Cisco Nexus Dashboard Fabric Controller (Formerly DCNM) Reviews

We use the solution to manage switches.

The product makes the management of our environment simpler. It simplifies the management of our services that are deployed on the switches and routers. It is easy to manage.

We need better performance and reliability.

I have been using the solution for a couple of years.

The tool is stable.

The tool is scalable. We have more than 10,000 users in our organization.

The support is not perfect. It could be improved.

I work in the operations team. There is a separate deployment team in our organization. The deployment takes three months.

The deployment is done in-house.

We use Cisco Smart Licensing. The features have to be unlocked through Cisco Smart Licensing.

We haven't got much to compare the product against. It is tied in with the Cisco equipment in the organization. Juniper is our backbone. I will recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We use it to simplify the maintenance of servers and the network infrastructure for data centers. This means a single pane of glass from where we can easily manage the data center. 

We can configure things, check the host setup, and apply this to the policies. In addition, we also upgraded the OS version to fulfill the compliance requirements. We can also manage the progress and develop updates or check the health status and upgrade of home-based solutions.

We now get more insight into the network's health data. This includes the compliance part and other points to a single pane from there. We can also upgrade and get the visibility for the running version. Without the compatibility of the infrastructure, we would not have been able to do this. It will manage what we don't see on the device and sync from a single cloud.

I don't have to rely on the on-site engineer who can do the configuration. I can have our team just plug the devices and perform remotely. I can also do the templates. 

Automation for the RMA process can be added. 

I have been using Cisco Data Center Network Manager for more than a year.

It is a scalable solution. It is recommended for both small and medium-sized companies. 

The technical support team is excellent. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment of the solution is dependent on the organization, but after it is downloaded, it takes an hour to get the solution deployed. 

I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten. 

We use the solution in data center to manage Nexus features and ECS servers.

Cisco provides very good documentation. It is easy to deploy and troubleshoot, and they have good backup support in case of any issues. With regard to maintenance or hardware, I haven't had any significant issues working with Cisco products.

It has a very nice dashboard so you can see what's currently happening in the network and the performance of the back story.

It's very costly. Most of our customers are actually looking for other cost-effective solutions. Even if it has very good performance, other competitors can offer the same at a lower cost. 

I have been using Cisco Nexus Dashboard Fabric Controller (Formerly DCNM) as an implementor for five years.

It is 95% scalable. You need support for cosmetic bugs, security issues, and upgrades.

It is suitable for service provider customers.

We use Arista For SDN controllers.

We could set it up in less than a week.

Two guys are enough to install and configure the product. You need to have the basic package. You don't need any advanced services.

Most of our customers who use Cisco have had the box running for ten plus years, there is ROI.

Cisco has AI switches already for AI use cases.

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

We use the solution to build private clouds in government data centers. Government institutions mainly use their own data centers. We come in when they want an update or something in addition to their data centers. We work on any addition or update requirements in these data centers. 

We are system integrators who also take part in purchase and selling. We architect solutions and implement them for all activities as part of a business. 

The most valuable feature is that it is vendor-independent. We have an open-solution approach. However, the actual devices have to be from an OEM but the management part, if proposed on open platforms, the solution becomes independent of OEMs. 

For network management, your access is locked to Cisco. Open solutions let us integrate with other solutions. Cisco should have better integration to use additional tools. If the customer thinks about using additional solutions, which are alternatives, Cisco should make sure they are not left out.

I have been using the solution for more than ten years. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

The product is very scalable. We work with their architects to figure out the solution. Scalability is a factor we take into consideration when we design a data center. 

This solution can be used by big companies as well as SMBs. 

The technical support is good. I would rate the technical support a ten out of ten. For maintenance and support, Cisco provides options like next day, business day, or within around four hours. Multiple options are available, so depending on the use case, everyone can choose the ideal level of support. 

When a solution has more depth, the setup is more complex. Cisco has extensive training and documentation, so we don't have a hard time with the setup.

I would say that the pricing offers great value for the money. The solution is expensive, but it gets compensated by the use cases. 

The licensing cost is also on the higher side, but customers show confidence in our implementation of this solution. Getting trained people on this solution to do the job is easier for us. We have found that Cisco is a good company to work with. 

The licensing model is not complex. Some scenarios can be complex, but the complexity is justified. 

The cost structure is very transparent regarding maintenance and support. 

For some use cases, we worked with Juniper. Juniper is equally strong. 

In comparison, the certification process is very extensive for Cisco. Most professionals are trained and familiar with Cisco. Of every ten professionals, all will be trained in Cisco, whereas only two will be familiar with Juniper. 

Whichever solution needs to be implemented, we can always work with Cisco Solutions. They have the right fit for everything, Cisco helps us select the right product. We work out a solution and vet it by Cisco; that's how we work. I would overall rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

The interface of this solution is easy to use overall and is intuitive enough. 

We are customers of Cisco and I'm a system engineer. 

Fabric suite automation is a great feature.

I'd like to see better integration with VMware products such as NSX and the reporting could be improved. 

I've been using this solution for one and a half years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. We currently have four network managers and eight system engineers. 

The technical support is quite good, they respond quickly. 

We previously used SolarWinds Network Monitoring but switched to Cisco but it has multiple tools on a single platform. SolarWinds does provide better reporting.

Deployment took us 25 days and was carried out by our local team with some assistance from Cisco. 

The product is good but quite expensive. We pay an annual license and the cost depends on the number of devices. 

I rate this solution nine out of 10. 

The HDA is part of the micro-segmentation of the network, and it can be integrated with security departments like the F5 Checkpoint Firewall Tool. You can integrate all the networks into the software and file network data center. We are looking for the load balancing and application service of Cloudflare.

The visibility of applications is not great, which is why we study upscalability. We want to understand the software-defined network and access, the edge, and how to connect. The setup is complex and could be improved. Regarding additional features, the integration with the APM would be good.

We have been using this solution for 14 years, and it is implemented on-premises, Google Cloud, Amazon, or Azure.

It is a stable solution. 

It's scalable in terms of the network and software. You can do many things in terms of integration with the terraform.

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten. We have a great relationship with them and talk directly with the business unit.

Positive

The setup process was complex and not simple. It's not a plug-and-play solution.

I rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being a good price.

I rate this solution a six out of ten. It can be compared to VMWare but more as a complimentary solution than a competitor.

Data Center Network Manager is a little complex because it includes a lot of hardware to be installed, so making this simpler would be an improvement.

I've been using this solution for five years.

Data Center Network Manager is absolutely stable.

Data Center Network Manager is scalable.

Cisco's technical support is excellent.

The initial setup is straightforward so long as you have experience in networking.

We've had a good ROI from Data Center Network Manager. There's also a facility on Cisco's website to calculate the ROI from adopting this solution.

On average, Data Center Network Manager's pricing isn't too costly unless you choose a premier license.

I would advise those thinking of implementing Data Center Network Manager to get some expert supervision during the planning stage. I would give Data Center Network Manager a rating of nine out of ten.

We recently deployed our supply value for architecture and connected it to DCNM.

I like running the scripts. With the help of a Python script, we deployed within the configuration and built up the code.

One of the biggest challenges is that we aren't always able to push the configuration onto the target device. Whenever this happens, we have to do a factory reset, put on the script, and then reconfigure it again. In the next release, I would like to have a troubleshooting feature.

I have been using Cisco Data Center Network Manager for about two years.

Cisco Data Center Network Manager is not a stable product. We had some database issues, and we had to restart it manually. We also had some false alarms and had to investigate. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give stability a seven.

Cisco Data Center Network Manager is scalable. We have two IT engineers using it right now.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give scalability an eight.

I think we are premium partners, so technical support was mostly good.

Positive

We have Cisco ECI. We are focusing on high-end customers, so we are using DCNM. We also have Cisco AFI.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

We implemented this solution. We have three people, including a network architect, to deploy and manage this solution.

I would tell potential users a couple of things. Firstly, if you're trying to execute any network script, ensure it's properly written. Otherwise, it's going to create a huge impact. Secondly, before performing any upgrade to the latest version, pay the tag ticket to ensure that the firmware is OK and cannot cause any outage in your environment.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Data Center Network Manager an eight.