ExtremeRouting Reviews

My company uses ExtremeRouting for a big LAN environment, where there is a need for ERS switches, including Extreme Networks Core Switches and chassis, so the product is like a big cabinet to reduce chassis redundancy. The product is useful for LAN networks, especially when there is traffic from supposedly 500 or 1,000 users, and you want to get the traffic from the access layer to Extreme Networks Core Switch. The product's physical architecture of the box, chipsets, and load capacity are extremely good. The product was one of the best in the market in the past, but because of the support it offers, it got out of the market. In general, the product's hardware part is very good.

I think that all the devices included in Avaya fall under Extreme Networks currently. I am not sure how much Extreme Networks has changed ExtremeRouting, but I think it is in a better condition than Avaya. The support, software resiliency, and software stability are areas of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using ExtremeRouting for four years. I am a user of the product.

The stability of the product is poor because of its software, but otherwise, the device is good. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a six and a half out of ten.

It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

The support team is not technically that strong. The previous company that owned the product, Nortel, went bankrupt, after which the transition phase of the product didn't go smoothly. Avaya did not do well with the product's design and engineering after taking the product over from Nortel, after which Avaya decided to outsource the tool to my company, meaning we have worked as a vendor with third-party access to the tool in the name of Avaya. The support was very bad initially, but my company could fix the problems of the customers on time since we had better communication skills than technical-solving skills due to our limitations related to the area of device engineering. When it comes to a feature of the product, my company could enable it for the customers or users of the product. If, by any chance, my company found a bug in the tool, then it was a hectic task for our support team to deal with it since it took months to fix it.

Currently, Extreme Networks takes care of the support part, and it might have improved.

I rate the technical support a four out of ten.

Neutral

The product's initial setup phase was easy or of an intermediate level of difficulty.

The physical device architecture of the product has the same RJ-45 copper ports, fiber ports, one gig, and ten gig, and in my company, we have never found any issue concerning the device failure, meaning the device failure rate was very low. The device can work for a long time, but if you upgrade it, then there is no confirmation of how it will behave since its vendor changed from Nortel to Avaya. With Avaya as software, my company's engineering team was not that good at fixing the bugs, so my company's customers, who have been using the box from Extreme Networks for 20 years, know more about the product than our company since we got involved in the system's support only three years ago. When my company suggested to our customers that they upgrade the product, they denied accepting our recommendation by stating that they didn't need any extra features since they were unsure if the new software would fix it. The device has a limitation on the software part. The device usually works in very adverse conditions since it has a very good architecture.

For those who have the option to get good support for the device, then I would definitely recommend the product to them.

I rate the overall tool a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case is routing. We are currently in the process of implementing the FabricOS here pretty soon, which is their alternative to the standard, what's called XOS, ExtremeOS, which is a more traditional switching and routing model, very akin to Cisco with a similar command line structure. With the routing capabilities, you basically have a way to turn your entire infrastructure across multiple locations into what looks like essentially one large switch, so routing becomes efficient. You can let VLANs talk to each other and control anyway through access control list.

I think their most valuable feature is their FabricOS. With this feature, we have the ability to virtualize the entire network infrastructure across multiple locations and multiple switches. Secondary to that, is their auto detect auto sense capability, which you can actually configure so that you do not have to preconfigure ports. You can simply plug a device in, and if it's based on several parameters and some rule sets, it will decide how to configure that port, what VLANs to connect to it, and where to connect it and where to route it based on what the device is.

My advice for those looking into ExtremeRouting is: right now all switch manufacturers are backed up for months. If you're looking to implement quickly, I would say shop around a bit because it might be difficult.

I have about a year of experience with ExtremeRouting. 

So far it's so good. We have not had any failures that I know of where a piece of equipment actually failed and I think we've had to reboot one switch once. In the last instance, the issue had more to do with the interoperability of the Extreme fiber interfaces with Cisco at the other end. The interoperability can be a little tricky at times.

ExtremeRouting's stability is solid as far as I can tell. However, I have only used it with our village, which encompasses some 1,000 users. Looking at the robustness, I do not know whether it would be carrier grade – let's say for hundreds of thousands of users – but it certainly doesn't balk at 10,000 users or less.

My impression of the initial setup is that it was pretty straightforward. You get a new device; you put a cloud app on your phone; you take a picture of a barcode and of a QR code; and it integrates that device into your infrastructure. It's very quick and easy.

In terms of the pricing, you probably could get an average premises switch for about $500 a year in total and the management license. For the most part, there are not any additional costs to the standard licensing fee. On some of the lower end switches, if you want to run 10 GB, you have to pay $100 a year or so extra to get the 10 GB license. That's the 5300 series and below, not the ones we use.

ExtremeRouting's prices are at least 30% less than Cisco as a competitor in management. Extreme IQ, in spite of any of the shortcomings, is still quite superior to Meraki, especially when you bring in the SD-WAN and the Fabric capabilities that Meraki can't even touch.

Overall, ExtremeRouting requires less technical depth in order to implement the infrastructure than Cisco, for example. However, Cisco is bigger, Cisco's got more firepower when it comes to maintaining stuff. Not that I've ever had any kind of failure rates with ExtremeRouting equipment. 

ExtremeRouting is a smaller company and in my experience smaller companies can be more responsive, especially for the smaller guys like me.

I mainly use ExtremeRouting in office settings to improve office processes and manage networks. I have used it for educational demos in schools too, making it useful for education. It is a versatile networking solution that works well for both corporate and educational needs, and I find it very helpful.

What I like about ExtremeRouting is its impressive performance. It performed really well, especially during school demonstrations, and the feedback from the students was positive.

One area for improvement with ExtremeRouting is the need for more accessible and comprehensive training. It is crucial because the product requires a good amount of technical expertise for effective support and operation. In comparison to competitors like Cisco, where many people are trained, having free and thorough technical training for ExtremeRouting would be beneficial. 
I would like to see Extreme Networks expand its offerings to include industrial equipment for sectors like mining and aviation.

I have been using ExtremeRouting for almost five years.

In our organization itself, we don't use ExtremeRouting, but we provide it to our clients. We support companies, and among our clients, there are approximately more than 100 computers in the office, with some having nearly 200.

We have previously used Avaya.

Overall, I would rate ExtremeRouting as an eight out of ten. It works very well.

Our primary use case for this solution is extreme routing. We have about ten to 12 buildings, so this product provides internal and external routing through the ExtremeRouting mechanism. Additionally, we have routing protocols, like OSPF, and RIP. 

We have found the extreme stacking feature very valuable. It is stable, and we use it often in our processes as it provides a good redundancy technique. Additionally, the product offers a good maximum value for its attributes.

The product could be improved by including the latest protocols to match the other vendor standards because some of the latest protocols are unavailable. So when we mix this device with other companies and vendors like 48 or Cisco, we have issues because ExtremeRouting uses more of these proprietary protocols. Hence, they can improve by adding the latest protocols to the data.

We have been using this solution for eight years and it is deployed on-premises.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, and there are currently four people using this solution in the organization. However, we intend to increase the usage of this solution eventually.

We have not had a very good experience with customer service and support. We have experienced issues with technical support, which is time-consuming. We don't get the required input we need from the support team. I rate to support a six out of ten.

Neutral

We previously did not use any other solutions.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The solution was deployed in-house and took approximately one week.

Unfortunately, I cannot comment on licensing costs at this time.

We evaluated Cisco routers. We primarily compared Cisco with ExtremeRouting and chose ExtremeRouting because it was more user-friendly and budget-friendly. Compared to Cisco, ExtremeRouting is cheap and has an easy configuration process.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by including advanced protocols.

We use this solution in the bank. We will migrate the solution that we currently have on-premises to a SaaS solution.

We are concerned with how the solution will evolve to the next generation of Contact Center.

It's not evolving as quickly as we would like it to. We want to move to the next generation by the next quarter, but they are not ready yet.

I have been using ExtremeRouting for 20 years.

We have no issues with the stability of ExtremeRouting. It is very stable.

ExtremeRouting scales easily.

Technical support is very good, especially when you compare it to other vendors we have here.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is very easy to set up.

The pricing is comparable with other solutions. We have no issues with the price.

We are currently moving our workload from on-premises to Cloud.

Because they are moving to the next generation, I would rate ExtremeRouting a seven out of ten.

We use the solution primarily for routing purposes.

The routing protocol is the solution's most valuable aspect.

Overall, we've had a lot of issues with the solution. It should operate more like Cisco's Nexus 9300. It needs a lot of work.

Due to the issues we've been having, we plan on replacing the device completely.

The solution is far too unstable. It's completely unreliable.

I've only been using the solution for one year.

There are a lot of stability issues. We have to replace the mini components. When we experienced those problems, the issue with components, we received new components. Even when we received the new components, they were also, I wouldn't say broken, however, they were not working properly.

We had to send back the devices and components, and, in fact, a motherboard. It seems like when companies send the components back, the company ends up just reselling them to other companies. Yet those components were not working properly, so this seems ill-advised. 

After all the issues, we decided to replace the core switches because we don't have any trust in them at all. 

Technical support was actually supplied by a third party. We don't go directly to the company.

It's kind of network and I believe it's a Canadian company that supplies the services. They are a technical support company based in Montreal. 

I would say that we got really great support from them. We've been quite satisfied with their services.

I believe we pay extra to utilize the services. It's not included in the cost.

We've had a lot of issues with the equipment in general. It's hard to say it's straightforward when so many things are going wrong.

I'm unsure of what the licensing costs are. Users will have to pay extra for technical support, however.

We're just a customer. We don't have a special contract with the solution and we aren't a consultant or reseller.

My understanding is the company plans to replace this solution within the next six months as they've been unhappy with the performance of the solution.

I would advise other organizations not to purchase this solution. I really prefer Cisco products, which work much more effectively.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It's not a terrible solution, however, our experience was very bad.