We performed a comparison between Aruba Orchestrator and Cisco SD-WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product has reduced OpEx expenditure."
"The Business Intent Overlay is a great feature."
"The most important feature is WAN optimization."
"The technical support services are excellent."
"We had to deal with separate management models for Wi-Fi and switches. With Aruba Orchestrator, it's now a unified solution, making things much easier for us. We log in and manage everything from a single console. It provides complete internal visibility from LAN to Wi-Fi, resulting in higher stability and easier troubleshooting. The management process is much quicker and more streamlined."
"Aruba Orchestrator has notably reduced enrollment setup times from several hours to within an hour if prepared and planned."
"The most valuable feature is optimization."
"It's very easy to manage and monitor the network's health and security using the solution."
"The availability of services and combining different connections is most valuable."
"The solution can scale. We haven't had any issues doing so."
"It's a complete solution with many security features."
"Cisco SD-WAN is a very good product."
"We would recommend this solution to customers looking to implement it on a global scale. We recommend the solution, not only because of the functionality or the technical support, but also because of the delivery of the solution, and the docking and upgrading capabilities."
"The first part that we like is that we can reuse certain hardware, which is a valuable asset. You can use hardware SKUs that already exist in the network. The second part that we like is the integration with the cloud and the measurement of the cloud's quality. These are the two values that this solution gives as compared to other implementations that we have seen."
"The most useful feature is centralized telephony."
"The initial setup is complex, depending on the overall planning for the entire environment."
"The solution lacks sufficient security features."
"Aruba Orchestrator should implement dynamic certificate changes for security."
"The management menu should be simplified."
"They could provide essential training to understand the product functionality."
"The solution can be improved by lowering the cost and making it more user-friendly for first-time users."
"The price could be better. From a technical side, and everything's working smoothly. Cisco SD-WAN could be cheaper."
"The main issue is that not in the technology, but it comes back comparison. When we do a comparison with other SD WAN solutions, they are priced better."
"I would like to see a better, web-based interface to make changes to the configuration or to view statistics."
"When you buy the equipment, they should already put it into your cloud account. It should already be set up so that we can manage with vBond. We came across an issue where it wasn't resolved in the DNS. We are using Umbrella, so we need to create a VPN IPSec tunnel to Umbrella to enable the users to browse. I would really like to see an internal built-in firewall so that we don't have to go to Umbrella. This functionality might already be there. We are quite new to this solution, and we are still learning about it."
"The bandwidth limitations would be good to remove, but it is a policy and license situation for Cisco because the cost is very high. It would be good to have OTP implemented with VRF. It can have support for EIGRP Over the Top (OTP) VRF. I saw some limitations in regards to the VRF protocol and the advertisement between VRF configuration. EIGRP Over the Top basically was quite limited with the VRF configuration. If you wanted to do rollback in VRF by using the EIGRP OTP protocol, the formation was not populated across. Cisco got back and confirmed that it is a configuration that I need to wait for until the next release, which is going to happen in one year. Cisco documentation is not the way it used to be before. It just gives an easy way to configure, but it doesn't go into the details of the configuration. The information that you need is there, but sometimes you want to go further and get more information, but the information is quite limited. It would be good to cover a few business cases or configuration cases. They used to be there in the past."
"It should also be much more affordable for a larger number of customers."
"It would be very helpful if we had better access to a knowledge base, or online documentation, to help both us and our customers learn to use this solution."
"Cisco SD-WAN could improve on the ease of integration, the configuration should be easier. At the moment the process is more command line based and it would be better if it was able to be done through an interface."
Aruba Orchestrator is ranked 13th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 7 reviews while Cisco SD-WAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 86 reviews. Aruba Orchestrator is rated 8.6, while Cisco SD-WAN is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Aruba Orchestrator writes "Provides complete internal visibility from LAN to Wi-Fi, resulting in higher stability and easier troubleshooting". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco SD-WAN writes "A solution for integrating services to enhance up-time, performance and lower costs". Aruba Orchestrator is most compared with Juniper Session Smart Router and VMware SD-WAN, whereas Cisco SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki SD-WAN, VMware SD-WAN and Juniper Session Smart Router. See our Aruba Orchestrator vs. Cisco SD-WAN report.
See our list of best Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.