Cisco Enterprise Routers Reviews

I use Cisco Enterprise Routers for connectivity and network applications.

I have approximately 300 users for the Cisco Enterprise Routers.

The features of Cisco Enterprise Routers that I find most useful for my networking are the enterprise routing capabilities.

The solution is reliable.

In terms of network performance, the performance is actually very good.

They help with network safety and assist with network security.

Cisco Enterprise Routers are scalable only if using their brand.

Cisco Enterprise Routers can only integrate with standard equipment. If using something non-standard, it will not work. By non-standard, I mean the unknown brands that are not generally used.

There is still room for improvement in performance, quality of service, and security in general.

Cisco Enterprise Routers are not easy to set up. They require special skills and don't have plug-and-play capability.

I have been working with Cisco Enterprise Routers for the last 24 months.

They are stable. I don't have any issues.

For scalability, I would rate it a six. Cisco Enterprise Routers are scalable only when using their brand. When mixing them with other brands, there are issues.

The support for Cisco Enterprise Routers is good.

I would rate the support a seven. Standard support is fine, but for customer-specific issues, there are lead times which can frustrate customers, especially with unique problems.

Cisco Enterprise Routers are slightly expensive. If used as a service, it is affordable. But acquiring the actual equipment is more expensive.

I do not have experience using AI, as we are currently gearing ourselves towards using AI for managing or optimizing the performance of Cisco Enterprise Routers.

I would recommend Cisco Enterprise Routers, but with some qualification, as it is a pricey solution.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 6.

I work in a medium company, focusing on VLAN and security. I use Cisco Enterprise Routers for the network and to implement VLANs.

The best feature regarding security is the shutdown port capability; the fact that you can shut down an unused port is great with Cisco Enterprise Routers.

I use Cisco's traffic prioritization.

I cannot assess the high-performance bandwidth of Cisco Enterprise Routers without knowing the purpose of the call.

I do not use Cisco's integrated security protocols.

I am unable to specify what areas could be improved with Cisco Enterprise Routers.

I have two years of experience with Cisco products.

I cannot provide extensive details, but it is working normally and satisfactorily for me.

I never call Cisco for support because we have everything we need.

Positive

I have experience with Omada Identity.

I have experience with other vendors, specifically TP-Link Omada.

I work with Cisco Enterprise Routers as part of my role.

It is expensive, but I am not the person purchasing the products; I just handle the configuration.

This implementation uses the router and switch, not Cisco Meraki Wireless.

The switch I use is the 2900 series.

The implementation includes Cisco 2900 series and 3500 series, which includes a switch and a router.

I also have experience with Cisco Enterprise Routers.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Cisco Enterprise Routers a 10.

The main use cases for Cisco Enterprise Routers among our customers include typical routing, BGP peering, and SD-WAN usage in some cases.

Our customers using Cisco Enterprise Routers span across different industries, including typical enterprise environments and service provider environments.

The most useful features in Cisco Enterprise Routers are the security features related to the routers themselves and typical routing features.

Regarding security features, Cisco has a long history of security built into the routers themselves, including virtualization options on the routers, the ability to implement managed access lists, tagging on the access level, and using these tags on Cisco firewalls and so on. The VPN integrated within the routers and the ability to handle VPN connections, whether that be LAN to LAN or client-oriented VPN connections, are crucial for Cisco Enterprise Routers.

The Cisco traffic prioritization is definitely helpful, as it's one of the important features within the routers, especially in the enterprise environment. It guarantees bandwidth for business-critical applications.

The only complaint from customers about Cisco is price-wise; they tend to be on the higher side compared to some competition, making it hard to compete in today's market.

Although Cisco has made some movements towards something similar to Meraki products to target price-sensitive users, there is always room for improvement regarding cost.

I have been working with Cisco Enterprise Routers for more than 15 years.

There have been no issues with stability regarding Cisco Enterprise Routers at all.

I don't have any complaints regarding scalability; it's quite scalable.

Due to the years I have been working with Cisco, there have been some bugs and issues encountered with the devices, but the support has been satisfactory and they resolved it eventually. Operationally, there were some bugs and issues, but nothing major that would greatly influence the customer experience.

Cisco's support for routers, especially Cisco Enterprise Routers, is above the competition for sure.

Positive

It is easy to set up Cisco Enterprise Routers. You need some type of experience, but it's generally easy, especially now that everything can be software managed. Cisco is moving away from the command-line interface, making it much easier for general users, though we are power users here, so it should be quite easy for us.

The deployment of a typical Cisco Enterprise Router depends on the enterprise environment.

Our customers have seen return on investment and value for money since implementing Cisco Enterprise Routers. They have been using Cisco equipment for a long period and continue to return to Cisco for replacement technologies and everything else, so they are happy with Cisco equipment.

I don't have any general improvement recommendations for Cisco Enterprise Routers, as I consider Cisco to be performance-wise and quality-wise above the competition.

I would give a warm recommendation about Cisco products. I suggest they start with a validated design and architectural part rather than individual products to reap the benefits.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cisco Enterprise Routers a nine.

There are many use cases for Cisco Enterprise Routers. The space it is used in now focuses on IoT for edge computing. The heavyweight Cisco industrial solutions are used for manufacturing, automation, and similar applications. The lightweight solutions are used for retail locations, stores, banks, and other similar locations. For establishments with numerous locations, Merakis are utilized.

All of the features in the Cisco Enterprise Routers are excellent. Having everything on one pane of glass is excellent as users are able to monitor everything, bringing everything closer to the edge. Users are able to get good feedback to people within the organization who might be monitoring everything.

The security functionality of the Cisco Enterprise Routers is excellent. They are top-notch with security features.

Support can sometimes be overwhelmed, which is common with many service centers.

I still have experience with the Cisco products and recently completed some work with them.

I would recommend using Cisco Enterprise Routers. If you want the top or best solution, then you have to choose Cisco. We work with Junipers and various networking equipment, but nothing comes close to Cisco.

When comparing Juniper and Cisco, there are many components missing in Juniper. It takes more work to set them up. While their security is good, it does not match Cisco's capabilities. They all have their place, but for large companies with numerous locations and strict security measures, Cisco Enterprise Routers are the superior choice.

Merakis are extremely easy to set up, but most companies do not have the IT staff. Even when it comes to phone systems, companies prefer having someone else handle the setup. Our partners set everything in place. Once the licensing is set up, the systems learn from each other and adapt. Users can then see all connections from a single pane of glass and configure as needed.

For industrial routers, some command line control is still necessary, but most operations have moved to a program base.

Cisco Enterprise Routers require more complex setup. Organizations either need certified staff or must bring in external expertise because there are many components involved.

The pricing and licensing of Cisco Enterprise Routers is high, but the quality justifies the cost.

I recommend continuing to move forward with Cisco products as they have no significant flaws. Cisco Enterprise Routers are very sound. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 10.

In my case, I use Cisco Enterprise Routers for voice communication systems, so I need a specific coverage of service between the sites. In our company, we use switches that are validated and certified by our suppliers because if it is not working with them, then we cannot use them. Sometimes, we use Aruba in our company, while at times, we use Cisco, depending on the manufacturer or system supplier. Sometimes, it gets difficult when you mix some things from one supplier to the other, but the product works in the end.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it makes it possible for users to use encryption and decryption since our company aims to achieve transparency, and without it, the other system on which it is used won't support it.

The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required to be made by making it cheaper.

At times, our company needs to exchange the equipment because it is not supported anymore or because it is out of service. When it comes to Cisco Enterprise Routers, and you look at the cost of ownership, there is a need to consider the fact that my company undertakes projects that are on systems that should be running for more than fifteen or twenty years, which is an area that is always difficult. If you must exchange the equipment because it is no longer supported, then it would be nice if Cisco provided discounts for the new products, especially if you stay with the same supplier. In our company, we may use Cisco, Dell, or Aruba, especially in scenarios where Cisco does not allow or fulfill our requirements. They should be hardware exchange contracts when dealing with equipment from Cisco, Dell, or any independent vendor.

I have been using Cisco Enterprise Routers for four years. My company is a platinum partner of Cisco. I use the solution's latest version as described by our company's security policy since nowadays we are not allowed to use or do the migration or upgrade part of routers or switches, and we need to consider exchanging them instead.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven or eight out of ten.

My company mostly deals with small-sized businesses that use the solution.

I rate the technical support a seven or eight out of ten.

Neutral

I would rate the initial setup a seven or eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is a difficult setup phase, and ten is an easy setup phase.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The solution can be deployed in a day. At times, the deployment process may take a week, depending on the other interconnections in an environment.

The return on investment from the product is high, considering factors like availability and the name of the product in the market.

I rate the product's price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

The major purpose of our using Cisco Enterprise Routers is to terminate the 0.2 internet links because we don't use net features on the router. We prefer to configure NAS and other publishing through Cisco activities. We use the routers to create GRE channels with our different sites.

We use Cisco routers, firewalls, switches, and the Cisco Eyes and NAT solution in our environment. I have also done some R&D to implement mass cloud infrastructure for my client.

We're using the ISR series at the moment. The version is 4451 or 4431. These are public routers. We have permitted our major internet links on these routers.

This is an edge device for my organization. Normally, the enterprise company has one or two Cisco routers because they use it for internet termination and PLS termination.

I am using version 16.4 of the ISR router.

It's highly stable. We rarely see any bugs or abnormalities in our Cisco routers, especially for the ISR series. We have used the ASR 1000, and that was highly stable.

You cannot configure internet policies or other options on Cisco routers. If you have a very limited budget, you can't afford two different pieces of equipment, and you can't afford yearly licensing.

I would like Cisco to launch a small business router that has firewall capabilities as well. It would be a great initiative for small businesses.

I would like to see two additional features: a remote access VPN with the MFA, multifactor authentication capabilities. At the moment, the ISR series only supports MFA, but not every company likes to use that tool. I think Cisco needs to consider MFA for the remote access VPN and should incorporate other MFA solutions as well.

I would also like there to be some firewall features included in the routers. I'm not talking about a full-fledged firewall feature, but a limited set of features that can be used on the small and medium-sized enterprise level. These two features would be a great initiative.

I would also like to recommend the licensing feature. Previously, the Cisco licensing model was either a perpetual or annual smart license. Now, Cisco has totally shifted over to the smart licensing feature, and perpetual licenses are about to be eliminated from Cisco. The licensing feature is a bit costly if we compare it to other vendors. The licensing features of the F5 are perpetual, but the support has periodic renewal. The license to use Cisco features like a firewall or the routers are actually yearly based and not perpetual.

The lead times are extremely high. Normally, it's six to eight months initially, and they prolong it to up to one year for new device delivery by Cisco.

If you say you need a brand new router, switch, or fiber from Cisco within one month, you will never get it, unless some stock is readily available with your vendor. Otherwise, it will initially take six to eight months, and then that will be prolonged to one year. This is what we're experiencing with our clients right now.

I have used Cisco Enterprise Routers since 2012.

It's highly scalable, but there is some cost involved. If you need one gig throughput, you don't need to procure another offer. You just need to purchase the throughput license, and you can increase the throughput. These are very costly licenses. 

I would rate the scalability as eight out of ten. 

For the initial setup, I would rate it as 10 out of 10. It's very user-friendly and simple to implement Cisco devices.

Deployment didn't take more than one hour.

Even the command line is very user-friendly. A layman could very quickly understand Cisco's command line.

We're an IT consulting company and we have our own engineers to deploy the solution. We provide IT services to the other companies in our country as well.

There are different series for the routers and different licenses for each series. It depends on which series you're going to choose and which router model you're going to choose in that series. There is a base license, throughput license, and boost performance license.

For a boost performance license, the cost is $2,000 to $2,500.

There is an additional cost for more scalability.

I would rate this solution as nine out of ten. I'm only deducting a point because of the licensing cost. Scalability is very costly. Cisco is going to shift to smart licensing, which means you get the license for a specific period of time, and then you need to incur some cost to renew that license.

I highly recommend Cisco. It's highly stable and highly scalable, which is the reason why they're unable to fulfill orders globally.

Before I would recommend Cisco to someone, I would review the project and business needs. Why do they want to use the Cisco Enterprise router or Cisco equipment? What is the business nature? What are the requirements? What is the budget? These things need to be discussed before suggesting any solution. I am a solution provider, so it's the core business of my company to set up IT infrastructures for the other companies.

I always intend to know what kind of business someone is running, what are their prospects, what are the expectations from the infrastructure, and what is the total budget they want to incur on the infrastructure. For a businessman, IT is just an overload. There's a burden on the budget. If you have a garment business and someone suggests that you buy a $4,000 router, you will say, "Why?"

First of all, analyze your requirement, business, and network, and then I can suggest the best possible solution. It could be Cisco or another third party because if you say, "I have only $1,000 for this IT infrastructure," you will need to buy switches, the router, and everything else for $1,000. You can't even get a small enterprise router in the $1,000 range from Cisco.

In my company, the tool is used mostly in our branches.

The benefit from the use of the product in my company stems from the fact that it is a tool that is considered to be a leader in the market while offering good support and stability, making it an overall good product.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that the product's overall look and feel is good, making it a user-friendly tool.

The product's pricing is an area that is too fuzzy to deal with, in my opinion, making it an area where improvements are required.

The product's deployment phase can be made slightly better and more intuitive.

I have been using Cisco Enterprise Routers for ten to twelve years.

It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Around 110 people, consisting mostly of members of my company's IT team and network administrators, use the solution in my company.

During weekdays or normal days, it is easy to get hold of Cisco's support team, but during holidays or weekends, it becomes challenging and problematic for users to reach the support team. It is important to know that the support offered by Cisco is comparatively better than the support offered by its competitors.

The solution's deployment phase is okay since it is a process that may not seem too easy, but at the same time, one may not experience any hassles.

I rate the product's deployment phase a five out of ten.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

Considering the configuration phase that takes time, the solution can be deployed in a time frame between three to four hours to two or three days.

In comparison with other products, I rate the product's ability to provide my company benefits in terms of time and funding at twelve or thirteen, even if the benchmark you provide is ten to the maximum.

I rate the product's price a six or seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is extremely expensive, and ten is very cheap. Apart from the licensing costs attached to the solution, a user has to pay towards the product's RMA and support costs.

My company's support team, consisting of 20 to 25 engineers, deals with the product's upgrades, failover testing, and everything else.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

The clients are using Cisco Enterprise Routers for normal NATting purposes. The clients usually have it on-premises.

The advantage of Cisco Enterprise Routers is that it is very easy to use and has many options available. Users can utilize CME, data capabilities, IPsec, dual NATting, ISP load balancing, and ACLs for user restrictions.

Regarding VPN connectivity in the product, IPsec is available.

The Quality of Service capabilities in Cisco Enterprise Routers are far better than other products, and implementations depend on the customer's scope of work. When comparing with other routers, Cisco Enterprise Routers is the best solution I have experienced, and it performs its functions exceptionally.

The only disadvantage is that the router comes with specific interfaces, typically two or three, and adding another interface requires an additional card, which increases the cost. Otherwise, everything functions properly. Cisco Enterprise Routers are significantly better than any other router I have used, and we typically recommend Cisco routers to our clients rather than other options.

I have been selling Cisco Enterprise Routers for more than eight years.

Cisco Enterprise Routers are very easy to install. When compared with other products, Cisco Enterprise Routers are simple to install and configure.

Regarding stability, Cisco Enterprise Routers are stable and reliable, with no significant glitches in performance.

In terms of scalability, Cisco Enterprise Routers are easy to scale.

I have never opened a TAC case with Cisco because all documentation can be found easily on Google through the Cisco community. With other products such as FortiGate, I usually open a TAC case whenever I encounter a problem.

Negative

I am partnered with all the popular vendors, but we mostly prefer Cisco Enterprise Routers because it is a reliable product. Although it is expensive, the reliability and ease of use through CLI configuration make it superior to any other product. This is the primary reason we mostly deal with Cisco.

The pricing is not cheap. When we provide quotations to clients, they often comment on the expense. However, we recommend the solution, and after procurement, all clients are satisfied with Cisco Enterprise Routers.

I am comparing Cisco Enterprise Routers to Huawei, Aruba, H3C, and Ruckus.

The failover capability in Cisco Enterprise Routers helps minimize network downtime overall, taking only two to three seconds to switch for ISP failover capability.

The advanced routing features such as BGP are very easy to configure, including OSPF configuration.

In comparison with other vendors such as Aruba and Ruckus, Cisco Enterprise Routers are better due to increased reliability and ease of use, though they remain more expensive. This is the main difference compared to other vendors.

The performance and reliability of Cisco Enterprise Routers merit a rating of 10 out of 10. My overall experience with Cisco Enterprise Routers rates at 10 out of 10.

We primarily use the solution as a router, for virtual routing connections. 

We've been satisfied with the capabilities of the product overall. 

The virtual routing is very good. 

It's not complex to deploy.

The solution is stable and reliable.

It is easily scalable. 

The main issue is there is a backlog in terms of getting any hardware. You might have to wait between eight months and a year to get what you need.

We'd like to see some better UI. It would make it easier for configuration purposes. A graphical user interface would really help. 

I've been working with the solution for 12 years now. 

I've never had issues with stability. Cisco routers are very reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution isn't too scalable. It's not modular. You have to size everything correctly.

A lot of people are using the solution. We use it throughout the city. 

The company itself has about 1000 employees. However, we also have a compound that includes villas and apartments. We are delivering various services using Cisco infrastructure.

In terms of the technical support by Cisco, if I'm opening a ticket or something, or even if I'm calling them, if I have Smart Care, I would get the support in the next business day. If I receive something damaged as per the contract between Cisco and me, I can get quick help.

If even I ask for sizing for a big project, Cisco is going to help. They've already helped us with something similar. They are quite helpful in general.

We use many different Cisco devices. 

Previously, I used Linksys. However, it was a small household device. 

The solution is very easy to set up and implement. It's not an issue at all. As long as you have a design ready to go, everything can happen very fast. 

How long it takes to deploy depends on the routing cables that you are going to handle, however, it's not too long. Usually, it's just one day.

We have two admins managing the product. Of course, we're getting help from the ISP for managing some devices.

The pricing depends on what Cisco is offering and what is available. Unfortunately, right now, the availability of devices is low right now. It can make it get more expensive. 

We are using Cisco now. However, I have heard about Extreme. I'm working to compare Extreme Cloud and Meraki Cloud and want to see what the benefits are.

We're end-users and customers.

I'm the network engineer of Egypt company. I'm responsible for all the infrastructure in the company. I have a lot of Cisco devices. That's what we work with. There are a lot of LAN and WAN and wireless items. 

Mostly we use the 800 series routers. However, we also have a few 500 series and a 190. 

I'd recommend the solution. However, it depends on the size of the business you will implement within. Cisco Meraki is also good. I would advise that as it is amazing and easy to deploy. It's very scalable. 

I would rate this solution eight out of ten. 

There was a need to connect remote offices. They numbered at least 18, which is why we had to deploy routers that also supported SSL and VPNs. We then built this wide area network using MPLS. As a result, we used service providers. They are three MPLS services, and we built an IP-based network for a large area at the time.

I haven't assessed it in that way, they provided us with excellent service. We had very few issues.

I would like to see them improve at least their sales, where they guide their customers on the capabilities of their products. 

Perhaps it's not so much a Cisco problem as it is a system integration problem where they have business partners who come forward. 

I believe they lack uniform training or that it is not enforced, because we found something lacking in designing a solution and then implementing it because, in one or two instances, we thought these guys were clueless.

I would like more training and documentation.

I would like to see the network control section, where we talk about data control and network control, then when we talk about a software-defined network, the support should not be native within routers and even switches. Their software-defined paradigm requires significant improvement.

We have been using Cisco Enterprise Routers since 2014.

It is not the most recent. There is an upgrade cycle that we will begin very soon, beginning next quarter.

Cisco Enterprise Routers are stable.

The issues we had were with the service provider, the internet links, and all or some of the dedicated links, but they were minor because our experience has taught us that if it's a fiber optic backbone deployment, it's pretty sturdy.

However, in our part of the world, the geography we live in, copper wires are still used in some deployments. These can be troublesome.

Cisco Enterprise Routers are quite scalable.

We are leveraging IP everywhere. There is no issue. We can stock up on LAN cards.

Of course, we cannot upgrade the main engine; that requires a product upgrade, which we are considering beginning next quarter.

It's a fairly large company, with around 1,000 people directly benefiting from it. That's just the headquarters; when you factor in the regions and other offices, the total number of people is around 5,000.

It is widely used because it has become our backbone for all IT. We have centrally deployed all of our databases, mail servers, and other systems. It's essentially a continuous deployment architecture.

I would rate the technical support a four out of five.

I have experience with IT service management at the director level. I have never used the product myself, I have been overseeing staff.

I have done a little bit of work in Oracle, Oracle database, and SQL Server, as well as Microsoft, but not IBM.

We have not used System Center SSIS, it was mostly network-centric, and my primary role was in networks rather than service. What I am monitoring is what we are doing at the network level.

SolarWinds was the most frequently used. It has a router family that can be deployed, so we use quite a few of those. Aside from that, we were using an ERP system, and Oracle was the backend there. 

We are primarily using Oracle ERP and then some apps to facilitate our center, which primarily provides advisory services. In order to gain industry insights, we rely more on organizations such as Gartner and others.

We were interested in getting the Point solution at one point; I believe that is what the product was called. I don't recall, but not because we don't run campaigns per se, so we don't really need a CRM system in place. 

We don't because we have a large customer base where we interact with CRM in our current role. Because it is mostly personalized, we use the phone or email.

Integration is something that has always existed, but we only considered it at the ERP level.

I was working on a project where we were doing both pre-implementation and implementation supervision. It was financed by the World Bank. It was in Africa, in a western African country called Ghana, if you're familiar with the name.

We have used McAfee and Semantic as well as other security software. We were also curious about network access control.

We primarily use these drives for storage. Maybe Box is the one we use the most, but we also use box.com and Google Drive to some extent.

We have implemented our own FTP, and we primarily use it with customers.

We don't use Google Hangouts, Google Classroom, or Google Cloud.

They are all based on Linux. There are not many of them. Python is used for front-end programming, and Oracle is used for back-end processing. Oracle has its own, complete with Java.

Oracle Linux, is limited to financials and HR for the ERP portions.

We have been using Red Hat.

For networks, Cisco was everywhere, we used Cisco access control and everything else, including routers and firewalls.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The deployment took six months to a year to complete because the majority of the deployment was done at the headquarters level first, followed by the rollout to the regions once the headquarters deployment was completed. 

The entire project lasted more than a year. It took 12 months to create and get the entire organization connected.

The deployment was done by, a Cisco system integrator.

We have a total staff of approximately 30 people who manage the entire network, including 15 people in the headquarters and the remaining 15 spread across the regions.

The licensing cost is quite reasonable.

They purchased an assortment of items. There was no single vendor. We had problems because there was a mismatch of different vendors, and we had to meet a certain standard. It could have been a variety of other vendors. I wouldn't know what to call them, but one brand that comes to mind is D-Link.

I am running my own consulting company. I don't have a very large setup at this time.

We can easily comply with the industry standards, their hardware is quite robust, and there are a lot of trained resources available in the market to hire. As a result, you are never lost.

I would rate Cisco Enterprise Routers a nine out of ten.