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

I think the Juniper MX series is a fantastic option for data center connectivity and places that aren't very high touch, but need good reliability and uptime. These switches are a bit more difficult to use day to day, but their reliability and robustness make them a great fit for data centers.

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

• Storm Control needs to have a way to see what going on in the CLI in a more straight forward fashion
• They need a GUI interface much like the old Nortel Network equipment.
• Not the routers fault but support costs have increased.

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.

Working with Juniper switches can be a bit of a chore compared to other brands, like Cisco or HP. This makes me drop the rating for usability down to a 6, because for higher touch environments, I wouldn't recommend a Juniper. Outside of data center use cases, a Cisco switch would be a better option.

Incentivized

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

• Being dependable has allowed our network to stay running allowing for everyone to be productive.
• Cost of the routers was very reasonable allowing us to keep our budget under control.
• Support cost on our routers is not terribly high.
• We link our routers to Cisco and Aruba with no issue. Interoperable give us flexibility of choice

Incentivized