plan to increase the usage.

The technical support team gets back to you and always has an answer. If they don't have an answer on a couple of occasions, they'll take it up to their team. We encountered a bug, and the support team patched it immediately.

Positive

We previously used Meraki. We switched to Aruba Orchestrator because Meraki was terrible at failovers. With Aruba Orchestrator, we get an alert in case of a failover. We don't have to worry about it, and the users don't even know if anything's happened. If we lose a circuit, the users will never know it as long as you have one circuit up and running.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution’s initial setup ten out of ten.

You use the solution to manage the other devices. I can't say what the return on investment is, but it's free, and you need it to manage the SD-WAN.

Aruba Orchestrator is free to use.

Implementing security policies through Aruba Orchestrator is very easy and straightforward. I'm not on the security team, but the security team defines what needs to be protected. It's very easy to go in and make those changes with Aruba Orchestrator.

The solution's unified management interface makes it easier to handle our WAN operations. Since it's a single pane of glass, I don't have to log in to each individual router to see what's going on. I can do everything from where I sit at my desk with Aruba Orchestrator to see what's happening.

Even though the solution offers cloud services, we started with on-premises and have kept it there. We never moved it to the cloud because we don't have a need for it. The solution comes with the SD-WAN, and you have to get it. It's called a different name, but it's not a separate product. It's all combined with the EdgeConnect platform.

Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.

My main use cases for Aruba Orchestrator involve connection management. I use it for servers connection MPLS and IP MPLS.

The features I appreciate about Aruba Orchestrator include effective customization and integration capabilities. The dashboard, customization, configuration part, and integrations are particularly effective features. The dashboard is very clear and we can apply templates.

The benefit I gain in terms of management is that it simplifies management. Integration capabilities with cloud and on-prem environments help my organization maintain a hybrid approach.

There are some aspects of Aruba Orchestrator that could be improved. The price should be improved as it is very high. The Aruba products are expensive.

I have been using Aruba Orchestrator for about three years.

There were no challenges or difficulties with installing Aruba Orchestrator, as it doesn't require an installation since it's cloud-based. The tutorials and Aruba support are clear.

It took a few minutes for me to deploy it, maybe just half an hour.

I think it's a good solution, and it's very stable.

The technical support of Aruba is very supportive and excellent.

Positive

Before choosing Aruba Orchestrator, I evaluated some other solutions for VoIP data. I previously used different products before Aruba.

Since Aruba Orchestrator offers zero-touch provisioning, this feature has influenced my setup process and helped me with the initial setup.

I have seen a return on investment and financial benefit from using Aruba Orchestrator. This is due to the simplified use of data and the dashboard with analytics.

Regarding my experience with the pricing and setup costs, I find it expensive software compared to others.

I am still working with Aruba solutions as I have expertise with this vendor. I rate Aruba Orchestrator ten out of ten.

We are currently managing only the switches and Wi-Fi. These are the only two devices connected to Aruba Central.

We had to deal with separate management models for Wi-Fi and switches. With Aruba Orchestrator, it's now a unified solution, making things much easier for us. We log in and manage everything from a single console. It provides complete internal visibility from LAN to Wi-Fi, resulting in higher stability and easier troubleshooting. The management process is much quicker and more streamlined.

Aruba has the capability, but not at the desired level. There is a need for enhancement. You can bring up a site quickly, depending on the circumstances. You can bring it up within the day. Otherwise, if you need hardware, controllers, and configurations, too many things are involved. It reduces time by maybe around 30%. For example, if we need to deploy an on-premises gateway, it takes at least six months for the whole process, including purchasing, delivery, and installation. 

I have been using Aruba Orchestrator for one year.

100 people are using this solution.

The support should be fine. We've been using Aruba Orchestrator for a long time. We receive support. Sometimes, for example, during an outage scenario. We may sometimes get an engineer, but they may not have the right expertise. So, catching up will go for escalation later and then getting the right people to fix things. Sometimes, there is a challenge in finding the right people to fix that issue. 

Aruba is not expensive. It's subscription-based, so we do not need any maintenance contracts. The support will be handled through self-subscription.

I rate the solution's pricing as eight out of ten, whereas ten is expensive.

Aruba has plenty of solutions showcased at this event. Perhaps they offer their firewall, which we are not currently utilizing—the LAN switching, ClearPass, and Wi-Fi. ClearPass is is still on-premises, but the switching, Wi-Fi, and security features are included. 

It has some capabilities, like automation intelligence, which they call AI operations. So it is helpful. Our time spent on troubleshooting will be significantly reduced with it. Another useful feature is that we can inquire about the health data from Aruba Central and receive the necessary answers. Aruba Central simplifies management. Yes, deployment will be much faster than on-premises setups, where you need many hardware gateways. With just an access point or minimal hardware, deployment will be quicker. Troubleshooting with it has also made it much more straightforward.

A group of ten people should be more than sufficient to manage an extensive infrastructure.

Aruba is providing better support. They are also improving their email services. They are up to market standards, so we choose to go with them. We were looking for a direct vendor, but they didn't meet our requirements. Aruba Orchestrator is meeting our current expectations and standards, so we are sticking with them.

We don't have any issues because we have been with Aruba for many years. We don't mind moving from one vendor to another. We are simply transitioning from one rental type to another with Aruba.

I prioritize enhancements in AI functionality over other features. There are several implementations, with AI being the primary focus.

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

The product has reduced OpEx expenditure. 

Aruba Orchestrator should implement dynamic certificate changes for security. 

I rate the tool's stability a ten out of ten. 

Aruba Orchestrator doesn't have any scalability limit. My company has 70-80 customers for the product. 

The tool's deployment takes 10-15 minutes to complete. You need to complete a WAN zone setup. You need two resources to handle the deployment and maintenance. 

We have seen ROI with the tool's use. 

The solution's licensing costs are yearly. It is not expensive, and I rate it around three to four out of ten. 

I rate Aruba Orchestrator a nine out of ten. It is a solution that handles optimization and incident management together. 

Aruba Orchestrator helps us reduce the cost of the WAN links and size the solution for the beta management environment through orchestration. Additionally, we try to deliver application capabilities with the same user experience.

The heterogeneous solution combining WAN optimization and SD-WAN has significantly improved the environment. Aruba Orchestrator has notably reduced enrollment setup times from several hours to within an hour if prepared and planned.

There is room for improvement in both environments, such as Cisco SD-WAN and Aruba Orchestrator. LiveAction, a data analytics tool, gathers much information and provides reporting, making it preferable to Aruba's native analytics and licensing.

Many deployment scenarios can complicate insights and troubleshooting efforts. Therefore, complexity needs to be managed carefully.

From a security perspective, both environments are secure. Silver Peak offers third-party integrations like Zscaler for application delivery. Cisco provides both Zscaler and its native solution, Cisco Umbrella. Other third-party solutions like Netskope also exist, ensuring robust security features through integration capabilities.

There are practical challenges that customers encounter that should be addressed by the product team. 

I have been using Aruba Orchestrator as a customer for four years.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.

3,000 users are using this solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability a ten out of ten.

Documentation could be improved.

Positive

Compared to Cisco SD-WAN, it doesn't decouple the control plane from the data plane. Unlike Cisco SD-WAN, the Orchestrator manages the environment from a configuration standpoint but doesn't handle control information or push routing information to individual nodes.

The initial setup is complex, depending on the overall planning for the entire environment. Setting up a single node doesn't take much time, typically no more than an hour. However, the entire deployment, including all nodes, heavily relies on planning and the leadership team's focus.

I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The product has reasonable pricing.

Hybrid environments and high-compute, high-storage setups prefer this solution over those with lower storage and higher computing performance or companies with cloud-agnostic approaches.

The sizing of the solution is crucial. If a customer prefers on-premises data centers over the cloud or opts for a hybrid solution combining on-premises and cloud resources, Silver Peak becomes an attractive option. The choice also depends on the application landscape and user usability requirements. Customers seeking optimized infrastructure costs can undoubtedly benefit from this solution.

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

The main feature is WAN optimization. The Aruba Orchestrator helps businesses define their network policies and access to their servers and the Internet. This improves the quality of their connection. It offers great stability and policy.

It can simplify management by using an intent overlay. The zero charge provision is beneficial. It would only take about one hour to onboard a new device.

The management menu should be simplified.

I have been using Aruba Orchestrator for a year.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight to nine out of ten.

The solution’s scalability should be simplified. We now have two customers using it.

Technical support is highly knowledgeable.

The initial setup is complex because it's a new function. It has deployment templates. Once you set up the deployment, you can use it for any other file. We use the same template, so you can replicate the process and pass it on.

To deploy, first set up the Orchestrator, whether on-premises or cloud and include the license. Once you have the license, the Edge Connect devices will be directly connected, and you will approve them highly. Then, install the configuration using the deployment template. Furthermore, you need to proceed with changing the site by site. There are different parameters, such as LAN IP or other offerings. The deployment template is quite simplified.

Aruba is stable and connects its internal network to the Internet. The main functions of WAN optimization and the business overlay policy are reasonable.

The conclusion is that WAN optimization, access center policy, and BIO should be the main features. Let's also examine the deployment using the template to replicate similar device characteristics easily. You have two options with Aruba Orchestrator for automation based on throughput and bandwidth usage. You can either add the boost item or change the device.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We have lots of branches connecting globally and we use the solution for optimization, as well as for sharing data and accessing data for each branch.

The most valuable feature is optimization.

The solution can be improved by lowering the cost and making it more user-friendly for first-time users.

I have been using the solution for almost one year.

The solution looks to be stable.

The solution is scalable. We currently have under 100 people using the solution.

The initial setup was a bit complex, but already knowing the techniques and the best practice to properly approach the deployment it should be fine. Our deployment is across multiple branches and is still going on.

I think it is quite expensive compared to other vendors in the market because it depends on what kind of features you really want to acquire in the product. In our case we are looking for more optimization, so that's why we believe in this solution. Optimization is really attainable and can be attainable to our environment and to our infrastructure because we're using Aruba for most of our products. That's why we wanted to make sure that we can interconnect some of our products to Aruba as well.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

The solution can be difficult for new users who do not have experience with FTL or Aruba. I need to provide something first because initially, it is not easy to learn for the new user. It's not straightforward like Cisco.

If you compare the solution to Cisco, I believe when it comes to security and of course optimization, Silver Peak Unity Orchestrator is much better and recommendable compared to Cisco.

This solution provides SD-WAN services on top of the internet to avoid MPNS connectivity. I'm a senior technical consultant.

The Business Intent Overlay is a great feature. They have a good interface which is very easy to deploy and use. 

The solution lacks sufficient security features. The weakness of Silver Peak is that they are an SD-WAN or WAN op provider without a legacy for any other product line. I think they need to include the option for organizations to move to a public cloud rather than be restricted to only using Silver Peak cloud.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The product is very stable.

The product is scalable. 

Silver Peak provided the best support from a vendor that we have experienced. They are marvelous, providing support and training, which is free. Even the hands-on training labs were free.

The solution was very easy to deploy.

In our last calculation, ROI occurs in year three or four. It's about the savings in NPLS and the amount they're investing in Unity Edge Connect, as well as the subscription and internet costs. 

The price is mid-range and competitive. It's a subscription license with each branch device costing less than $1,000 and a perpetual license for the hardware. It includes a support and maintenance fee.

There is a lot of competition in this field. Cisco is one of the leading companies in this category. They built their whole portfolio on a legacy that Silver Peak lacks. Most firewall vendors like Palo Alto, Check Point, and Fortinet moved into the SD-WAN space because of security. A firewall is always required; if it can provide the SD-WAN, it's the best thing for customers. Riverbed was major competition initially with Silver Peak a late comer into the market. They haven't been as strong in the Middle East market.

If you are using Cisco routers, Cisco switches, or if you have a Cisco firewall, you're not going to choose the Silver Peak SD-WAN. Cisco has the JC to provide the wireless controller, the firewall, the SD-WAN, and the WAN op. It offers a level of flexibility that people get used to. If your whole environment is based on Cisco or Fortinet, you'll stick with the same company as the rest of your environment. In the Middle East, most companies will go with Palo Alto or Check Point because of the brand name and the proven technology. 

I rate the solution nine out of 10.