Barracuda Secure SD-WAN vs. IBM Networking Services for Software Defined Networks

Whether it's SaasS or internet-bound traffic, Barracuda is capable of directly sending internet with appropriate security inspection with no backhauls. In my department, we achieve consistent network link pooling, data caching optimization for bots handling critical workloads. There is always enogh bandwidth for applications with Barracuda optimization. We are however not completely satisfied with their link redundancy handling capabilities as I've explained.

Incentivized

As service providers in Information technology, IBM Networking Services for Software Defined Networks has been of priceless value in management of virtual networks. It is crucial to improve our flexibility in administration of networks regardless of the usage bandwidth whether around the company or on our clients' networks. If you are looking to improve agility and configuration of your networks, then IBM would be the best SDN for that.

Incentivized

• Uses next-gen firewalls to assure data security
• Scales dynamically despite the traffic to match workloads

Incentivized

• Network evaluation
• Network performance

Incentivized

• It Still cannot combat link redundancy speedily. One time a network link failed and it took quite a while before restoring traffic from the backup link.

Incentivized

• It should have a standard API for inter plane connections.
• Centralized controller is ineffective.

IBM is a company that has a lot of experience in networking services, in addition to having a better integration with other products of the same brand, for this reason we use IBM Networking Services

Incentivized

• Has sufficient firewalls, we don't need to engage other providers.
• I believe it has provided plenty of savings in license costs for the company by performing multiple WAN tasks

Incentivized

• Loosening from the hardware constraints in network provisioning.
• We are top performing in Network modernization.

Incentivized