F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Reviews

The solution is mostly used for the LTM load balancer. Recently more of our customers are using it for the web application firewall. Some of my other customers are using the GTM model also. 

My experience in selling this solution is approximately two and a half years.

The solution is stable.

The scalability of the solution depends on the sizing of the network. Generally, the scalability is quite good.

The technical support is one of the best I have seen in their field. They have been good so far.

One of the strongest areas of this solution is its ease of install. It did not take more then a couple of hours.

The deployment can take some time because you can do a lot of configuring to meet the needs of the use cases for clients. This will take more time to configure the different areas than just the general install. We typically have two technicians on site doing the deployments.

The solution is quite expensive if we compare it with the competition. For only load balancer, it is too expensive. The license is subscription-based, except for the security model.

I would recommend this solution.

I rate F5 BIG-IP a seven out of ten.

We are a reseller of F5, but we haven't had many projects that we've deployed with F5. In terms of use cases, it is used when clients have web servers, and they are hosting on their own infrastructure. When they have web applications that are publicly visible, they use F5 to balance that incoming traffic for their web servers.

The web application firewall feature is the most valuable and useful feature. It is a leading industry product when it comes to load balancing.

Its user interface is very simple. There isn't a steep learning curve. When we initiate someone to F5, they start using it quickly.

Its price can be better. It is a bit expensive.

I have been using this solution for the last five years.

It is very stable.

It is very scalable. 

I never had a case that required technical support.

It is very easy to set up. It is not a complicated product. The deployment duration depends on the architecture that you're deploying, but it usually doesn't take much time.

The number of people required for its deployment depends on the size of the deployment. For a very big deployment, you need less than three people. For a fairly normal or standard deployment, just one person would be fine.

It is a bit expensive product. Kemp Loadmaster is much cheaper than F5. 

Its licensing is on a yearly basis. It can be for one year or three years.

I would recommend this solution. It is a really good solution. It is fairly straightforward, and it does what it is meant to do.

I would rate F5 BIG-IP a nine out of ten. In terms of features, it is good, but its price can be better.

We are a solution provider and we work with a lot of products from F5.

In our internal network, we use F5 BIG-IP. We also have a few implementations with this product, including some that are integrated with other solutions such as IBM Guardium. 

One of the great use cases is capturing an application user through F5 and then pushing it to Guardium. This is very useful for our customers because they can then connect to the database with a real application user, which is something that is very hard to achieve through other vendors.

The main reason that we suggest this product to our clients is the great integration with other security tools, such as IBM Guardium. 

This product is very user-friendly, which is good for customers who have an implementation done by a partner but want to handle administration in-house.

All of the functionality can be achieved from one console.

Even on Hyper-V or a VMware appliance, the performance is very good when you use it as a proxy or a web application.

The documentation is very good.

We have been working with F5 BIG-IP for between three and four years.

This is a stable product.

From our perspective, it is scalable.

We have all of the help and support that we need from the F5 office in this region.

Technical support from F5 is very good. As a partner, I have had a very good experience with them. They have shared knowledge with us and support us in our projects, which is definitely a big plus.

It is very easy to install, especially when doing so to VMware. For example, we have spent almost a day installing security tools by other vendors. For BIG-IP, we need only two or three hours to complete it.

For the complete deployment that includes implementation and configuration, it takes between 10 and 15 days. The length of time depends on the client's goals and requirements. For example, some just want to use it as a web application firewall, whereas others want to use more functionality. The more functionality there is, the more time it takes to complete.

Our in-house team implements and deploys this solution to our customers. 

You need two or three people, including a security manager who will configure all of the rules and policies.

The price should be reduced because it is expensive when compared to the competition. Alternatively, bundled packages should be offered. This is an issue that shows up for most of our customers.

In summary, this is a very good product and we are actively suggesting it to our customers. It is something that should be more present in our market, especially because of the functionality that it provides.

In the end, we get very good results from BIG-IP.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are using this solution as a load balancer and reverse proxy.

The most valuable feature is customization.

We are currently using BIG-IP and NetScaler and we wanted to have just one technology. We will be replacing F5 in March.

NetScaler is primarily used for Citrix purposes and BIG-IP is being used as a reverse proxy for our other applications.  We would like to manage it easily with one technology.

I would like to see better integration. I can remember when we were implementing ADFS, we had some challenges.

There is not a lot of documentation available where you can refer to and configure any new technologies.

I have been working with F5 BIG-IP for approximately seven years but our organization has been using this solution for 13 years.

This solution is stable. We have not experienced any issues.

It's a scalable solution and we have not had any limitations. We have approximately 3,000 users.

Technical support is very good in terms of their technical knowledge and assistance.

We have had contact with both F5 and Citrix. 

F5 has a good technical team who can assist and understand the problem and respond quickly. However, Citrix has been a challenge for us.

When we were setting up for Azure we had some challenges.

We have an internal team of two for maintenance and reporting.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I need to have a deeper understanding of F5 technology.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The load balancing is very good.

The tech support is helpful and knowledgeable.

Everything is okay within the solution. It works well.

The product offers pretty good security.

The solution is easy to install. It's a straightforward process.

The interface is excellent.

We've found the product overall to be simple and easy to use.

Currently, the product offers everything we need. I can't recall any features that may be lacking.

I've only used the solution for one year. In comparison, I've used Radware for three years.

We've had the solution installed for a year now and it is working as it should. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find it stable and reliable. It's been a good experience so far.

The product can scale quite well. We haven't had any issues. If a company needs to expand it out, they should be able to do so without trouble.

Right now, I'm the only one at the office who uses the product.

I've been in contact with technical support in the past. So far, I've been happy with their level of service. They have been very helpful and responsive overall. I don't have any complaints.

We also use Radware, which we've used a bit longer.

The initial setup isn't too complex. We can handle the process pretty well. It's straightforward. I consider it to be pretty easy. There's no difficulties during the instllation.

I'm not sure of which version of the solution we're using right now. I have a few customers who are using it, and they may be using different solutions.

I'd recommend the solution. Our customers seem to be very happy with it.

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

We are in the security business, basically working in two segments; the first is in the financial sector, with the largest banks in the country, and second, we work with some government organizations and corporate businesses. Only B2B for now, not much retail. We have a few projects in insurance companies. The solution is deployed on-premise in our office and we basically use it for demo and testing purposes. We deploy for our customers both on-premise and on cloud. We are a distribution channel, like a reseller. I'm a channel development manager.

For BIG-IP, I think the most requested functionality is its NetFlow balancing and traffic balancing, as well as its secure access and its optimization of access to applications. The solution is the most requested by our customers, so it's an important direction for our business.

I'd like to see a more intuitive interface. The market now is moving into salvage services, different kinds of services, not only hardware solutions. 

I've been using the solution for four months. 

The product is scalable, we have around 200 users in our company. In terms of our customers, there would probably be over 1,000 users.  We have a huge company, but our department for network security products consists of about 25 people. In half of them, users are the technical specialists.

We're just starting to work on setting up our own support service for clients. We hope that maybe next year we could add support products to our product line also.

We have other vendors in our portfolio, all of them working for performance network, performance optimization, and application implementation. We generally propose a few solutions to our customers. 

We have a technical department with a lot of certified specialists who work on the implementation side of things and we also support some of our departments and external clients. It's not my area of expertise. 

We are planning to expand to other segments in the market, healthcare or logistics or even some FMCG retail companies. We hope the F5 solutions will help us to expand. We intend to continue providing this solution and to involve more partners in the F5 business. I would recommend this solution. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

Our company is based in different geographical locations and we need to create SD-WANs with tight security while allowing remote access to our resources. To manage that and to manage the whole network, we use BIG-IP.

When we purchased the product, we found it to be a bit expensive.

If we decide to migrate to the cloud, I don't think that BIG-IP is a good solution and we probably won't use it.

If the price for a cloud-based deployment can be matched with their competitors the I think it would be a far better solution. 

I have been using F5 BIG-IP for almost two years.

BIG-IP is stable and we plan to continue using it. We don't want to change because we're happy with what it's doing unless we switch over to the cloud. I think that cloud sizing is too heavy.

This is a scalable product. There are three people who manage it, but it's applicable to the entire organization, so there are approximately 1,500 users.

I think that technical support is pretty good. On a scale of one to ten, I can reasonably score them a nine.

The implementation and deployment happened before I joined the company, although I have reviewed the procedure and did not find anything challenging when it came to installation. Once you understand how to work with the product, it is easy to manage the services.

Our in-house team takes care of the maintenance. There are three people who manage it, and once every three months, we spend 30 or 40 minutes reading and clearing up the logs.

I don't think that this product really provides value for the money. However, what you get for the cost is satisfactory. It's not like I won the lottery. This is a solution that does what it's supposed to do at the price point.

When we purchased additional licenses for our other locations, we received a discount of between 20% and 25%. My understanding is that they matched the competitor's price.

If we move all of our on-premises systems onto the cloud, we will probably look for another solution. We may rely on the cloud provider for this. 

We have not felt the need to upgrade to the most recent version or do any updates on this product because we're pretty happy with what we have.

Overall, this is a good product and if one can afford it, then I would recommend it.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten. 

The anti-bot protection is very good. They are able to see bots from their system quite well. It has helped our customers to filter real traffic from fake and allows the real traffic to access the application. With the profile provided, you can block many new scans and scripts that are constantly generating traffic to their web service.

When you create an autofile, its profile takes a long time to generate the view in the VIP. That is probably due to the performance of the device, however, when you load a specific profile, the browser takes more than one minute to show the information. 

The web interface could be better.

The solution should allow for the creation of custom signatures. Right now, I see that can be a little bit complicated to create new or personal signatures in the VIP.

The way that policies are created should make it easier to maintain the solution. 

The product needs to implement some kind of artificial intelligence or machine learning that can start to generate fewer false positive requests. We tend to have a lot of false positives. The policy should be created in such a way as to help lower false positives.

There should be better reporting. Our customers ask us for reports quite often. It would be ideal if the solution itself was able to generate various types of reports for them instead. 

I've been working with the solution since 2014.

This year, we had a couple of issues. We found some bugs in version 15. They are very good, however, at finding the issue and generating a hotfix quickly so that we can apply the hotfix to the device. In the general, I would say that version 15 has been very stable overall.

Whether you can scale easily or not depends on the device and the sizing. For example, if you have an E 2000 or I 4000, you might have a lot of traffic and the device cannot handle it very well. Scalability with the performance was the one issue that affected us this year.

Most of the customers that we have are enterprises. They are banking and insurance customers. They're quite large, which is why we need the scalability that we do.

We always use technical support and the team helps us very well. They're able to effectively find and fix issues and they respond very quickly. We're quite satisfied with their level of service overall.

We also work with Palo Alto firewalls. I've worked with Check Point as well.

The initial setup is not too complex. It's pretty straightforward.

It's straightforward to create a new policy or a new postulate or a new deployment. It takes a couple of minutes to create a new deployment and it's rather easy to do so.

We're a reseller for Enterprise companies such as Banking and Retail.

I'd advise that if a customer wants to implement this product, that they find a partner they can have a strong relationship with. The partner needs to be able to effectively implement the product and train your staff on the proper usage. That is, of course, if the client wants to manage it themselves in the long run.

Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten. If they could improve their web interface, generate reports, and have all the configuration on a single page on the platform, I'd rank it a bit higher.