Carrier-grade NAT is the purpose of using A10 Networks Thunder ADC at Turk Telekom Mobile.
Senior Network Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Solved our CGNAT performance issues and provides good scalability
Pros and Cons
- "The Deterministic CGNAT feature is valuable for us."
- "It solved the CGNAT performance issues and, within two years, it had no problems and no outages."
- "It scaled well for our numbers, up to 3 million subscribers for our most crowded region but I would like to see the same scalability numbers for the virtualized version as well."
- "It scaled well for our numbers, up to 3 million subscribers for our most crowded region but I would like to see the same scalability numbers for the virtualized version as well."
What is our primary use case?
How has it helped my organization?
It solved the CGNAT performance issues and, within two years, it had no problems and no outages.
What is most valuable?
The Deterministic CGNAT feature.
What needs improvement?
I would like to see the scalability numbers for the virtualized version which are comparable to those I noted in my answer on "Scalability."
Buyer's Guide
A10 Networks Thunder ADC
May 2026
Learn what your peers think about A10 Networks Thunder ADC. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2026.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
For how long have I used the solution?
One to three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Every six months we made active-passive changes and upgraded to the latest version of the firmware. But we didn’t have stabiliy issues.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It scaled well for our numbers, up to 3 million subscribers for our most crowded region.
How are customer service and support?
Technical support was mostly provided by another company, but A10 also responded our questions on time and accurately.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We used F5 load-balancers for the same purpose before, but those devices weren’t meant to be built for CGNAT. F5 devices built for CGNAT were also functioning well according to PoC tests.
How was the initial setup?
It was easy. The CLI of the devices are universal and we had to make the solution as simple as possible in order to get scalability.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
F5.
What other advice do I have?
I would advise doing comprehensive PoC tests for your specific purpose, for all products.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Network Engineer at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
A cost-effective and highly scalable ADC for enterprises seeking advanced load-balancing features
Pros and Cons
- "A10’s ADCs is a solid, high-performance platform."
- "However, the future might not be bright for this company, and I highly suggest that existing and potential users follow the progress of their legal battle with Brocade."
Valuable Features:
One of the main advantages of A10’s line of ADCs is that they offer an all-inclusive licensing scheme for their products. This scheme enables enterprises to save significantly on costs, and makes managing licenses easier. A10’s ADCs is a solid, high-performance platform. It supports advanced traffic management and scripting features and broad set of security features using a third-party web application firewall. Lastly, A10’s ADCs have IPv6 support which gives it an edge over other offerings in the market should IPv6 functionality be required.
Room for Improvement:
Though A10 has a solid offering, they have an on-going legal battle with Brocade. Depending on how this plays out eventually, this is a risk that must be evaluated carefully. Support can also be a problem if you are in the United States, as its main contact centers are in Asia. Application integration with third-party development tools is also a problem, as there are limited integration options available. Finally, A10’s products has limited web acceleration support for mobile users. This can be a problem if the application is intended for this purpose, but custom scripting is available to help alleviate this issue.
Other Advice:
Overall, A10’s ADCs are a good product with the price many companies can afford and have features that even some high-end ADCs. I recommend it for those companies looking for advanced features offered by the product yet wants to keep costs down. However, the future might not be bright for this company, and I highly suggest that existing and potential users follow the progress of their legal battle with Brocade. Long term support might suffer if they lose their case, which a cause of concern for both existing and future customers.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Buyer's Guide
Download our free A10 Networks Thunder ADC Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: May 2026
Product Categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)Popular Comparisons
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway
NGINX Plus
Fortinet FortiADC
Radware Alteon
Kemp LoadMaster
F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition
VMWare Avi Load Balancer
LoadBalancer Enterprise
Barracuda Load Balancer ADC
Amazon Elastic Load Balancing
Akamai Ion
Array APV Series
Buyer's Guide
Download our free A10 Networks Thunder ADC Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- Do you recommend A10 Networks Thunder ADC?
- When evaluating Application Delivery Controllers, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- Comparison Between Kemp LoadMaster and Load Balancer.org
- Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
- What are your daily F5 BIG-IP LTM use cases?
- Why do I need an ADC solution?
- What is the best ADC solution?
- Why is Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) important for companies?














