Aruba Switches Reviews

Aruba Switches are being used for the campus network requirement, specifically at the access layer as well as the aggregation layer. They are not currently being used for the data center or for the DMZ.

For the access switch use case, Aruba Switches remain a good choice. However, they are not being used in the data center or DMZ environments, so I am uncertain about how well they perform in those spaces.

The best features of Aruba Switches are their stability and reliability. Hardware failures are rare because the switches have been running for years, and it is uncommon to encounter hardware issues or impacting bugs.

From an operational perspective, Aruba Switches are stable and easy to configure through centralized management solutions. Initially managed through AirWave and now through Central, the configuration can be managed easily with audit records and visibility to switch health and other parameters.

Another advantage is that Aruba Switches work seamlessly with ClearPass as a NAC server. This integration allows for dynamic policies, dynamic downloadable user roles, and enables seamless segmentation of users for network security.

The real-time analytics provided by Aruba Switches for network efficiency are valuable when needed. All information visible in the analytics dashboard is truly helpful. With Aruba Central's migration to AI capability, additional value is being provided, offering more information and making troubleshooting easier with user-friendly features where you can search for anything and receive relevant results.

Currently, the security integration with Aruba ClearPass is being used for NAC authentication only. Many ACLs and other security features are being managed, but the current security features being leveraged are primarily on the ClearPass side. Aruba Central also has certain security features including segmentation capabilities and endpoint information that can be used to define policies.

Many other security features are available in Central, but they are not being used yet because the infrastructure is newly migrated to Central. Enhancement and utilization of these features will be planned for the future.

Aruba Switches support would be rated around a seven out of ten. For certain products, there is no significant drop-off in support quality. Within the same TAC team, some products receive good support, and ClearPass receives good support as well.

However, when working on switching cases, the support experience is not as strong. From the support perspective for Aruba Switches, there is sometimes a lag in response. When issues are escalated to TAC for switching cases specifically, the support tends to be a little poor, whereas support for other products remains acceptable.

Positive

Having worked primarily with Cisco switches before transitioning to Aruba Switches, a comparison between the two reveals no major drawbacks with Aruba. Cisco does not perform significantly differently than Aruba in most respects. Regarding their management platforms, Cisco offers DNA as an SDN solution, though its success is uncertain.

After working with DNA for some time, the SDN solution for managing switches in a centralized manner was not particularly helpful, and configuration changes still required accessing each switch's CLI individually, which was quite difficult.

Aruba's centralized management solution, however, is truly helpful. Direct CLI access to switches is avoided in most situations, with CLI only being used in certain troubleshooting scenarios. For configuration, reporting, and other features, Aruba's management platform is excellent. This represents a major difference between the two vendors.

While Cisco's CLI syntax is more familiar from working with it from the beginning, when managing an enterprise with hundreds of locations and numerous switches, a centralized management solution is definitely a significant advantage.

Aruba Switches receive a high rating of nine out of ten overall. Other Aruba products including wireless, ClearPass, and Aruba Switches along with VeloCloud SD-WAN are the primary products currently in use.

Aruba Switches are used in our organization for a straightforward purpose. We started with the HP line, and when Aruba came into the picture, we began using them for our network infrastructure. The old HP big switches function as our backbone, while the smaller Aruba switches are positioned at the edge, providing power to the wireless network and related equipment.

The functions I appreciate in Aruba Switches are that they use the same configuration type as the old HP switches. I prefer the black screen and typically make configurations on the terminal side, using the web pages only when I need something quickly.

The troubleshooting capabilities in Aruba Switches have basic functions that are mostly sufficient, including getting MAC tables and viewing everything that is happening with ports and connected devices. I usually handle this work on the terminal side.

Technology is constantly advancing, and although more security is always needed, our networks are still old, so we mostly need to modernize our installations.

Regarding integration capabilities, there are some limitations with Aruba Switches that make them a little difficult sometimes, as they are very particular about the kind of SFP+ adapters and cables you can use. However, when you have the right cables and accessories, everything usually works, and there have been no problems with the switches.

About the software-defined networking feature, I think Aruba Switches are starting to be so old that we need to consider getting our backbone speed upgraded. The 10 gigabits is still sufficient for us now.

I have been working with Aruba Switches for 10 years.

I would rate the stability of Aruba Switches at seven out of ten. While they are aging, they do not fail.

I would rate the ability to scale at seven because the modular backbone devices are very good, and if you choose the edge switches well, it is quite easy.

I would rate technical support from HP at five out of ten. There is much information available, but it can be quite difficult to find what you need sometimes.

Positive

When comparing to competitors, Extreme Networks is a product we have been looking at. We don't consider Cisco products as much. We have been using HP, and their configuration approach is well known to us.

Regarding the setup process, I find it simple. Aruba Switches have nice, easy setups, but I mostly do everything in the CLI, using my old notepad file for the main configuration.

In terms of pricing for Aruba Switches, I would rate it a five. They are quite expensive devices.

Regarding the security aspect of Aruba Switches, we are satisfied because we have isolated the management in a very closed network, and we try to make all access to devices require more than one password, requiring authentication to the firewall to get access to the management network.

For real-time analytics with Aruba Switches, they have basic tools, so if there are error accounts, I need to watch more closely what is happening. Usually, it is a broken network interface either on the computer or on the switch side.

I confirm we purchased the product through a distributor. I would rate this review a seven overall.

Our main use cases for Aruba Switches are in our retail business. We have stores in different malls, such as the fashion business in Dubai Mall, Emirates Mall, and all the big malls in the GCC countries. We are using Aruba Switches and the access points for the Wi-Fi network inside the stores.

The main purpose of Aruba Switches features is management. Our head office is in Kuwait, and we manage all the switches and devices remotely through the cloud, which is very easy to manage without any local IT in these countries. We replaced Cisco with Aruba Switches now.

We are not using all the features as we actually have multiple vendors, and I'm not an expert technically for Aruba Switches, so I'm not in a position to give detailed feedback on improvements.

I would appreciate having admin access to solve some issues with devices, as every time we want to add new devices, we are forced to contact the local partner, which is not good for us.

We have been working with Aruba Switches for more than four or five years, almost five years now.

The setup experience for Aruba Switches is a complex process since I cannot add devices by myself, and I need to rely on the partner and pay them extra for their services.

The deployment takes a considerable amount of time. It depends on their engineers' availability, and I find it time-wasting as we have to wait for them to implement new devices.

For stability, I have no complaints. Everything is good with the Aruba Switches.

Aruba Switches are scalable for our environment, and I have no issues regarding that.

We decided to go for Aruba Switches instead of Cisco mainly because we got a better price commercially, which is the main reason for the pricing. Also, as an admin, managing devices through the cloud feels more comfortable and easier than with Cisco.

The setup experience for Aruba Switches is a complex process since I cannot add devices by myself, and I need to rely on the partner and pay them extra for their services.

We are in cooperation with vendors for implementation.

We haven't used Aruba Switches in any AI-driven projects yet. We are only using the basic features and Wi-Fi access without exploring other options.

The cost comparison shows that Aruba Switches' price is better than Cisco, which has helped us save costs during this time.

The cost of Aruba Switches is based on the price per device. The cost depends on the model. We have 24-port switches, PoE 12-port switches, and bigger switches, so the price varies depending on the device.

We face different challenges with HP and Aruba. I opened a ticket with HP for a major issue we are facing, but I haven't received proper feedback from them either. We are continuously buying Aruba Switches and access points, but we have to contact our local partner in Kuwait every time we install new devices since we lack admin access.

To summarize everything, I recommend that technically and work-wise, there's no issue with Aruba Switches. They work perfectly, but the only challenge we face is the implementation time.

I rate Aruba Switches eight out of ten.

We primarily deploy Aruba Switches in hotels for services such as Wi-Fi, IPTV, telephone, and guest room automation.

The features of Aruba Switches are stable. This stability has provided a significant return on investment over time. Additionally, the longevity of the solution contributes to longer ROI periods.

In the hotel sector, IGMP 3 is particularly valuable for IPTV. The modular 5406 core switch is also very helpful for hotel operation.

There are issues with the distribution side of Aruba Switches. For instance, the distributor in our country cannot sell to neighboring countries, creating complications in project execution. Improving the distribution network across regions would be beneficial. Also, the SFP modules are significantly more expensive than industry peers, which affects cost-effectiveness.

We have been using Aruba Switches for quite some years, probably about seven.

I rate the stability of Aruba Switches a ten. I have sites that have been running for many years with no issues.

I would rate the scalability of the product an eight out of ten. There have been some model changes and conflicts between different models.

I don't directly deal with support, however, we don't have unresolved cases. Based on the lack of escalated issues, I'll rate them a seven out of ten.

Positive

We also work with other vendors like Meraki, as some hotel groups prefer their solutions.

The installation was straightforward and not difficult.

We have a team of about nineteen people in the technical team, and five are in the network. We handle maintenance with a team of four support staff.

We've been able to deploy many features even in non-Aruba environments, converting them to Aruba over time, leading to cost savings.

Most Aruba Switches come with a one-time licensing fee, and we pay for support annually. The pricing of some products, such as the 6300M switch, is considered a significant cost.

We also provide services for other vendors like Meraki, especially in specific hotel groups.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

The solution is well suited for any business, really. For my company, it's easier to use because our warranty structure in South Africa is much better. That's basically the only reason why we use Aruba instead of Cisco. Cisco is more expensive, and while Aruba is still expensive, it's not as costly in our region. If they don't pay attention to their pricing, they might lose to Huawei.

I find the switches like CX 6200 and up, and the zero-touch provisioning through the management console to be valuable features. The solution is widely applicable to businesses like mine, thanks to its flexibility and compatibility with our warranty structure in South Africa.

There isn't much room for improvement. A more granular breakdown in debugging would be beneficial. Apart from that, not much is needed.

I have used the solution for ten years now.

I would rate it probably seven out of ten in terms of stability. It's good, however, I don't know. On a one to ten scale, it's wonderful.

That's difficult to answer because the switch is very similar to other switches. So, I would rate it about a seven out of ten.

Regarding HP tax, there's nothing wrong with the tech. The tech is fine. Their tech support is good.

Neutral

I have done a comparison between Huawei, Cisco, Aruba, Arista, and Mellanox. Since we have everything with HPE, it makes more sense for us to stick with Aruba.

It all depends on what I want to do. Zero-thread provisioning is really easy. However, stacking through zero-dash provisioning is quite complicated. It hardly ever works properly. It's always best for me to do the stacking before I send it through and then do the template push after.

I find it to be middle to high. It's not always affordable, but they're losing the pricing market against Huawei, let's just put it like that.

I have done a comparison between Huawei, Cisco, Aruba, Arista, Mellanox.

The product rating is seven out of ten. I have integrated artificial intelligence with Aruba switches. As they haven't launched AI in our region yet, it's limited. However, I can recommend Aruba switches to other users.

I use Aruba Switches in Sri Lanka for their flexibility and reliability. The switches are affordable and have a warranty and compatibility with various solutions. They are suitable for both SMB and enterprise levels.

The features I find most valuable in Aruba Switches are their flexibility, reliability, and affordability. They offer multiple features and solutions that are compatible with existing systems. The lifetime warranty is a major advantage. Aruba Switches provide good security functionalities and quality of service.

The switches are quite good. The main competition in the market is Cisco, and to date, I do not have any significant suggestions for improvement from my use.

I have more than ten years of experience working with Aruba Switches.

The stability of Aruba Switches is very good, and I would rate it between eight and nine out of ten.

The scalability, in my opinion, is around seven to eight out of ten. There is room for improvement even though it is generally good.

I find that technical support is available, especially during the warranty period. However, it sometimes requires waiting for assistance.

Neutral

The initial setup for Aruba Switches is easy and straightforward.

From my experience, the pricing of Aruba Switches is competitive.

I would definitely recommend Aruba Switches to others. 

Overall, I rate the solution between eight and nine.

Positive

We use Aruba Switches primarily as access switches, which are employed to provide network access to users. These switches are part of our existing infrastructure, replacing older models that have become damaged due to aging.

Aruba Switches help by providing a greater number of switch ports, offering better speed and more bandwidth to the users. This enhances the network's capacity, allowing for an aggregation of users without degradation in performance.

The Aruba Switches are valuable because they come with a large number of switch ports by default, including forty-eight ports with each being a one-gig port. 

They also include additional ports for SFP modules, enhancing connectivity with the potential to support up to ten GB SFP modules. 

Additionally, the speed of the processor allows for quicker boot-up times compared to Cisco switches.

A challenge is the process required to reset the switches, which involves using two pins in tiny holes. An easily accessible button for resets would be a better design. The configuration aspect, although I have a personal learning curve since I come from a Cisco background, it might be complex for those transitioning from different systems.

We have been providing services for Aruba Switches for at least five years or more.

I would rate the stability of Aruba Switches at eight or nine out of ten. However, they are more susceptible to power interruptions. Proper power protection is essential for maintaining their stability.

I am uncertain about the scalability due to prior issues experienced in extending networks from Aruba's trunk ports. This may be due to configuration shortcomings on our end.

We haven’t had reason to contact Aruba's support, as the switches work reliably until they need replacing.

Positive

Cisco Switches were previously used, but due to budget considerations, Aruba was chosen for its affordability while still offering similar features.

The setup, in terms of configuration, requires an understanding of Aruba's command line, which differs from Cisco. Once familiar with it, it's manageable, especially since we copy configurations.

Typically two engineers handle the installation and configuration tasks. However, if one engineer understands the configuration well, they can manage both installation and configuration.

Aruba Switches are cost-effective compared to Cisco switches. This is affirmed by the customer's choice to procure Aruba over Cisco.

Cisco is another vendor we considered. Aruba was chosen due to its affordability and its close feature parity with Cisco.

Ensure that the power supply to the switches is protected with a UPS to prevent damage from power outages. Additionally, proper ventilation and cleanliness must be maintained to prevent dust accumulation. Aruba Switches offer a viable alternative to Cisco for those needing reliable performance at a lower cost.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The primary use cases for Aruba Switches are for campus networks and data center stackable switch solutions.

Aruba Switches have provided significant improvements to my organization by offering robust networking solutions without the need for additional licenses.

The most valuable features of Aruba Switches include the dual control plane, stackable features such as stack V6 and VSF stacks. Additionally, the switches work with all necessary features out of the box, without requiring additional licenses.

Aruba Switches don't need licenses to activate features and work straight out of the box, which is an advantage over some competitors. This implies less room for complaints compared with other solutions.

I have used Aruba Switches for about five years.

The stability of Aruba Switches is high, as rated ten out of ten.

Aruba Switches offer high scalability, receiving a ten out of ten rating.

The customer service and support from Aruba are rated ten out of ten.

Positive

We work with Cisco and Juniper where extra licenses are often needed to activate features, which is not the case with Aruba Switches.

The initial setup was easy.

Aruba Switches are rated six out of ten when it comes to pricing, which means they might be more affordable compared with other vendors since they do not require additional licensing for features.

Other solutions that could be evaluated include Microsoft tools, AWS, and Juniper.

I recommend Aruba Switches as they are more affordable compared to other vendors and do not require additional licensing for our customers.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

Neutral