Cisco ASA In a Nutshell
Overall Satisfaction with Cisco ASA
Cisco ASA was used at the organization I was employed in. Also, I deployed it to several companies as a VAR. Cisco ASA was deployed as a standalone product, as well as in an HA environment for reliability. Cisco ASA was used as an edge firewall for organizations in all environments; it was deployed.
Pros
- Cisco ASA has a variety of features including NextGen to protect corporate networks.
- Cisco ASA is easy to deploy and manage.
Cons
- Multi-WAN routing could use improvement. Currently, Cisco routers are needed in front of the ASA to accommodate.
- NextGen features such as FirePOWER can be difficult to deploy.
- Hardware is reliable as with most Cisco products. Expect a good life cycle on the product.
- Edge firewall security is essential to invest in — better protection of your internal network with a Cisco ASA than with some competitors.
Cisco ASA seems to be more reliable to me. However, Watchguard has multi-wan routing built-in natively to the appliance. Outside of the multi-wan functionality; however, I find the Cisco ASA to be more reliable and dependable. The Cisco ASA is more focused on security, whereas the WatchGuard focuses on being an all-in-one appliance.
Do you think Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software's feature set?
Yes
Did Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software live up to sales and marketing promises?
Yes
Did implementation of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software again?
Yes
Comments
Please log in to join the conversation