OpenText Network Node Manager centralizes network management, offering comprehensive topology mapping and monitoring across diverse environments. Its focus on enhancing visibility and providing detailed analytics makes it suitable for handling enterprise-level network complexities.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| OpenText Network Node Manager | 5.4% |
| Cisco DNA Center | 8.7% |
| DataMiner | 5.0% |
| Other | 80.9% |
| Type | Title | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Network Management Applications | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Product | Reviews, tips, and advice from real users | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText Network Node Manager vs Cisco DNA Center | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText Network Node Manager vs Cisco Catalyst Center | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText Network Node Manager vs Fortinet FortiManager | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Title | Rating | Mindshare | Recommending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NetScaler | 4.2 | 2.9% | 91% | 107 interviewsAdd to research |
| Cisco DNA Center | 4.0 | 8.7% | 90% | 44 interviewsAdd to research |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 8 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 1 |
| Large Enterprise | 11 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 96 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 33 |
| Large Enterprise | 69 |
OpenText Network Node Manager is designed for managing networks by offering functionalities such as root cause analysis, fault management, and event handling. It accommodates both physical and virtual devices, and supports integration with enterprise-level hardware. Users benefit from its customizable integration capabilities and its capacity to generate insightful visualizations that facilitate decision making in network operations. Users also appreciate its efficient alerting systems and centralized information management that improve network visibility and generate comprehensive reports and metrics. Despite room for improvement in areas like routing protocol management and interface modernization, it remains vital for IT managers and admins in their network monitoring tasks. However, it should address scalability issues and enhance its technical support and integration with more server types, including NAC.
What Features Make OpenText Network Node Manager Stand Out?In industries requiring robust network management solutions, OpenText Network Node Manager is implemented to handle expansive device counts and complex configurations. It is particularly effective for network operations teams managing regional infrastructures, supporting comprehensive monitoring and management across diverse network environments.
OpenText Network Node Manager was previously known as Micro Focus Network Node Manager, Network Node Manager, HPE Network Node Manager.
IPC, Exelon, VivaCom,
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Performanc Monitoring and Application Architect at Hewlett Packard Enterprise | 4.0 | I've used OpenText Network Node Manager for over six years; it's stable, integrates well, and automates network discovery, though setup can be time-consuming and topology support is limited. Overall, it's effective for SNMP-based network monitoring and event correlation. |
| Senior Engineer at Elm Co. | 4.0 | I use OpenText Network Node Manager i for network monitoring and diagnostics. It excels in root cause analysis and event handling, though the interface is outdated and needs improvement. We're considering other options like SolarWinds for future use. |
| Delivery Manager at We R Tech | 4.5 | I use OpenText Network Node Manager i to monitor network infrastructure and devices, finding its map topology feature valuable for mapping CIs. While customers switched from SolarWinds for easier topology creation, the addition of AI options would enhance it further. |
| Network Team Lead at Atlas Security | 4.0 | We use OpenText Network Node Manager i to manage endpoints and network devices, appreciating its vendor adaptability and customization. However, it lacks integration with some NAC servers and could improve topology clarity and reporting without external tools. |
| Senior Engineer at Elm Co. | 3.5 | I find this solution stable for fault and availability but unstable for performance and lacks traffic visibility. While setup is easy, smart plug-ins are challenging, and support is poor. It's not cheap and requires a special team. I rate it 7/10. |
| Deputy Manager Information Security at Central Depository Company of Pakistan | 3.5 | I found Micro Focus Network Node Manager offers good fault monitoring. However, I experienced poor traffic visibility, performance issues, and challenging smart plugin setup. Technical support is also bad for this expensive solution. |
| Integration Consultant at Multilynx | 3.5 | I use this enterprise solution for its scalability and fault management, rating it 7/10. Despite improved customer service, I find it not user-friendly, mainly due to non-customizable dashboards, making my experience less than great. |
| PM at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees | 4.0 | I use this stable tool for virtual server monitoring, integrating alerts with ServiceNow. Despite being satisfied, I experience slow, undertrained customer support and find the cost, especially for modules, too high. |
| General Manager at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees | 3.0 | I've used this stable and scalable network monitoring solution for seven years. However, I encounter issues with some modules and unhelpful customer service, leading me to consider migrating to SolarWinds. I rate it a six out of ten. |
| PM at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees | 4.0 | I find this solution stable and mature, centralizing my network monitoring. However, support is slow, documentation flawed, and setup tricky. It's expensive, but I'd still recommend it with an 8/10 rating. |
I remember working with OpenText Network Node Manager at my previous company. I am now working at a different company focusing on data center migrations and DR preparation. In my current role, I have exposure to various tools including OpenText Network Node Manager, SolarWinds, and NNMi.
Currently, I am using OpenText Network Node Manager and NNMi for network management.
NNMi is an OpenText product and serves as the OpenText Network Node Manager monitoring tool.
OpenText Network Node Manager is used for network monitoring of switches, routers, firewalls, load balancers, and all network devices. It can support any SNMP protocol.
The advantages of OpenText Network Node Manager stand out because it can build the topology, Layer 2 topology, and Layer 3 automatically once devices are added, connecting them together, such as device one, for interface one, connected with interface one on another device.
The integration capability of OpenText Network Node Manager is excellent because it integrates directly, and I can configure the integration to feed the CMDB, from where I can get all information from network monitoring into the CMDB, linking it with the infrastructure and correlating events.
I use advanced fault monitoring and management features in OpenText Network Node Manager for topology and fault monitoring, as it can alert or generate an event if the value exceeds or falls below a predefined threshold for SNMP traps.
The predictive analytics impact planning and optimization strategies because the product can be linked with another product for analytic analysis, allowing me to see the interface utilization trend and proactively take action if the utilization increases.
The automated network discovery features and topology mapping in OpenText Network Node Manager have a positive impact. It supports a bundle with another product for NetFlow to monitor traffic, ports, protocols, and SLAs, and I can build compliance reports to address security vulnerabilities, such as identifying all devices using outdated protocols.
The disadvantage of OpenText Network Node Manager is related to configuration, which is straightforward since it is agentless and solely relies on SNMP protocol, and although it requires some effort, it remains easy to use.
The configuration aspect requires network teams to configure devices to start sending traps, allowing the application to collect them, which makes the implementation time-consuming.
The main issue with OpenText Network Node Manager is not its scalability but its network topology capability limitations, while installation and deployment types are supported across various platforms.
I have worked with OpenText Network Node Manager for more than six years.
OpenText Network Node Manager is very reliable and stable. One node can handle about 10,000 network devices with no issue, which is significantly better compared to the limitation of 1,000 devices in my previous solution.
The scalability of OpenText Network Node Manager is good, but there are limitations in capability, particularly with topology, as it only supports Layer 2 and 3.
The technical support from OpenText varies based on the level you pay for. Community support is available because the product is established, with many knowledgeable supporters.
I would rate support from OpenText as a seven out of ten as it provides good service.
Positive
Installing OpenText Network Node Manager is easy because one of its features allows all-in-one installation with a built-in database on a single server.
I see a return on investment in OpenText Network Node Manager, which is easy to use, although one limitation is that it cannot add non-SNMP devices, making it difficult to trace communications between servers.
OpenText Network Node Manager is affordable.
I would rate OpenText Network Node Manager an eight out of ten, as it is very good, and I appreciate its ability to link faults with network configuration management, allowing me to identify root causes effectively.
Negative
We use the product monitoring network infrastructure, interfaces, and devices.
The most valuable feature is the map topology. We can map CIs by node and present them along with devices.
They should add AI options in the product's next release.
We have used OpenText Network Node Manager i for over ten years.
The platform has good stability.
It is a scalable platform.
You can refer to the knowledge base of the use cases shared by the customers in the product's community.
Our customers have used SolarWinds before. Later, they switched to OpenText Network Node Manager i as it is easier to create a topology map. It automatically implements policy on the devices to monitor.
The product is easy to implement as we work with the network team, which has expertise in network architecture.
The product is inexpensive than SolarWinds.
The platform has a lot of interesting capabilities. Implementation is simplified, in contrast to some products like SolarWinds, where external assistance is often required for meet uploads. It is more inexpensive than other products in the market.
In a specific customer implementation, the complex topology of the customer's network revealed a separate and closed segment at one of their sites. We could not understand the status of the broken network and devices. With the help of NNMi, we got a view of the issues.
The product helps us reduce downtime and improve incident response time by offering remediation options. The tools run automatically, checking the network activities for different areas and time zones. It provides efficient documentation, interface, and integration features.
I rate the product a nine out of ten.
Our company uses the solution to manage all nodes, switches, routers, firewalls, cameras, and IoT, WAPs, IP phones, and many more. It completely manages all of our endpoints and network devices.
The solution tells us when a link goes down or when a device goes offline. For example, we have thousands of cameras and can quickly see when one goes offline on the NNMi. It uses ICMP and SNMP to pull data from that device to report that it is offline. Fault and performance monitoring and reporting of all nodes in the Infra.
We also use the solution for our topology. From there, we can see the map of how all devices are interconnected to one another.
Throughout our company, we have ten to twenty network-supporting engineers and managers who use the solution.
The best feature is the solution's entire credibility with all vendors. When we bring in a Cisco device, the solution has a way of changing its own capabilities to adapt to the Cisco environment. A Moxa device sees the solution as Moxa. When we connect HP devices, the solution is immediately able to manage a 3rd-vendor device in far better ways than Cisco Prime or a Cisco monitoring device. We can easily manage any vendor including Fortinet, Aruba, and Cisco. So the solution is a very good device for network operations management, monitoring, and reporting.
The solution allows for much more modifications or human interventions than the Cisco brand. It gives more room for customization compared to other monitoring servers out there.
The solution should integrate with NAC servers other than only LDAP. The world has evolved so your monitoring device should be able to integrate with other NAC servers. We deployed in December 2022 and version 2022.11 still cannot integrate with NAC servers such as Forescout and Cisco ISE.
The topology maps can sometimes be very clumsy. If you are explaining them to someone, then you need to enlarge them just to prove a point.
Features such as API for third-party integration can be a very good thing.
The reporting needs improvement unless you integrate it with Micro Focus OBM which allows for proper reporting. A small environment that cannot afford OBM is stuck using the solution's inbuilt reporting.
I have been using the solution for seven years.
The solution is stable so stability is rated an eight out of ten.
The solution is not very scalable. We previously used the 10.0 version and it was a hassle. In fact, the vendor was unable to upgrade us directly to 2022.11 so they had to upload what was on 10.0 to the new version.
The scalability is rated a seven out of ten.
The technical support team is awesome. We have been working with Micro Focus a long time and they always have a guy working behind us remotely. They are always available.
Positive
The setup is fair. The whole setup took roughly two weeks, plus the training that was provided. We have a large environment with thousands of nodes, so a smaller environment might take only a few days.
The solution is quite expensive.
SolarWinds NCM is an awesome product. I would rate it a nine out of ten because it is quite better than the solution. It can manage anything. The interface is much easier than the solution. It handles the surge in the latency better than the solution. Better user-interface, interface and device monitoring, better performance monitoring and management and more out of the box monitoring features.
This is a stable solution fit for any infrastructure size. It can be used for monitoring and management in a multi-vendor environment. The solution is the best for you to use if you want to manage nodes from HP, Aruba, Cisco, Fortinet, and FortiGate because it is able to manage different vendors. It has a simple polling architecture making polling and discovery pretty easy.
I rate the solution a seven out of ten.
We're working on fault, availability and performance. We have iSPI on the network for metrics and traffic.
The stability can be improved.
We have been using this solution for six years.
It is stable for fault and availability but unstable for performance and analysis. We are working with the network team, and they have more features regarding the analysis. Micro Focus Network Node Manager is not powered to drill down for traffic visibility.
A special team is required to work on this product, and not everybody can use it. Less than 100 people use this solution, and the network teams are the main users.
The technical support is bad. I rate them a four out of ten. In the past, we opened a case and tried many things to find a solution. Because we have level-one support, we didn't get an expert to fix the issue, and they wasted our time. They spent about two weeks just collecting information.
Neutral
I rate the setup a ten out of ten. It is easy to set up, but there are challenges with the smart plug-ins during setup and configuration. We opened many support cases until we got results.
I do not have details about the licensing costs, but it is not a cheap solution.
I rate this solution a seven out of ten. Using this solution depends on an organization's requirements and environment. For us, we need to cover everything. We need fault, availability, performance, and security. Our challenge is handling, understanding and analyzing the traffic. We've covered the fault and availability and now need an analysis of traffic and behaviour.
Our monitoring and network teams of less than 100 people use this solution. The availability and fault monitoring are good.
Micro Focus Network Node Manager is not the best when it comes to drilling down for more visibility, especially regarding traffic.
Performance and analysis need to be improved as well.
You need a special team to work on this product, and not everyone can use it.
I have five to six years of experience with this solution.
The technical support from Micro Focus is bad, and I would give them a four out of ten. When I contacted them, I had already done several things to try to fix the issue or find a solution, but they kept asking for information such as the version I am using. I needed the expert to provide the solution and not ask for basic information.
Neutral
It's easy to set up, and I would give it a five out of five.
The challenge is with the smart plugins, which are not easy to set up. We faced a lot of issues during the setup and configuration of those and had to open several support cases until we got the results.
It's an expensive solution.
The fault availability is good, and the performance is okay. However, the smart plugin performance for traffic is not as good. So, I would rate Micro Focus Network Node Manager at seven on a scale from one to ten.
We install, integrate, customize and configure this solution for our clients. We are system integrators who resell tools to our customers and we are partners with Micro Focus.
The great thing about this solution is its compatibility for enterprise level organizations. If you need to install 10,000 or even 20,000 devices, it's easy to monitor. The product's fault management is awesome.
I haven't had a great experience with this solution because the dashboards are not customizable and it's not user-friendly. The market has changed and people are now focused on mobile solutions, tablet solutions, or dashboards, which I prefer to use. I'd like to see dashboard customization and customized reports.
I've been using this solution for three years.
The stability is good.
The scalability is great.
The customer service has improved drastically over the past couple of years and I think they're very good now.
Positive
Deployment generally takes around two to three hours. It's a matter of integrating with the databases, and then connecting devices. It's not easy getting the connectivity right and that can be time-consuming because there are lots of configurations required on every device when connecting to the NNM. We use our own technical team for deployment, usually three or four people; two for delivery and two for follow-up support.
I think getting an ROI takes about three years but it depends on the customer and the scenario. For some companies, for example, if one site goes down and nobody is aware of it, the cost can be in the millions. In other scenarios, the loss wouldn't be so great.
The license is a perpetual lifetime license and the subscription is on a yearly basis. It's an expensive product because it's an enterprise-level product with a big team working behind it for batch releases, maintenance releases, version upgrades, maintenance support, and professional services.
I rate this solution seven out of 10.
We are using virtual servers. We have two servers, they are set in fail-over environments. One is active, one is waiting.
I work for a very big enterprise. Any employee could technically access this tool, but only a few of them are interested. Roughly 50 people working in specific departments access this tool — mostly the network operations team.
Currently, we are not using all of the features they provide; just the main tool for monitoring the alerts. The lists are sent to a third-party tool — ServiceNow. It's an umbrella that collects alerts from different tools.
I'm pretty satisfied with this tool. We have some specific devices that are not integrated very well, for example, Barracuda Firewalls. They have to improve this, but this is a specific situation.
It's a good one. It's a stable tool. We do not have any issues stability-wise.
I would say that they definitely need to improve their support features — this is a problem. When I open a ticket, usually they respond very late. Some of the people I negotiate with seem undertrained. They don't know much about the tool; they have to ask their high-level colleagues. This takes a lot of time and it's pretty frustrating to wait so long to form a ticket. They need to be quicker and more knowledgeable.
When we paid for a consultant, it was a very different situation. All of our problems were solved in a very short period of time.
Micro Focus Network Node Manager was already installed when I came to this company. In the future, we may switch to SolarWinds.
I wasn't involved in the pricing, but I think it's quite expensive. For example, we wanted to buy a separate module — a performance and reporting tool; however, our colleagues from the payment section said that it costs too much.
Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.
We are using the solution for network monitoring.
We had some issues with some of the features, some modules are not meeting expectations. Additionally, they need to start following some of the latest trends.
I have been using the solution for approximately 7 years.
It is a stable solution.
It is a scalable product.
When we speak to the customer service about issues that we have been experiencing, they tell us that is how the solution operates, unfortunately, and we have to live with it.
We have approximately 3 technicians doing all the installs and maintenance.
The solution is priced mid-range compared to the competition.
We are thinking about migrating to SolarWinds because of some of the issues we have been experiencing.
I rate Micro Focus Network Node Manager a six out of ten.
We are able to have all network devices in a single place in order to send the alerts to an umbrella tool (Service Now).
The stability is quite good.
It's quite a mature solution.
Technically speaking, I'm facing some issues when monitoring Barracuda firewalls. There is some room for improvement in this area.
The documentation for the initial/upgrade setup present errors sometimes.
This product has been used in our company for ten years, I suppose, however, I have been personally using it only for two or three years.
Regarding stability, we don't face any issues. It's reliable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.
From the very beginning until now, we deployed to two servers in a fail over environment. Therefore, I can't really speak to the scalability of the product.
Technical support could be much better and work much faster.
Typically, is taking some time so solve tickets. If involving a higher level expert is needed, you should wait.
The initial setup is somewhere in between. It's both not so easy, and also not so complex. We have the Linux version. Some years ago we had physical servers and we migrated to virtual ones.
There were some issues and we opened some tickets, however, in the end, they were solved. It's just that there are a few key steps that need to be handled carefully during installation. You need documentation to guide you. However, some of the articles meant to assist were not very accurate. If you're following exact instructions line by line, and you are not getting what is expected, you have to do a bit of problem-solving by yourself.
I don't handle the pricing, however, it's my understanding that the product is quite expensive.
I would recommend the solution to others due to the fact that it's quite stable and mature. That said, there are a few improvements that can be made.
Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.
