Cisco FabricPath Reviews

We implemented Cisco FabricPath in our networking design. Depending on cost considerations and customer preferences, we may configure Cisco or HP switches accordingly. We aim to deliver a configuration that is both cost-effective and acceptable to the customer.

Cisco FabricPath is highly beneficial for network performance and relatively easy to implement. It also offers straightforward monitoring capabilities.

Cisco FabricPath is functional in both CLI and graphical modes. From an administrator's perspective, having a graphical interface is preferable for its user-friendliness. However, it's important to note that the graphical interface often relies on Java, and compatibility with different versions of Java can be a factor. Older versions of Java may be necessary for compatibility with certain software components. While CLI management is adequate, a graphical interface offers a more intuitive experience, especially in complex environments like FabricPath.

I have been using Cisco FabricPath for over five years.

The solution's stability is good.

I rate the solution’s scalability as eight to nine out of ten. 

Technical support is good.

The initial setup is easy and takes two to three hours to complete. If the design is ready, it takes some hours to deploy.

I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

The solution is neither cheap nor expensive.

I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

I recommend the solution since it is stable and the ROI is good.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The most valuable feature is the switches provided by Cisco FabricPath to users.

I don't see any weakness in the product.

The product lacks AI. AI technology should be involved in Cisco FabricPath's future releases.

I have experience with Cisco FabricPath for about eight or nine years. I am an end user of the solution.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution.

My company has 100 users of the product. I am the administrator of Cisco FabricPath.

I don't use the support. I am from Egypt.

I was previously using switches from 3COM.

Cisco FabricPath has many useful features over any other solution.

The initial setup of Cisco FabricPath was a bit complex. The configuration of the devices was not easy at all.

The setup process was not stable at all, so it took a day or two to deploy a switch, while multilayer switches are very complicated to handle.

The solution falls under the pricier category, but it provides value for the price charged. The exchange rates of USD and the currency of Egypt should be taken into consideration before buying any product.

Our company has to pay additionally for maintenance or support.

It is a very useful device. One must learn about the solution carefully before choosing it. There is a need for individuals to practice and train before using it.

Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We are customers of Cisco and I'm the infrastructure and telecommunications manager. 

Cisco has created a good balance for traffic with this solution. We can select a priority package for these products and give additional bandwidth if we need it. We're not using the load balance, it's the fabric switching that is the most important thing we do.

I'd like to see better integration with SIEM, perhaps to generate more plugins that can adapt to the traffic analyzer. We also have some issues with the technical support because in Mexico the hardware is not always readily available. We had to wait around 50 days for a part. It's crucial to have sufficient stock on hand for your customers. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

We haven't had any issues with stability. We maintain the updates of the firmware and we haven't had any problems in production.

The solution is scalalble, we have around 300 users.

We used to use Avaya but we changed to Cisco because we needed some extra intelligence in the network and Avaya didn't have the hardware for that. 

The initial setup is very easy because we have good engineers. We created a template for our business and we make changes to the solution every two weeks. This is good for us and for the business. The initial deployment took two weeks. 

We have a problem with the licensing costs because all contracts are in American dollars. Mexican pesos have a disadvantage in that market, and it's a problem getting dollars in Mexico. It's also an expensive product for us. 

It's important to understand the core business of your organization, not every organization needs a solution as large as Cisco's. We only use around 30% of what this solution offers. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

The solution provides a broader speed of connectivity for our applications. That means if we deploy multiple applications into our data center and we don't want a delay between our application and our storage, then we have to use Cisco FabricPath for that as well as for the storage end.

We can deploy our storage on the network and we can get a wider speed for our storage. This means we can take storage from our network to deploy to any machine, to install any server, or any application.

The setup is straightforward.

It's a scalable solution.

We've found the product to the stable. 

I can't speak to any areas that need improvement right now. 

The solution is costly.

I've used the solution for a while. I used it most recently, about ten months ago.

The solution is stable and reliable with good performance on offer. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is very scalable; we can expand it. 

The initial setup is very simple and straightforward. It's easy; it's not complex. 

I can't speak too much on the deployment process, as I don't handle it directly.

While it is a very useful product, it is expensive. We find the value we get to be worth the money we spend. 

I haven't used any other vendor, so I can't compare anyone to Cisco.

We are a user and provide support on devices. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using.

If a company has to deploy multiple applications where the speed and the accuracy of communication matter, then I would suggest Cisco FabricPath. That said, if they have too many legacy applications or too many legacy requirements for the network, then a different type of technology could be more suitable.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Cisco FabricPath is a very good technology, and I have been using it within my profession.

They use them for LAN switching and connecting servers, access points, and edge devices like IP forms and CCTV cameras.

FabricPath switches are reliable and simple to maintain. Once you install one, it's generally good. They don't malfunction, and the switching capacity is good.

I like the 10G ports and the modular uplink port.

The switches require some maintenance, but generally, they are very reliable. 

FabricPath is highly scalable.

I rate Cisco support nine out of 10. The only problem is when your support contract has expired. If you have an active support contract, you are well sorted. 

Setting up FabricPath isn't straightforward, but Cisco offers some excellent training. Once we had enough training, we had no problem with the setup and configuration. The deployment takes a week or two if you plan well. However, the deployment time depends on the complexity of the solution you're implementing. It is determined by the number of devices and the size of the project. 

A massive project may take you a couple of months, whereas a small project can typically be completed in one or two weeks once all the prerequisites are in place. I'm only talking about the time it takes to install the active devices and configure them.

While Cisco products are excellent, the problem is the cost. Cisco products are product, Cisco products are very expensive. I rate Cisco FabricPath three out of 10 for affordability. 

I rate Cisco FabricPath seven out of 10. Cisco switches and routers are the best. They work well, but you need technical training to set them up and administer them.

We deploy this solution for clients who specifically request it. The solution is often deployed on-premises as per client requests.

The cloud version of Cisco Fabric Path could be improved because most of our clients choose to stay on premises because of the unstable internet service available here.

We have been using this solution for three years and are currently using the most recent version.

The solution has excellent stability. We have a client who ran a Catalyst 4506-E switch for seven years straight without switching it off. Hence, the solution's stability is impressive.

The scalability primarily depends on the size of the company we are dealing with.

Our experience with customer service and support has been excellent. The clients have been able to reach the support team. However, we also had delays before.

The initial setup process differs. It could be very basic or complex, depending on the client's needs and requests. For example, clients may request to be educated on the tools before deploying the technology in their network. At other times, the company may be moving from one solution to another. Therefore, it depends on the client's needs.

We usually request that any additional costs we may incur be included at the onset of our purchase. The licensing fees differ from one client to another. We have clients who have paid 1,000 and others who paid 3,000.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. We recommend Cisco Enterprise solutions because they're very good, stable, offer high-quality equipment and provide good value for the price.

I mainly use FabricPath to install equipment for core and LAN switching and for access for users to connect to the MPLS, internet, and SD-WAN.

FabricPath's best features are routing, OSPS, ethernet, and performance.

FabricPath's stability is good.

FabricPath is easy to scale.

Cisco's technical support is good because we have a network operation center.

Positive

The initial setup is easy.

The prices for FabricPath are very high, and Cisco also takes a long time to deliver products (in Mexico, the delivery time is eight months).

I would rate FabricPath as ten out of ten.

The most valuable features are the lead time and the high quality of the product.

My company's been using FabricPath for the last twenty to twenty-five years.

FabricPath is stable.

FabricPath is scalable.

Cisco's technical support is very good - they always make the deadlines.

The initial setup is a little complex.

FabricPath is very reasonably priced.

In terms of future models, Cisco are already building up, so they're up to the mark in terms of digital turnaround. I would give FabricPath a score of seven out of ten.

We are using Fortinet as an additional solution as well. Apart from that, we are using an MPLS networking solution. We use Cisco alongside these. 

Overall, it's a good product. 

It's very stable.

The initial setup is pretty simple. 

The price is a little bit too high. They need to work on lowering the cost.

The GUI and OpSys would be better. Cisco should focus on something better for the GUI and figure out the interface.

I've been dealing with the solution for one and a half years. 

The solution is stable. It offers good performance. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

At this time, we have about 400 users on the solution.

We do not plan to increase usage in the next two years. 

We have always used Cisco. We have not used any other solution.

The initial setup is pretty simple, pretty straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

We have five technical individuals that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks. One is a manager and four are admins. 

The solution is pretty expensive. 

We have to pay a yearly licensing fee. 

I would recommend the solution to other users and other organizations.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. We've had a pretty positive experience overall. 

We use FabricPath in the Cisco Data Center Switches. FabricPath is a license to inject into Cisco Data Center Switches like Nexus 7K, 9K for reducing the Spanning Tree phenomenon.

Cisco FabricPath is used to eliminate Spanning Tree broadcasts into the Layer 2 network. We can configure the FabricPath in a lot of different interfaces for communicating with different switches and disabling the Spanning Tree Protocol so we can't have a loop in the leaf and spine architecture.

The setup is very simple. 

We have found the solution to be stable.

It scales well.

There could always be more interfaces included in the switch.

If Cisco can include management for this protocol in Layer 3, that would be ideal. For example, we have our first data center in the USA and the second data center is in Europe. If we could juxtapose FabricPath for managing the Layer 2 loop between these two data centers locally, that would be great. 

We have used the solution since 2018.

It's stable. Really, we don't have any problems with FabricPath when we configure it into our Nexus switches. It's very stable without looping into our Layer 2 network. I recommend its usage for this reason, really.

The product scales well. If a company needs to expand, it can do so.

We don't have any problems with FabricPath. If we have to reach out to Cisco support to resolve a problem, we can, however, it rarely happens. That said, if you call Cisco to resolve a problem, it's my understanding that they have very good support can resolve problems immediately. Support from Cisco is very, very good.

So far, we have found the initial setup to be very simple, very straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

The solution is very, very cheap compared with all other brands - including Huawei or HPE Switches. We buy Cisco for the performance, really the performance, scalability, backup, and a lot of technology like VPC, OTV, or VDC, Virtual Device Context. It's good.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We've been very happy with its capabilities. 

I would recommend the product for a company that has a very big data center. It's good for those in banking or insurance, for example.