Juniper Contrail SD-WAN Reviews

Some time back, I conducted research on our website, PeerSpot.com, about IT solutions, specifically about Huawei Wireless and Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points. I am not selling anything or working as a reseller. I am reaching out to capture feedback about your experience working with IT solutions and to understand your opinion about working with IT tools. I was wondering whether you have experience working with Huawei Wireless or Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points.

I am also interested in whether you have experience working with Juniper Contrail SD-WAN, Juniper QFabric, or Mist Premium Analytics.

I would appreciate your thoughts about the security capabilities of Juniper Contrail SD-WAN, particularly its built-in features.

There might be additional features that would be beneficial to have in the Juniper Contrail SD-WAN solution, including potential design improvements and UI/UX issues that have been observed.

I would be interested to know approximately how long you have experience with Juniper Contrail SD-WAN.

I was wondering if it would be acceptable to ask you a few questions about your experience with Juniper solutions. I would be interested to know your relationship with Juniper, whether you are a customer, end user, reseller, implementer, partner, or MSP. The reviewer rated Juniper Contrail SD-WAN 11 out of 10.

I've worked with several SD-WAN solutions over the past few years, and the product felt more like an automated provisioning tool. Unlike solutions from Palo Alto or other SD-WANs orchestrated by a SaaS solution, Juniper Contrail SD-WAN already had the files and built their SaaS to orchestrate the configuration. Initially, you didn't do much, but then it started adding some routing capabilities.

The automation features do help with network operations. Manually configuring SD-WAN is complicated, so the automation simplifies that. However, the initial SD-WAN solution had many limitations, particularly regarding its features. At some point, the tool began looking for other solutions and bought the 128T, which led to implementing a different SD-WAN approach. It also acquired another company for its session smart router, and then it began to develop the exact SD-WAN solution on the Mist Cloud.

Implementing new branches or changing existing ones in Juniper Contrail SD-WAN wasn't as straightforward as with other solutions like Meraki SD-WAN, which is almost plug-and-play with its zero-touch provisioning. In Juniper Contrail SD-WAN, it was more challenging.

This difficulty stemmed from the orchestrator not handling the entire process. Sometimes, provisioning would depend heavily on devices, leading to issues and getting stuck. If something went wrong, you often had to reset the entire configuration. While I'm not sure if it's more stable now, making changes was quite hard during the time I was working with it. 

The Juniper Contrail SD-WAN was highly scalable, especially because it was designed for service providers. From the beginning, they focused on scalability and availability, making it multi-tenant. However, the main issue was with the feature set, which lagged compared to competitors like Fortinet.

There were also challenges with scaling security features. It's unclear if the tool has since developed a faster solution to address this. Additionally, there may have been ongoing processes regarding security features, but the acquisition by HPE might have halted these efforts. With HPE having its own SD-WAN solutions

The return on investment with Juniper Contrail SD-WAN wasn't very good, mainly due to provisioning issues. Modern SD-WAN solutions provide users with abstraction, making it easier to implement new links with different service providers or make changes to the network. However, with Juniper Contrail SD-WAN, making such changes required involvement from Juniper engineers and wasn't as straightforward.

The product was Juniper's first foray into the SD-WAN market. Initially, it was developed as a SaaS solution, though an on-premises option was also available, particularly for certain service providers.

I wouldn't recommend this product today due to its lack of features and stability issues, especially considering that it doesn't seem to be evolving towards more advanced solutions. I rate the overall product a five out of ten. 

We use Juniper Contrail SD-WAN to provide centralized orchestration to manage SQL solutions across multiple branches. Our customers can create multiple devices and deviate from centralized policies. They can configure the same components across different stores as per requirement.

Areas for improvement in the Juniper Contrail SD-WAN solution include the on-premises deployment process, which can be challenging for customers compared to cloud deployment. Additionally, integration with the Mist cloud service could be improved.

I rate the product's stability a nine.

The platform is highly scalable. It is suitable for enterprises. I rate the scalability a ten.

The technical support services are good.

Positive

From my experience, I've seen it deployed both on the cloud and on-premises environments. While I haven't personally executed the deployments, I have guided customers and resellers to test both options. Overall, the feedback has been positive, indicating a good experience with deployment regardless of the chosen environment.

We encounter a few challenges, particularly when deploying on-premises. While provisioning in the cloud-based model typically proceeds smoothly, setting up the hub part for on-premises can be more complex. 

I rate the process a seven out of ten.

My advice regarding setup costs, pricing, and licensing for Juniper Contrail SD-WAN would be to carefully evaluate and position the solution in line with competitive offerings, especially considering regional dynamics. In a few regions, Fortinet stands out as a significant competitor from the pricing point of view. Juniper should focus on clearly articulating the value proposition roadmaps and running programs at the SMB or enterprise level. While Juniper's strength in the Telecom sector is acknowledged, a targeted and well-thought-out approach is essential for success in the enterprise space.

The latest version offers enhancements compared to previous versions, resulting in improved connectivity and various parameters. It includes creating tunnels promptly, allowing easier access to the central hub from branch locations.

Its primary function is to optimize performance and reduce costs associated with internet usage. Public applications can seamlessly access the internet through the direct public internet service provider, while dedicated applications within the customer's data center can also be efficiently utilized. It supports desktop management, network management, and SD-WAN policies.

While some SD-WAN service providers offer solutions without integrated security features, Juniper includes built-in features. This integration allows routing and security functions within the same platform, enabling customers to protect their entire network within the security layer.

I rate the platform an eight out of ten.

My customers use the solution to have better control and knowledge about the applications inside ONE Access. It also helps them cut costs by reducing MPLs and using better internet access from FTTH. 

The solution is expensive. Its support can be better. 

The tool is stable. 

The solution is more scalable than any other tool because it just does not rely on VPN integration. It can scale ten thousand of branches. 

The product's tech support is good. 

Neutral

The solution's deployment is not easy because you need to be knowledgeable of the technology to deploy it quickly. Comparatively, Fortinet is more intuitive to deploy. You have to spend days not just deploying the solution but on the planning and scheduling processes as well. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. 

For Juniper Contrail SD-WAN, we haven't got the equipment. So, we just got one router and everything, but that's not under Mist. So far, the demos have been impressive. We are just getting the equipment, specifically the SD-WAN equipment for Juniper.

Juniper Contrail SD-WAN has very similar things to Silver Peak, which we were interested in, but when we analyzed it, we realized that we were pretty much getting similar features under Mist. However, the demo by Juniper Contrail SD-WAN was very promising and better than Meraki. Speaking in more detail about the performance of the circuit, Meraki can give a view of what's happening. But with Juniper, if you want, you can focus more on the user experience, especially considering that we have a lot of people working remotely. The solution is more specific about what's happening since it explains where the problem may lie and points out areas where there is a problem. So, we like that it provides more visibility. In general, that would summarize it.

We haven't seen anything that can be improved on the demo part since we are using the equipment for PoC.

The only issue was the switch we got, which was a little problematic because it was PoC equipment, and we had a little problem with that. Switches provided as a part of PoC equipment can be an area to be improved.

Right now, we were actually just trying Juniper Contrail SD-WAN. So, we don't have extensive experience with the solution. We just have a piece of equipment. I have used the solution for a couple of months. Also, I've done a lot of research and everything around the product.

We have just had Juniper Contrail SD-WAN for a couple of months. After Meraki came into the market, we had it for years. Later, some of it began to fail, and we had to replace it. It's basically only because it reached the end of life. So I can't vouch for the reliability of Juniper Contrail SD-WAN since we are just trying it out.

Scalability is one of the things we're considering because Juniper is more suitable for an enterprise-sized organization. It's a scalable product. Mist and Meraki are trying to be suitable for medium-sized businesses and are really trying to get into enterprise-sized businesses, but it really doesn't have a lot of the features that we need for an enterprise business.

I haven't really had a chance to contact support when I had problems. For Juniper and Mist, I used Marvis. So, we did ask about that, and we came to know that there was another parent agency, and they mainly use Marvis, which is the artificial intelligence part of it, but when they actually had to text somebody for live support, they were pretty responsive. So, I can only go by my experience and judgment. I rate the support a nine out of ten. My experience with support is not based on direct or personal experience because I haven't had to contact somebody from the technical side.

Positive

With Meraki, I have years of experience.

We have different equipment for PoC, and the IT was, you know, very easy to configure. So, it was very easy to configure since you don't need any connection in particular. The switch that we got was a little problematic because it was PoC equipment, and we had a little bit of a problem with that. So, we had to upgrade the firmware. But, once the firmware was upgraded, even offline, it was pretty easy. So now, I don't like Meraki.

Meraki is very easy to get it up and running, but compared to Juniper and Mist, I don't see that there are a lot of features in Meraki. In Mist and Juniper, you have a lot more features with which you can play around.

From a price perspective, they function comfortably with other vendors, just like Meraki or Aruba. They are neither very expensive nor cheap. So, we can consider its pricing somewhere in the middle.

When I researched Juniper and Software, one of the things that I really liked was its ability like when you make a change, for example, to a switch or a router, the ability to roll that when you commit to change, you're able to set it so that if something goes bad in the settings while working and you lose connectivity to the portal, then it's able to tell you that it cannot revert back to change. So, you can pull it back within a certain amount of minutes before you configure it. So you don't lose connectivity, and you'll regain it, which is a big feature. Such a feature is not available in Meraki.

Such features are not available in Meraki or Cisco.

I rate the overall solution an eight or nine out of ten.

Any network that is on-premise and hardwired, whether it be banks, universities, or the public sector, can be made into a software-defined wide area network rather than a physical one with this solution. This allows more flexibility to increase or decrease the network.

Greater flexibility, stablity, and lower.operational costs

When it comes to sales of the solution they need to work on marketing and awareness. Solution is best in the market.

I have been involved with Juniper Contrail SD-WAN for approximately 9 months.

The solution is stable and you can leave products for years with no resetting. With products like Cisco we had to reset regularly. 

Juniper Contrail SD-WAN is scalable by hardware and software options.

The support is very good from Juniper and from the local channel partners.

The solution installs similarly to competitors. It is not more difficult or easier. However, it could be easier and take less time for the installation. The time can vary depending on the environment but it typically takes 30 to 60 days. It all depends on scope of the project.

Implemented by Juniper channel partner, Beyond Technology MEA

JUNIPER CDWAN ROI is excellent as product has long life cycle and therefore supported with no need to buy replacement products. Lower operating costs are also there as no resetting required and products being carrier grade. 

The hardware is a one-time purchase fee and the software is purchased on an annual basis. There are additional costs for other software features that are available which are on an annual basis, such as extra capacity. Overall its excellent ROI as lower cost in longer term through lower opex costs as well.as longer lifetime. Juniper products having long lifetimes versus regular replacements of products by its competitors in our experience.

I have evaluated other solutions such as Huawei, Cisco, and Fortinet.

We have had good feedback on Juniper overall across all of its product lines with our customers.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Juniper Contrail SD-WAN a nine out of ten.

I am a partner and we deploy Juniper and other solutions for our customers. Right now, we are mainly focused on Juniper Contrail SD-WAN.

Juniper has layer four to seven protection. It gives you that level of visibility to understand what's going on between layer four and layer seven. Another nice thing about Juniper is that it helps us reduce bandwidth. By reducing bandwidth, I am referring to the difference when it comes to competitors' MPLS circuits. With Juniper, it cuts all of that back. To deploy on the cloud, we don't need to move from one branch to another, or from one data center to another. Juniper SD-WAN gives you that platform for cloud migration. You can deploy to AWS, and GCP — that's Google cloud — without any sort of extra bandwidth from the MPLS circuits.

The training could be better. When it comes to the demo dashboard capability, I feel like it could be much easier for our customers to use. Our last customer complained about this. 

Fortinet comes with an additional next-generation firewall — it's an add-on to the initial implementation. Juniper doesn't really provide a next-generation firewall; the add-on function is just not there either. That's something that should be improved on.

I have been dealing with Juniper for just over one year.

Juniper is very stable. 

Juniper is very scalable regardless of how large a company gets.

We provide support to our clients, but we also receive support from Juniper as well. Still, as we've only completed one deployment so far, I haven't had much contact with them yet. 

The initial setup is straightforward. It's very easy and doesn't take much time.

The licensing structure is very flexible. It's very flexible depending on what exactly is in a customer's IT infrastructure. It's not rigid at all. It's not as if they say, "Oh, you need to have this and that before you can use Juniper." It's very, very flexible depending on whatever is in the IT infrastructure.

When it comes to licensing, Fortinet is more expensive. That's why some of our customers prefer Juniper. Sometimes they prefer Juniper over Fortinet if they're a larger enterprise, too.

I would absolutely recommend Juniper, but only to small to medium-sized organizations. For larger enterprises, I would recommend Fortinet. Juniper is a good choice for smaller organizations that don't have the budget for Fortinet.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Juniper a rating of seven. 

The dashboard seems a little bit complex. The Initial setup is great but the dashboard seems a little bit too complex for IT personnel who are being trained. The dashboard should be simplified just to ensure that people who are being trained learn faster. Also, as I mentioned, a next-generation firewall cannot be added on. If they improved these things, then I would give Juniper a higher rating. These features would also help Juniper gain traction in the Nigerian market.