Cisco Nexus Reviews

This solution has allowed our organization to grow. Our last platform was the legacy Cisco 6509, which did not have virtualization built in. We now have one box that does multiple services.

The most valuable feature is the flexibility that it has with the layer-two switching.

Its speed, as well as the ability to expand it, are also very valuable.

There are still bugs in the system that need to be fixed.

Technical support could be better.

This solution still hinders on some of the old technology base. It seems like bugs are still being brought in as customers are changing how they want to connect or how fast they're trying to connect stuff.

The scalability of this solution is ok. Everything can be a little bit better on scalability, but it does an ok job.

Technical support for this solution is middle-tier. It could be better.

Sometimes you get people that know about the products themselves, and the hardware, but don't understand my use case or a customer's use case. They understand it from a product platform, but not real-world actions.

We were using the Legacy Cisco 6509, but it did not have virtualization built in.

The initial setup of this solution is pretty straightforward.

If you came from the Legacy OS, it is easy to access and move around, even though the command lines are a little bit different.

We used an integrator to assist us with our deployment.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

In my previous company, we relied on this solution as a part of the data center core switch. Everything inside the data center was connected through this unit.

This solution has helped the data center in the bank's infrastructure to expand over the past ten years. Both the reliability and scalability of this solution helped to support this growth.

The most valuable features of this solution are scalability and reliability.

Scalability is important as the business moves forward. As the number of bank branches grows, the traffic grows. You need to rely on a solid Cisco product in the data center to support this.

Enhancing the software-defined level of this solution would empower it.

While I am not a technical person, I can comment on this solution's stability from a management perspective because I keep my eyes on the incidents. I have to look at all of the incidents that are reported through the data center. I can't remember having any incident raised regarding this product.

From this perspective, I can say that stability is good.

This solution is quite scalable, although this product comes in different families including an enterprise-level version and a mid-level version. Scalability depends on how the switch has been configured and the technical specifications that are related to it.

Technical support is part of Cisco's overall goodwill.

The support level is good and it is reliable, as well. It is also quite convenient for us as a financial institution.

The choice to move to this solution was based on our business strategy. It is a top-down approach, where the business strategy is passed down and the technical architecture is evaluated. After this is complete, a decision is made to either invest in a new solution or continue to rely on the old one.

In our case, this was the solution that we needed to accommodate our business strategy.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

Something like this always goes through a pre-planning stage. Kicking off the project requires that all of the prerequisites are in place. All of the information is gathered and the final scope is identified. This can be something that is straightforward or very complex.

In the bank that I have been working with, we were building the infrastructure from scratch. This is the reason it has been a straightforward project, rather than a complex one.

We had a very reliable Cisco partner implement this solution for us. Their name is Raya Integration, and they are one of the dominant Cisco partners across Egypt.

We considered both Cisco and Juniper for our infrastructure. My experience with Cisco over the past twenty years has been good. Also, this specific product is both reliable and scalable, which were all things that we considered when we adopted this solution.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are using this solution in the redesign of our data center network. Specifically, to provide an aggregation point for our data center services.

This solution provides our organization with more business continuity and high availability. This is because we can build them in ways with technology, like VPC, to make sure that our network is constantly up and available to our end users.

The biggest benefit to this solution is a high port density with high bandwidth. A big strength is the high bandwidth backplane, line rate speeds, and switching and routing packets.

We have uncovered things about some of the features where there is room for improvement.  

• There are limitations on some of the lower level 9K solutions where you can't do the same things that you would normally be able to do, like for instance the number of static maps that you can configure on it.
• There are limitations between different product IDs that I do not really understand, and I don't think that there is a really good reason for.

This is an extremely stable solution. I would say that heeding or taking note of the software versions that Cisco recommends is probably a good idea because that's where you find the most stable features. When you do that, or you follow the low level, baseline requirements, it is very stable.

The 9K series is very scalable because you have multiple different PIDs that allow you to put them where you want them. They can be on the core, your access, or your aggregational layer. You can do a lot of different things with them. They're a very scalable switching solution.

Cisco technical support is much like any other. The first level is often a little bit laboring to get through that process, but once you get to their second or third level of support, they are very knowledgable about the solution.

If you're dealing with a bug or a feature that you're not really understanding, it often takes a day to get through that process. If on the other hand, it is a situation where you have a priority one network down then you can generally jump through the ranks pretty quickly.

Our existing network had been neglected for a long time before I joined the company. We wanted to become more relevant with the times, knowing that we're pushing a lot of stuff to the edge, trying to get higher bandwidth to our core.

We were comfortable with Cisco's technology and Cisco's footprint, so we started by getting some information from them. After this, we began to have regular meetings with them to discuss our design and how it would be implemented.

I think that the initial setup would be complex for someone that does not know the technology. You do have to know some of the underlying technologies in order to use this solution because it's not something that you can just unbox and start using. There is a learning curve.

We purchased the product through a reseller, MTM Technology, and they are very good. We have a long relationship with them.

We are deploying the solution with our in-house team.

All of our costs including subscription, licensing, and support services are bundled together, and the cost is approximately $100,000 USD per year.

We were pretty focused on Cisco. That is where we wanted to go.

We are using this solution in a very specific use case right now. I do see more flexibility and availability, but for us, a pretty small network, I haven't really unlocked a lot of the features.

My advice to anybody looking to implement this solution is to take your time in finding the right design. I have worked with Cisco for a long time, and I've worked with other manufacturers like HP, Dell, and Arista. I think that Cisco is definitely the leader in the market, but I do think that if you rush through the design process then you might find yourself making decisions prematurely. 

This is a good solution, but there is some room for improvement on some of the things that we have discovered.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

This solution is used as the core and access switches in our largest data center. We have several of them that make up our 40-gigabit uplink.

From my perspective, this is a nice solution. These units are easy to work with and they have a lot of features that you can't get anywhere else. It gives me an unparalleled ability to build out my environment differently than I would have if I was going with another vendor. This is true even if I was going with a Catalyst model instead of a Nexus model.

The most valuable feature of this solution is its stability. We don't have any problems with them, ever. It doesn't matter how much we hammer them or load stuff up on them, they never give us any trouble. I cannot say that for many other platforms that I operate, so I am really pleased with that aspect.

The ability to troubleshoot on this model is very good, and far beyond what you get on a different model. We have had some weird issues in our data center, and this has helped us in that regard. Sometimes you need a tech to help you with it because it's a little too complex, but at least you can see the data. I wish I could say that about, pretty much, anything else I have.

I would like to see Duo directly integrated with the Nexus hardware, instead of it being through the proxies, like how Duo works today. The way it works now really irritates me.

There is a lot of depth in the Nexus class, and it would help to make this more accessible to the users. We, for instance, are using them no differently than we would a Catalyst switch with VPCs. With that in mind, some of the more in-depth features would be nice to have, so having easier access to them would be beneficial.

We have been operating for a year and a half, and we've never had one crash. I couldn't say that for most other platforms.

We have not had an opportunity to scale this solution, but it seems very scalable. The VPC, virtual port channels, and the virtual domains, together, allow you to scale endlessly. I have never seen any problems with them.

I love Cisco Smart Net. It is the best thing in the business. I've never dealt with another vendor that comes even close to Smart Net.

This solution was integrated before I started, but we used to have Cisco 7K and 5K models. When we built the new data center, which was necessary after our company split in two, the 9K made more sense. It was the right choice for us at that point.

The initial setup seemed pretty straightforward. These units were a little different, compared to the Nexus 5K that I came from. Some commands are a little different, but other than that, it was easy to do.

There are a lot of more complex features in the Nexus class that we aren't using today, so maybe it would have been harder if we were using some of those. But, for a basic setup, it was easy enough.

We used a third party, Logicalis. The sold us the product and performed the basic installation. The VPCs were built, the management and IP configuration were completed before we took it over.

I felt like we paid for more than we got, but that was ok. They got the job done and we didn't have time for it. At the end of the day, I would rate them a three out of five.

Every Cisco product is more expensive than competitors on the market, which is just a fact, but from my perspective, it is worth it.

Our company is locked into one vendor for purchasing, which is a board decision. The only time we can use another vendor is if they sell it as part of a solution. Logicalis was the only vendor that had the solution we wanted, so that's who we went with.

This solution is ACI compatible, but we did not have time to get them on ACI before we went live. As a result, they will not make it to ACI.

There is always room for improvement, but I really love this solution. These devices do not give me any headaches. I design enough solutions for our company where, if they give me headaches, they come back out. It's that simple. I don't have time to keep going back and cleaning up the solutions that I've already installed.

If you want something that that is rock solid and you don't have to worry about, then go buy yourself some Nexus 9Ks. It's that simple.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for our data center layer two, layer three, infrastructure.

Our main data center has been using this solution for the past twelve months and we have had zero outages. Before that, when we were using the Catalyst 6500 series, that was not the case. The stability of this solution is a major win. 

The most valuable feature is stability because in a data center you really need that.

The consolidation of all of the layer two ports into one rack is very valuable.

I would like to see more on-device programmability, as it seems to be lacking in this platform.

The EEM has limited capabilities compared to the Catalyst 9300 series, so this can be improved.

I would like to see better support for the newer front end tools, such as the DNS center.

Stability and availability is a definite plus on the Nexus platform. It seems to have better HA capabilities compared to the older platforms.

The scalability of this solution is better than that of the traditional models. You can always add more 2k switches to a 5k underlying chassis and increase the number of ports without any other configuration. There is no additional configuration required for FEX ports.

Technical support for this solution has always been the same.

The old solution was at end-of-life.

We were using the traditional Catalyst 6500 switches with the traditional iOS. It didn't provide us with 10-gigabit ports in the data center, which is why we switched to Nexus.

The initial setup was a little bit more complex because it was a new technology that we were adopting. The learning curve was a little steeper. However, the actual deployment was pretty straightforward.

We used a reseller, World Wide Technology, to help with our deployment. Our experience with them was very good.

We have seen ROI in terms of support and business continuity.

We are a Cisco shop, so we didn't look for an alternative platform. We knew that we were going to use Cisco.

My advice for anybody implementing this solution is to train their support staff on the Nexus product before deployment, and not after the fact. Once you deploy, if the support staff has to learn while on the job then it may cause issues. It is good to invest in training prior to the implementation, especially on this platform because it is very different than the traditional iOS.

The software upgrades are also different from that of the traditional Catalyst switches, so if you are not used to doing them on this platform then you have to be careful.

The other thing that I can say is that the scalability and stability of this solution have improved when compared to previous products.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for our networking.

The most valuable feature of this solution is its speed.

Currently, the platform is heavy. I would like to see a lighter platform.

This is a stable product.

This solution is definitely scalable.

The technical support group for this solution is very helpful.

Prior to this solution, we used older Cisco products, and we wanted to upgrade to newer technology.

This initial setup of this solution was very simple.

We implemented this solution in-house.

We did not evaluate vendors other than Cisco.

This solution works well and I would recommend it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

This solution provides all of the routing and searching features that we need. We use it for internal use, rather than resell it to our customers.

The most valuable feature for us is the VRF (Virtual Routing and Forwarding) support. We are using it in the aggregation layer.

Some of the DHCP features need improvement.

The stability of this solution is good.

I think that this solution scales well.

The price of this solution is good when compared to others in the market.

When we purchased the hardware, the software license came with it.

We did not evaluate other vendors before choosing this solution.

This is a pretty solid product that complies with our design and gives us what we need.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco-based, and our voice infrastructure comes across that as well. I handle the Unified Communications. 

This solution has drastically improved our organization.

Prior to implementing this solution, our corporate campus was the only place that we had Voice service in our network. Over the past two years, we have brought Cisco Voice to every single one of our offices and stores, nationwide. Essentially, we have unified all of those communication links between stores and our corporate office to support those stores.

For the stores, it has made life simpler for them. They need only press a button to speed dial into a support desk, where before they were totally dependent on an outside POTS line that may not have been available when they needed it. We've also reduced their costs, in that rather than every single satellite office dialing long distance numbers to reach the corporate office for support, the calls now come right across the LANs.

In terms of mitigating incidents, this solution has reduced incidents of lost time by approximately thirty percent.

This solution has saved us both time and money because we now have the ability to control all of these telephony devices that are deployed nationwide. It is simple for us to make changes remotely, rather than having to deploy somebody to go and make the changes. The time that we spent helping people who are in remote sites is minimal now compared to before, so it is definitely an improvement.

The most valuable feature is the flexibility that we have had, working with our network team to get voice implemented. 

There is always room for improvement.

This solution is absolutely stable. Our uptime is wonderful. It is so much that I actually enjoy not being called after hours.

Technical support for this solution has been absolutely wonderful.

We did not have a voice network infrastructure in our stores and we wanted to support it. However, our existing equipment was antiquated and it had to be upgraded. We were still using Cisco equipment, but it was dated and did not have support for voice and the other things that are required today.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. The implementors that we would source to assist us knew exactly what they were doing. They were not stalled with questions, so it just worked.

We used an integrator to handle part of our implementation, and their service was really good.

Cisco is not stopping in terms of adding support for new features. They are continuing to innovate their product and make it better for everybody.

This is a solution that has made my life much simpler. I can relax in the evening knowing that the solution is stable.

In fact, the biggest lesson that I have learned from using this solution is that we waited too long to deploy it in our stores. For a long time, the stores struggled every day, and it's a good thing that we've got a management team who realized that. They wanted to make things better for the employees that are working in our offices, the customer-facing people. I only wish that we had done it sooner.

My advice for anybody looking to implement a similar solution is to go with Cisco.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.