Cisco 800 Series Integrated Services Routers (ISR 800) vs. Juniper MX Series

More suited is where we need more flexibility in terms of diagnosing the issues and also troubleshooting, which makes it easier for us because we have a more transparent way of diagnosing faults and fixing the issues. So that's a good one. I'm not too sure what is the less appropriate areas, but I could see less appropriate, probably not in places where it's a quick deployment on the cloud side. So probably that's right, I think. And all the security solutions as well

Incentivized

It is well suited as a WAN/Internet Edge device. It is easy to configure BGP, contexts and routing instances. Its suite of tools has saved our organization money by being able to provide services (tag stacking, for example) that our provider would normally charge us more for. Due to interface cost this would not be appropriate as a LAN aggregation device.

Incentivized

• [Cisco 800 Series Integrated] Routers can form tunnels over a cellular network via the SIM inserted into it.
• With an external antenna attached to it, their coverage is very good, making them suitable for remote sites where network coverage from ISPs is a concern.
• They function as a switch and router in one device.

Incentivized

• It's a robust platform, very resilient. It handles large traffic flows well.
• It's a flexible architecture, it can be configured with provider or enterprise options (or both!)
• It has an excellent versioning system, simple commit/confirm/rollback procedures!

Incentivized

• Being one of the most versatile routing/switching platforms available, it fulfills most functions one would need in a compact appliance.
• I have not experienced lack of functionality in any areas we use the appliance for.
• One small feature I would like to have is 19" rack mount.

Incentivized

• Sometimes I wish that documentation was more robust, complete, though this has been improved of late.
• It would be nice if netflow was easier to configure.
• It would be nice if the platform was cheaper.

Incentivized

Cisco has provided a real diverse router in a small package that meets the needs of our current environment. I highly recommend this product and should feel the to consider this type of solution, you would have made the right decision

This router is easy to use and manage. It provides the features, most important the security our organization requires to function properly. There is also cohesion between the HQ router we are currently using.

I think Cisco is a good product that offers a huge list of options where you can get support from. I find that forums, blogs and communities really assist wit resolving any issues that you might come across.

Implementation of this router is relatively easy. What i can say is plan your implementation and consider the the environment you are going to use it for.

We looked into setting up Site to Site VPN with either Cisco ASAs or [Fortinet] FortiGate Firewalls. We were unable to find a product that didn't also require us to set up an LTE modem separately. It would have forced us to have a mess of cables and multiple devices. Our kit for the field with the Cisco 800 [Series Integrated Services Router] is simple: router, power cables, and wireless access point. Everything is labeled and attached plugs into one device. Any field user can follow the instructions [to] get up and running quickly.

Incentivized

We preferred Juniper over Cisco for our WAN/Internet routing needs for a number of reasons. First was the price, the Juniper offering was much more competitive than Cisco's. Secondly, was feature set, Juniper's implementation of routing protocols, routing tables, and forwarding options are better thought-out than Cisco's (not to mention Juniper's longstanding use of commit/confirm/rollback features, which Cisco has only started to use recently, and only on some of their products).

Incentivized

• The long-term stability is great, we have very few problems, resulting in low maintenance costs.
• Configuration for almost all routers in the basics is the same, so there's a very short learning curve per model.
• Running some models of Router for more than 10 years of stability, so the ROI with the devices is greater than expected on starting.

Incentivized

• Its flexible architecture and configuration styles has saved our organization money by providing feature we would have otherwise needed to purchase from our ISPs.
• It has a long and healthy lifecycle, with potential upgrades for more performance if needed. (This helps alleviate the downtime associated with chassis replacement.)
• The only drawback is some of the highest throughput interfaces are expensive.

Incentivized