Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN one is part of our network transformation. So we're going from a standard access switch layer, switch to an SD wan. For a lot of reasons we're going into the cloud and we are using it for secure segmentation of traffic. So I mean it's how we're using it is basically like the gold standard. Everybody else uses it pretty much.
Pros
We are able to use a multiple different circuits to go into the cloud, so we are not relying on just one particular private wireless. We're relying on wine circuits, ethernet, ethernet out. So it provides us that flexibility where we didn't have that before. Provides security that is very robust and flexible and scalable and it provides us with, the biggest thing is redundancy, where we have backup. For example, we have a Starlink for nuclear power plants. If our main circuits go down, we have that. And without Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN it would be very hard to actually achieve, to accomplish true redundancy. So we're happy with Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN in that regard.
Cons
So one of the frustrating things is that the name changes. This was a company that Cisco bought. We understand that, and everything was managed and whatever. Now everything changed, product line changed, and yet Cisco tax still calls it V managed. Sometimes it's just a little confusing. The name, the name of that. So that's the one thing that I would say. Keep it simple. We have way too many acronyms already that we try to remember in our industry. If you change the whole thing, it's very complicated for a lot of people. So keep it simple.
Likelihood to Recommend
If you have a large heterogeneous network, this is great. You have a lot of sites, this is great. When it wouldn't be great, it would be for the capabilities of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN as far as flexibility and as far as multiple vrfs et cetera. That's something that a small site wouldn't really need. So it wouldn't really be for like if you have a lot of small field offices, you could do something else. Not Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is a little too complex for that environment.
This awareness route that provides all the connectivity to the best sites.
Pros
Our architecture topology is massive to having tools. The SD-wan devices per site. One the primary and one the second the backup up. And also the providers are full ancy on the one connection.
Cons
Maybe we are facing some issues with above on the current one version. Discussing that some interfaces cannot establish no negotiation. So we face that issue and the improvements should be maybe provide a new iOS version to fix this scope.
Likelihood to Recommend
When the company office is small, it is not needed. When you need to communicate different regions between each other. Have full residency on all to grade, along all the work.
We are completely engulfed in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN allows us to not deploy independent firewalls across our ~450 sites, and allows us to manage our devices independently.
Pros
vManage provides a single organization plane
Templates are easy to navigate
Central Policy allows us to manage our devices
AAR helps us with failing over when we have trouble with our circuits
Cons
Switching in to CLI more seamlessly
We have to preform ugrades/ patches often
We have to port hop our 8300s frequently
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is well suited in our environment because we have a very large network that cyber security would otherwise have us deploy firewalls at if we were not using Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. We have standard configs that go out on our devices, and the templates/ central policy is very useful for those. We do have a few issues at larger sites with multiple circuits with AAR/ port hopping.
VU
Verified User
Engineer in Information Technology (Oil & Energy company, 10,001+ employees)
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN infrastructure was used to replace the legacy MPLS WAN of the client global network. My involvement was to design, plan, and implement SD-WAN networks at sites in different regions to be migrated from legacy MPLS, which are costly to be upgraded for better performance and capacity.
Pros
Automated WAN
Allows the client to increase WAN bandwidth without costing too much like legacy MPLS
VPN segmentation
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN routers can also connect to other third-party Secure Internet Gateway (SIG) providers such as Zscaler providing secured DIA
Cons
It was hard to catch up when I first joined the project as SD-WAN concept is different. That would be great if Cisco can introduce SD-WAN concepts better to the network engineers community to enable them to adopt easier.
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is well suited in locations where public internet is easily available but from my experience, it was hard to be adopted in regional remote mine sites where there are only legacy mpls connections available without the public internet availability.
VU
Verified User
Professional in Information Technology (Mining & Metals company, 1001-5000 employees)
Our company operates far from any reliable wide bandwidth connections and we have to rely on a mixture of satellite broadband and limited dedicated broadband from sole mobile operator that services the area where our organization operates. Before we switched to Cisco SD-WAN we had a hard time managing network performance and applications. We increased our user numbers dramatically but our bandwidth stayed the same; with dramatic user expansion, our bandwidth became inadequate for our needs. After we implemented Cisco SD-WAN, we managed to prioritize office applications (emails, SharePoint, etc.) and users manage to perform their tasks faster and more efficiently. On the other hand we managed to add LTE routers to boost our traffic. Thanks to Cisco SD-WAN, we did not have any security breaches and feel confident in Cisco SD-WAN's security features. Since we implemented Cisco SD-WAN, our business applications work faster, business continuity increased, and cloud services became more available and usable for our needs. My network team also spends less time adjusting and configuring routing tables and application routings. Instead of monitoring traffic constantly, we let Cisco SD-WAN automatically adjust our traffic and as a result we have improved performance overall--even some streaming services have started to work at an acceptable level in our remote location. In the end we manage to provide better connectivity for both our business and personal needs for users.
Pros
Before Cisco SD-WAN, our users even struggled to send emails with Microsoft 365
Cloud applications, such as SharePoint, were not taking a long time to load and made it impossible to collaborate
Streaming services--even though video streaming does not work at desired levels, music streaming started to work without interruption
Cons
Outside help is not widely available
Still needs some QoS
Configuration might be easier
Likelihood to Recommend
If there are a couple of solid broadband connections available, Cisco SD-WAN can produce great results, but if there is only a satellite connection and limited GSM coverage, Cisco SD-WAN might not produce the desired effect. Configuration is a bit tricky, but once it is set, it works fine and greatly improves network performance.
