Cisco FabricPath Reviews

The typical use cases for Cisco FabricPath in my environment is that it's better than STP spanning tree protocols, doesn't block redundant links, and gives us active-active links that increase our bandwidth and provide good load balancing.

I find stability to be the most effective feature of Cisco FabricPath; it is stable.

Cisco FabricPath has good scalability; I don't have any problems with scalability as I can add any switches or distributors without any problem.

I utilize the multipath routing architecture feature in Cisco FabricPath, and it's good in load balancing.

Cisco FabricPath's compatibility to support Dynamic Layer 2 multipath routing in complex virtualized environments is good; I don't have any problems with it.

Nothing comes to mind regarding metrics for using the Layer 2 multipath routing feature; it was good, and there were no problems at all with Cisco FabricPath.

Cisco FabricPath's integration with Cisco Nexus works with virtual port channel (VPC) and is good for dual home servers and edge switches. We are using VPC in every layer of the Nexus center.

Implementing Cisco FabricPath positively impacted my organization by providing minimum downtimes as the service is always up; everything is working properly with the VPC and Cisco FabricPath.

I have experienced operational efficiencies with Cisco FabricPath that are 200% better than the old legacy equipment and protocols.

In future updates, I would prefer to see features such as more AI functionality or better integration added to Cisco FabricPath; more AI would be useful.

I have been using Cisco FabricPath for one year.

It was good and easy to install Cisco FabricPath.

Based on my experience with technical support from Cisco, they are helpful and responsive; they respond based on severity. If I set the severity to medium, they respond with medium priority, and if it's critical, they respond very fast. I opened a ticket about Cisco wireless yesterday, and I am waiting today and tomorrow to see the problem with Cisco.

I would rate Cisco support 8.5 out of 10. It's closer to 9.

Positive

I have not previously used any different solutions before Cisco FabricPath. I committed to Cisco, bought Nexus, implemented VPC and Cisco FabricPath, and everything works properly.

The deployment of Cisco FabricPath required about two days, one day I think because we weren't in a hurry.

About four or five people took part in the installation of Cisco FabricPath.

We were using outside help from a third-party operation company called C when deploying this solution.

Cisco is somewhat expensive, but it provides good quality products and operations, so I can't complain about licensing cost and setup costs.

There is room for improvement in terms of pricing for the Cisco solution. They are somewhat good at the starting point, but when you get the license and such, it becomes very expensive.

There are no extra expenses in addition to the standard licensing fee, but there are two licenses: a DNA license and a network license. Additionally, many products have subscriptions, making it very expensive when you bundle all together.

I have evaluated other options such as Huawei and HPE, which have M-LAG, the same principle as VPC and Cisco FabricPath, but it's a standard.

We are a premium customer of Cisco, not a partner.

Approximately two or three users from the operation company work with Cisco FabricPath in shifts; they do manage it effectively.

I don't think I have implemented the feature of automatic path selection and fault recovery in Cisco FabricPath. I doubt it works.

Cisco FabricPath does not require any maintenance or troubleshooting from my side.

After implementing Cisco FabricPath, I have not lost money during downtimes because when links go down, I am in an airport, and I don't have problems with downtimes when Cisco FabricPath works fine with VPC, so it's cost-effective.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Cisco FabricPath a 9.

On-premises

We are using Cisco FabricPath as part of our network transformation program. We identify key network requirements, find bottlenecks, and assess congestion issues. We determine where new switches need to be deployed to manage current traffic. Based on our assessments, we prepare a report detailing how many switches are required and what transformations need to be implemented in the client network infrastructure. We prepare a bill of materials that outlines the necessary products for procurement, implementation, or upgrades. We then procure items through our strategic vendors and handle installations, configurations, and service delivery.

This solution satisfies business requirements by offering a comprehensive assessment covering pricing, cost, and technical capability aspects. Some vendors may offer equipment at a lower cost, but Cisco distinguishes itself with superior service post-procurement and robust features. Although other vendors might claim to offer many features, these features could compromise the overall quality. Cisco is the best choice in terms of cost, quality, and post-procurement services.

In Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia and Malaysia, and in the Latin America region, delivery times can be quite lengthy. This is challenging in terms of logistics and customs. Additionally, parts availability in these regions needs improvement to address hardware failure situations, such as the availability of parts like a power cable.

I have been using Cisco switches for nearly eight years.

Cisco FabricPath is stable. Any latency issues are due to the kind of solution deployed or its improper load management, not due to the product itself.

The solution is fully scalable. I have not encountered any problems in terms of scalability.

Cisco provides excellent support. If I were to rate their customer service on a scale from one to ten, I would give it a nine.

Positive

The installation process is not complex. Switches and routers have similar procedures, and understanding the product allows for smooth installation. Any issues during installation can be resolved with Cisco support.

We require at least two skilled individuals for the installation, especially for mission-critical requirements, even if dealing with ten Cisco products.

While pricing is slightly on the higher side, the overall assessment, which includes cost and technical capabilities, often favors Cisco. Products like Cisco might be priced higher, but they offer the right technical functionalities and maintain a strong brand image. This results in customer satisfaction despite the higher cost. Licensing is generally on a yearly basis.

The main areas for improvement are availability, delivery time, and the supply chain aspect. AI integration is an area where there is vast potential, and implementing AI could help overcome existing bottlenecks in the solution. My current job title is Program Manager. My overall rating for Cisco FabricPath is nine.

On-premises

I use Cisco FabricPath for network connectivity and Ethernet switches, specifically Layer three switches like the 3750 series. My environment requires advanced network traffic monitoring and reliable network performance. I have had experience with other brands like HP, but I find that Cisco provides significant advantages in speed and network monitoring.

One of the most valuable features of Cisco FabricPath is its protocol freedom, which allows me to use multiple protocols at a time, such as Spanning Tree to prevent loops in the network. It also offers tools to prioritize network traffic and direct traffic to specific MAC addresses. 

Additionally, the reliability of Cisco enhances my overall network efficiency by reducing the need for switch restarts and helping me isolate issues from other network tools I use. The improved speed and monitoring capabilities are evident when compared to my previous experience with HP.

The main issue I face is the cost. Cisco networks are flexible yet expensive. I have observed that many features offered by other companies can work perfectly and are cheaper. 

Although I prefer Cisco due to its standard and reliability, the high cost is a barrier to easily upgrading our network infrastructure.

I have been using Cisco FabricPath for more than 15 to 18 years.

I frequently assess stability and monitor the network before and after upgrades, conducting audits by our professionals. Stability has consistently earned a rating of nine and a half out of ten.

Cisco FabricPath is easy for me to scale for a large number of users. My team gains knowledge daily and implements new rules and policies independently. We accept challenges and manage scalability effectively within our environment.

I did not purchase official support or license contracts from Cisco, so I haven't contacted them for assistance. I rely on online resources to resolve any issues I encounter.

Positive

Before using Cisco, I relied on HP for my networking needs. However, due to the advantages such as higher speed and more in-depth network monitoring offered by Cisco, I transitioned to their products.

Setting up Cisco FabricPath is not very difficult for individuals who are familiar with Cisco's basic features. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the setup difficulty an eight.

My team handles the deployment independently, utilizing both online resources and practical experience. We do not require outside professionals.

By planning two-year cycles for switch replacements, I find Cisco cost-effective as I do not incur any replacement costs within that period. Even if a switch is operational at the end of its planned life cycle, I still upgrade to a new one.

Cisco solutions are expensive, and because of that, moving to new upgrades is challenging due to cost considerations. For licensing, I budget approximately $100 per user annually and project future upgrades to increase the cost to around $260 per user. As I have over 1,500 fixed nodes, this would entail a substantial expense.

I am exploring both upgrades and cost-effective solutions, considering various options to enhance our infrastructure efficiently.

Cisco’s professional training and certification are high-end and costly, which makes it unaffordable for our engineers despite their experience. Therefore, relying on practical experience over certifications is a path we must navigate. I would rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

On-premises

Cisco FabricPath is used mainly for Layer 2 management in our organization. It manages VLANs and is part of our legacy system.

I have found it very beneficial because Cisco FabricPath ensures resilience and prevents collisions or loops on the network, maintaining stability. It is able to identify network flipping and acts as a preventative measure by disabling interfaces causing network instability.

We are phasing off Cisco FabricPath due to outdated protocols. The fault isolation mechanism in FabricPath is not as effective as the newer technology, Cisco ACI. Hence, we are transitioning to ACI.

I have used this solution for ten years.

I have not personally done a Cisco FabricPath installation. In the past, installations could take up to a day or half a day. While initial lab deployments took 20 to 30 minutes, putting it into production to ensure proper discovery and no network conflicts could take two to four hours.

Cisco FabricPath provides stability by ensuring resilience, preventing collisions, and avoiding loops on the network. However, it is being phased out in favor of newer technology due to its outdated protocols.

Cisco FabricPath has proven effective for network scalability in our organization.

We primarily use Cisco products due to their cost-effectiveness, stability, and scalability. We are not heavily reliant on other solutions.

The team responsible for Cisco FabricPath deployment is large, but only requires one person to handle the installation due to their expertise.

The network team has found Cisco FabricPath beneficial in maintaining network resilience and stability.

I would rate Cisco FabricPath as a five out of ten and would recommend it to smaller networks that do not have the funds for the latest technology.

On-premises

I have about eight years of experience working with Cisco FabricPath. I was initially a final customer and integrator, and now I'm a freelancer and consultant. I work with many Cisco environments, including CyberArk and various client endpoints. Many of my customers are clients of Cisco, and they often test integrations with other companies to interface with Cisco solutions.

Cisco FabricPath is very fast, stable, extendable, and scalable. It doesn't have issues with patches or problems because it's built on the stable NXOS operating system. In a scenario using FabricPath, the spin and leaf architecture is beneficial. For example, we can use two separate spine switches like 9980s and multiple leaf switches as access switches. 

These leaf switches are connected using VPC between them, with each switch separated and not directly connected to the spine. This setup improves data center architecture by allowing two ways to arrange destinations, connecting the first connection to the first spine and the second to the second spine. The spines are configured as a virtual chassis. In FabricPath, we can enhance VXLANs, VPNs, and integrate with Cisco ISE for user authentication. It can also be configured with WLC to manage wireless technology, depending on the client's architecture.             

Cisco FabricPath can be integrated into data centers and remote sites. For example, in a bank, we can extend the architecture to remote branches by implementing switches connected to the first and second spine for redundancy. This setup allows for VXLAN, VLAN, and SGT for user authentication. We can also use wireless technology through the data plane and route it on L3. This setup provides scalability and visibility. This technology is deployed in the USA, France, and Europe. For instance, BNP Paribas in France uses this technology.

I have experience of using Cisco FabricPath for eight years.

As for stability, I would rate it a perfect ten out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of Cisco FabricPath as a nine out of ten.

The technical support for Cisco FabricPath is excellent.

Positive

The initial setup of Cisco FabricPath is not complex. With the help of the guide, even an engineer without much network expertise can deploy it. For engineers with solid skills, deployment is straightforward. 

In my experience, FabricPath is typically deployed on-premises in data centers, physically. It's part of the cloud infrastructure but operated in a physical data center environment rather than on a cloud platform like AWS or Azure.

In terms of operational costs, FabricPath has provided stability and ease of deployment, especially when integrating with other solutions like OTP for virtualization or setting up backup data centers.

The pricing of Cisco FabricPath can be quite high depending on the architecture, but it's justified by the stability it offers.

We have configured Cisco FabricPath mainly for allocating to VMware ESXA servers. We are utilizing only a few ports out of 90 and using a maximum of ten nodes.

Cisco FabricPath operates with minimal errors. Initially, we faced a hardware issue that was resolved by replacing the switch, leading us to take regular backups of zone details. Redundancies are in place to ensure service continuity if one switch is down. This prevents significant customer access issues.

Currently, there are no issues or suggestions for improvement as everything is working smoothly.

I have been working with Cisco FabricPath for more than seven years within the same project.

The stability of Cisco FabricPath is rated ten out of ten; there are no issues.

I rate Cisco FabricPath's scalability nine out of ten based on its strong capability to expand.

Cisco's technical support is rated ten out of ten, indicating excellent service.

Positive

The initial setup of Cisco FabricPath is simple and not complicated.

Pricing and related discussions are handled by the sales team, not my team.

The main competitor to Cisco FabricPath in the market is Brocade.

The overall rating for Cisco FabricPath Fast is ten out of ten. 

Cisco is preferable compared to its competitors. I can recommend Cisco FabricPath to other users.

On-premises

I am using Cisco FabricPath in my data centre operations for management, monitoring and trend setup.

The most beneficial feature of Cisco FabricPath for network performance is its reliability. We connected different fabrics and servers to different storage and it worked very well. It is also stable and scalable. 

Cisco FabricPath has room for improvement in areas like technical support and design. There has been no progress on updates. Some extra features like artificial intelligence would be beneficial. We partnered to create a design but had to change the environment to fit our needs.

The pricing of the solution can also be improved. 

I have been using Cisco FabricPath for the past fifteen years.

Cisco FabricPath is a highly stable solution. 

At present, there are two thousand workstations and the solution is being used everyday in our organisation.

For technical support, we work with a local partner who contacts support directly when needed. 

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the initial setup of Cisco FabricPath a ten as it was straightforward. For customers, it might vary. We deployed it in our database, on premises. The deployment took about one week. 

We are a large organization, so we had to open a ticket for manual support. We bought it from a reseller, but we did the configuration ourselves, which took one week. Approximately two thousand workstations use Cisco FabricPath in our organization. We use it every day.

Cisco FabricPath has improved our cost efficiency and network management ROI. It wasn't difficult to set up. We upgrade our equipment every three to five years, so it's worth the investment. Integrating it with our existing network infrastructure had no difficulties.

I rate the pricing a seven out of ten, as it's a bit expensive. It would be better if the price were lower, but we prioritize quality over cost.

Before Cisco FabricPath, we used a different solution, including EMC and NetApp. We switched to Cisco for better features.

I would recommend Cisco FabricPath to others. Overall, I rate it an eight out of ten.

On-premises

The tool makes it easy to manage multi-layer networking and increases network efficiency. I haven't faced any challenges in integrating it into our existing infrastructure. 

Cisco FabricPath's pricing is expensive. 

I have been using the product for eight years. 

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

I rate Cisco FabricPath's scalability a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's ease of deployment an eight out of ten. It took two to three hours to complete. 

I rate the product's pricing a ten out of ten. Cisco switches cost around 15,000 dollars, and DNS licenses cost around 25,000 dollars. The total amount is 45,000 dollars, which is too expensive. 

Cisco FabricPath is suitable for enterprise businesses. I recommend it because it can increase data center efficiency and is easy to use with stable Cisco devices. I rate it a nine out of ten. 

On-premises

Cisco devices have consistently demonstrated high reliability and security. The acquisition of Meraki by Cisco has enhanced its capabilities, particularly in enterprise access points. The flexibility offered by Meraki, allowing remote management of access points, has significantly benefited Cisco. Overall, Cisco devices have played a crucial role in our network, and the addition of Meraki has further strengthened its position.

The durability, flexibility, and security of Cisco devices are notable. Particularly with switches, the capability to implement multiple VLANs and easily aggregate the network has been advantageous. The ability to have different VLANs and aggregate the network without complications is a key feature of Cisco FabricPath.

In terms of the series, I find that the integration with other teleconferencing applications needs to be more seamless. I have suggested to Cisco that the endpoint device should allow joining calls from Microsoft Teams, Zoom, and other teleconferencing applications. Additionally, I appreciate the recent inclusion of breakout sessions in the Cisco Webex application, which enhances its relevance in the networking field.

I have been using Cisco FabricPath for the past 15 years. 

Cisco FabricPath is highly stable, and I would rate its stability at 8.5 on a scale of one to ten, with one being low and ten being high.

The scalability of Cisco FabricPath is impressive, allowing seamless expansion from one to any desired number. Cisco has effectively addressed scalability concerns.

We switched to Cisco for the firewall from Sophos. The decision was influenced by the ease of maintenance, flexibility, and seamless integration with endpoint protection, making it a preferable choice.

I find it relatively easy to use, but it requires some basic knowledge. I would rate it around seven out of ten in terms of user-friendliness.I operate it, and the deployment took a few hours

We didn't use a third party for the deployment, and the team size varied between one and four people, depending on the defined actions. Maintenance requires one to ten people based on the network size, with smaller networks needing fewer people and larger enterprises potentially requiring more.

It is very expensive.

I would overall rate the solution 8 out of 10. 

Hybrid Cloud

We have the solution installed in many data centers, configured in spine-leaf technology configured with Nexus. We use FabricPath and VXLAN to make our infrastructure reliable in different data centers. We have multiple layers to our environment. Data Centers A to C are connected with fiber, and we used FabricPath to enhance our data center in spine-leaf technology six to seven years ago. Internally, we had VRF to separate our routing table. We use many virtualization environments, not only Cisco, but we especially use Cisco to expand layer 2 and layer 3.

For us, there is a change between a single data center with different IP addresses to a spam data center, where the VLAN could be extended between the two, so we are able to grant the service with high availability. We can also enhance our service line with disaster recovery.

We are working on layer 3 integration to completely expand our preferred center. At the moment, we are using VRF on an internal switch, so layer 3 does not have higher availability. I want to see that improve.

We have used Cisco FabricPath for the last five or six years, and we have it installed in our data center.

FabricPath is stable. Problems come when you try to integrate a different service or something else.

The solution is very scalable because we can add new data centers by simply adding a leaf. My company has approximately 1,000 users, and we are growing year by year.

We use tech support when we need to, and we usually get a good answer.

The initial setup was slightly complex. We required around 60% of our staff to deploy the solution.

At the moment, we are looking to deploy FabricPath on-premises. We are extending the private cloud to the customer. From our data center, we are connected with Azure and Amazon. We want to create a solution like a cloud, where our data center appears as a cloud for the customer.

Before choosing FabricPath, get the right design initially to support the right tools. I rate FabricPath an eight out of ten.

On-premises