FatPipe MPVPN vs. VMware NSX

If you need multiple ISPs for wan aggregation or site to site failover. This box can tolerate failures of ISPs and sites with less than 1-3 seconds of outage time.

Incentivized

With proper design, VMware NSX can and should be deployed to virtually any VMware virtualization environment, but the deployment should be tailored to the needs of that environment. There isn't really a one size fits all deployment design for all environments. That versatility is what provides its greatest strength to a business.

Incentivized

• Load balancing of ISPs
• Site to site failover
• SmartDNS

Incentivized

• End to end encryption on the wire.
• Micro-segmentation.
• Integrates well with existing VMWare environment.
• Integrates well with our existing network.

Incentivized

• Could use a training manual.

Incentivized

• Interoperability in multi-vendor environments
• Advanced networking and packet acceleration options can be improved

Incentivized

Fatpipe invented SD-WAN over 25 years ago and has been leading the way. Other companies I think have just ridden their coattails.

Incentivized

We use both Cisco ACI and VMware NSX, and while they have different strengths and capabilities, I would recommend VMware NSX, as it can be used in all VMware environments, without costly physical infrastructure changes. Cisco ACI provides some of the same capabilities, but not all. It's focus relies on physical networking changes.

Incentivized

• We have lost ISPs without any business disconnections.
• Business continuity at its best.

Incentivized

• Ability to move workloads more easily with the ability to stretch/move networks across multiple physical locations.
• The added flexibility allows you to expedite tech refreshes since you're no longer constrained by the hardware.

Incentivized