Nokia Ethernet Service Switch delivers high availability, interoperability with open standards, and advanced traffic management, aimed at enhancing network operations for organizations managing complex systems.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Nokia Ethernet Service Switch | 1.2% |
| Cisco Ethernet Switches | 9.0% |
| Aruba Switches | 8.9% |
| Other | 80.9% |
Offering a robust infrastructure, Nokia Ethernet Service Switch focuses on streamlining network efficiency through features like superior data aggregation and device utilization. Users note its powerful capabilities, but mention a need for improved configuration simplicity and comprehensive documentation. Users seek better integration with a unified monitoring system, open licenses to reduce management overhead, and improved collaboration with AMI vendors. While it handles scalability and reliability effectively, there is room for improvements in segment routing and cloud integration.
What features define Nokia Ethernet Service Switch?Nokia Ethernet Service Switch is widely implemented in control systems for electric and gas grids, integrating seamlessly with EMSS and enhancing network power capacity for effective traffic management. Users value its role as a mobile gateway and in facilitating network upgrades or rollouts, often transitioning from other providers to optimize network operations.
Nokia Ethernet Service Switch was previously known as Nokia ESS, Nokia 7450 Ethernet Service Switch, Nokia 7450 ESS.
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Project Manager and Assistant General Manager at tele | 5.0 | I’ve used Nokia Ethernet Service Switch for six months and found it reliable, easy to deploy, and scalable. It meets technical and compliance needs, though it lacks lower-end options. Support is strong, and performance is stable. |
| Team Lead at Thoshiba | 3.5 | Configuring Nokia Ethernet Service Switches differs from Cisco and HP, presenting initial challenges due to unfamiliar terminology. While this broadens technical understanding, improved documentation and more intuitive commands are needed. My background includes experience with Amazon Cloud and Cisco devices. |
| Operational Technology - Telecom Engineer (E.I.T) at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees | 4.0 | I use Nokia Ethernet Service Switches for grid control, appreciating their strong interoperability, functionality, stability, and scalability. Setup is straightforward. I'd like more collaboration with AMI vendors. Overall, I rate it an 8 out of 10. |
| Tech Lead - R&D at Numeryx | 4.0 | I use the Nokia Ethernet Service Switch for security sections, enhancing traffic management and device utilization. Valuable for data aggregation, it offers a strong ROI compared to Cisco. However, support response times and the user interface could be improved. |
| CTO at PT Bali Towerindo Sentra, Tbk | 4.0 | I find Nokia's Ethernet Service Switch stable and cost-effective, with supportive customer service, improving our network significantly. However, I desire a unified monitoring system and open licenses for all features. I rate it an 8/10. |
| OSS Automation and Orchestration Consultant at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees | 3.5 | I've used this for three years, valuing its availability for EMSS integration. However, segment routing needs improvement, and legacy migration to cloud is crucial. It's not very flexible, so I rate it 7/10. |
| IP Services Architect at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees | 3.5 | I use this mobile gateway for its performance and reliability, finding it scalable with good support. However, its stability issues, difficult setup, and need for better monitoring and capacity in one box are concerns. |
I am a system integrator working for different customers. My clients use this product for their network, either for network upgrade or new rollout.
The best features include some technical specifications it is compliant to, along with the client's requirement. Apart from that, customers frequently ask for trusted telecom portal compliance, which Nokia Ethernet Service Switch is compliant to, so that's beneficial for marketing.
The main advantage is that Nokia Ethernet Service Switch products are registered on the trusted telecom portal.
Advanced traffic management, scalability, and service delivery contribute to network efficiency overall.
We can understand the customer network better and propose products accordingly as areas for improvement.
Engaging with customers directly would improve how that could be done easily.
Many times there is a requirement for very low-end products, which Nokia Ethernet Service Switch is not currently marketing many of the lower-end products.
I have been using it for the last six months.
I haven't come across any stability issues or glitches, and there are no latency problems.
the solution is scalable enough.
The technical support is good with Nokia Ethernet Service Switch. I would rate support as nine out of ten.
Positive
Technically, I am not able to compare Nokia Ethernet Service Switch to Cisco.
It's quite easy, consisting of normal installation and commissioning.
Nokia Ethernet Service Switch can perform the installation, but we as system integrators prefer to do the installation.
The solution saves time and money for my customer in terms of reliability and product durability. This product performs very well.
I find the solution to be moderate in terms of pricing.
From a marketing and pricing perspective, Cisco has always been the costliest.
This possibility could be provided by the vendor. I advise people looking to use Nokia Ethernet Service Switch to always look for reliability rather than going for cheaper Chinese products. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 10.
We use Nokia Ethernet Service Switches to control the systems that we operate. These might be an electric grid or natural gas grid products.
Our deployment is a combination of on-premises and cloud-based.
I am the person who designs, builds, and evaluates.
The most valuable features are user functionality and interoperability. The biggest benefit for companies these days is interoperability with open standards.
I would like to see more collaboration with advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) vendors, such as Itron. This would include better support for proprietary software, such as billing and granulator meter reading.
The stability of this product is good. Resiliency and redundancy are also good.
I think it's being driven by the move to have everything ruggedized, with respect to both hardware and software.
The scalability is good. What it comes down to is port density, and the ability to combine as many VLANs into single ports as we can. We also look at the throughput associated with those on the line side versus the low side.
We're a large company, with between 50 and 100 users. The roles are anything from system integrators to control center operators. System integrators work onsite, connecting telemetry and other field devices. The control center operators actually operate and control the systems. They have greater extendibility and reach into the actual networks to look at the performance and other metrics.
I have not dealt with Nokia technical support. That's not my department.
As a company, we're expanding and using multiple vendors because it's not beneficial to have all of our eggs in one basket.
Personally, I have experience with Nokia, Dell, and Cisco hardware. I have also begun working with Fortinet solutions.
The initial setup is pretty straightforward. The engineers handle the coding as required, and get the job done.
In terms of maintenance, we have an in-house team that handles the hardware, firmware, and network problems including latency. There are questions about how to reduce latency, and what type of layer one connectivity we are running at certain points of the network.
Our in-house staff will also look at circumstances such as whether we should be using wireless services, or taking advantage of dark fiber.
Right now, we're kind of looking at different switches. We are interested in different options. We're working with our procurement department to get some proposals that include Cisco, as well as other vendors.
My advice for anybody who is interested in this solution is to look at your system and look at the functionality that you want to achieve. Obviously, the overall interoperability of the switches is important because there will be such issues with any vendor's products. You need to make sure that you work closely to hammer those things out.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
We are using it for various sections of security. To enhance its power capacity for handling traffic and maximize its switching utilization, we incorporate certain external channels.
The highest value lies in aggregating the data to improve both traffic management and device utilization, emphasizing the importance of engagement and liability.
I would suggest improvements regarding enhancing support response times and implementing user interface modifications for quicker and more user-friendly interactions.
I have been using it for four years.
It's incredibly reliable and meets expectations. I would rate it nine out of ten.
It provides excellent scalability capabilities, as well as the flexibility to work with different cost structures. It supports a large number of switches very well and meets the specific requirements. In our enterprise, we currently have two hundred servers, and this technology accommodates our growing user base, which may reach millions of users.
They offer excellent technical support and are considered one of the best in the industry. I would rate it nine out of ten.
Positive
I had experience with Cisco before switching to Nokia. With Nokia, in conjunction with Symantec, I've found new opportunities. It offers a strong return on investment, among other benefits such as excellent career advancement prospects, and the option to structure my training as well.
The initial setup is not overly difficult, nor is it very easy. I would rate it six out of ten.
The deployment time varies based on the complexity of the implementation. It's not consistently uniform, but it is generally quite good.
It is quite expensive compared to alternative technologies. I would rate it seven out of ten.
Nokia stands out for its exceptional scalability. It is highly regarded for its performance and meets the requirements of reliability exceptionally well. Many of the world's leading operators rely on Nokia in their networks' backbone infrastructure due to its excellent technology. I would rate it eight out of ten.
7210 SAS help transformed our legacy network to an MPLS based services and improved the network performance and availability.
7360 ISAM help us deliver fiber network to end user more effectively.
As I have yet to use different OLTs I find it difficult to make a comparison of the features I find most valuable.
We would like to have an unified monitoring system, while Nokia have different monitoring system for different product, we find it to be quite troublesome.
I also would prefer that all the licenses be open for our use. This would obviate the need to purchase individual licenses for each feature.
Overall, the solution is quite stable so far. I would only state that we have encountered certain issues with it, although these can likely be ascribed to high temperature in an outdoor cabinet.
On several occasions we encountered major issues with the solution and have found the Nokia technical support to be quite supportive.
Distribution involves around 200 SAS & OLT. This means that we do not put the OLT in a centralized location but distribute them near our customers.
The price of the solution is very competitive in comparison with that of the competition.
The solution is a good product from a well established brand. While I am not in a position to compare it to Huawei or ZTE, as I have not made use of these products, I do know that its price is very competitive.
I rate Nokia Ethernet Service Switch as an eight out of ten.
My primary use case is integration with EMSS.
The most valuable feature is the product's availability.
The segment routing could be improved, and they could also transfer a lot of legacy to the cloud domain.
I've been using this solution for three years.
This solution is not particularly flexible.
The initial setup was not very complex.
I would rate this solution as seven out of ten.
We primarily use the solution for the mobile gateway.
The performance and reliability are the solution's most valuable features.
The solution should improve the performance in terms of the capacity to have many services in one box.
The solution needs more monitoring tools.
The release is not very stable. You should have stability in the card. The card can reboot and restart without a reason.
The solution is scalable.
Technical support is good. We're satisfied with their service. They're helpful and fast to reply.
We previously used Cisco.
The initial setup is not very easy, because you have to set it up from scratch. You have no configuration at the beginning so you have tools to set up, and you need to know how to configure the routers from scratch. You have to know all the protocols and all the characteristics of them, to it set up.
It took about six months to deploy.
Our team handled the implementation ourselves.
We looked at Extreme Networks and Cisco, among other solutions. We chose Nokia because of the price and the integration.
We use the on-premises deployment model.
I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it seven out of ten.
