Cisco Software-Defined Access (SD-Access) vs. Juniper Contrail Networking

It's well suited in our corporate offices, where all our business users resides and where we can control all their accesses. What doesn't really fit well is when we have our branch fronts, where all the software domain access features aren't utilized to its fullest, due to the fact that customers and users don't really need to have all the security features that SDA provides.

Incentivized

The platform is good, robust, and scalable. It is much cheaper than Cisco ACI but unfortunately in Argentina, I have never seen this solution installed. You can only test it in a lab. The platform is ideal for NFVI, CSP, and Datacenter.

• Automation, pushing template-based configuration to multiple devices in one push saves time and manpower.
• Assurance [helps trace] issues related to devices, clients, and provide the troubleshoot as [the] best practices.
• Segmentation, with the use of the SGT tags, we are able to achieve segmentation and micro-segmentation securely.

Incentivized

• Contrail Networking automates network resource.
• Providing reliability and agility while extending visibility into your multi-cloud network.
• Advanced analytics capabilities.

• Documentation: Working in this solution I realized there were missing information details about the fusion device support for nexus.
• Fusion router: This roll in the fabric should be already integrated in the solution, right now it is configured manually.
• Bugs: Unfortunately the solution still present a lot of bugs, mainly in the controller.

Incentivized

• Contrail should have inbuild management of underlay network as well
• lack of open resources to learn

Incentivized

It is difficult to start using the product due to its unfamiliar name and acronyms. ,The task should be accomplished in a specific order to ensure success

Incentivized

As far as my experience with SD-Access -I'd say things that can be improved are - better functionality with ISE, ease to understand licensing and better documentation for configuration (add-ons, etc), and licensing.

Incentivized

I rated the training an 8 because overall, it was well-structured, and the instructor was highly knowledgeable on the subject matter. The content was relevant, and I appreciated the clear explanations of complex topics. However, I felt that some sections were covered too quickly, making it difficult to fully absorb the information before moving on. Additionally, I would have liked more time dedicated to Q&A, as there were moments when I had questions but didn’t get the opportunity to ask them due to time constraints. Adding more interactive discussions or hands-on exercises could further enhance the learning experience and make it even more engaging

Incentivized

At the beginning, we had to open a TAC case for every single step during the implementation phase.

Incentivized

Basically, we have various devices and solutions from Cisco and we are more focused on the next generation networks with the best support. We knew that Cisco has the best team sitting to support [any] issues and help us to troubleshoot whenever we need it. So we go with Cisco for this solution.

Incentivized

Contrail is best [suitable] for Service Provider having [multiple outlay protocol] support. Both Contrail and NSX fulfill all requirements for DC Networking, NFV Cloud, and Private Cloud Networking requirements. Cisco ACI is more relevant towards Enterprises.

Incentivized

• Positive: Less time to provisioning a device in the campus Lan network
• Positive: Less time to troubleshoot the network
• Negative: the implementation phase itself was too long because of a lot of bugs in the oldest versions.

Incentivized

• Core of our NFV Cloud providing Multitenant Services
• Give Agility to our Cloud
• Wrokload any IP, anywhere

Incentivized