My main use case for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is mostly for application hosting, load balancing, and reverse proxy.

A specific example of how I use F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition for application hosting, load balancing, or as a reverse proxy is that we had limited sets of IP addresses for the public and multiple applications—around more than 100. We didn't have 100 public IPs for each application, so using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, we used only one virtual server, and behind that, we were able to take all the 100 applications. Basically, using one public IP, we are hosting all of our 100 applications, which is a lot of cost saving and also less overhead on the administration side. This was one of the use cases for which we have used F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition.

I have a few other use cases for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition where there was a requirement for a persistent session to be implemented to have the proper load balancing and maintain the session with the back-end server, and we have a few applications that use this persistence feature. Apart from that, we are also using the WAF on top of our virtual edition of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition as a part of the security enhancement and application security requirements.

The best features that F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition offers are all of them because we are using almost all of the features like load balancing, SSL offloading, and even the WAF, as I mentioned earlier. The most important thing is that whatever services or features we are using, it is very good in terms of performance, and it is a very stable platform for these applications without any issues. Overall, I am happy with its performance and stability across all the features that we are using.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has impacted my organization positively with cost savings, as I mentioned earlier, by saving public IP addresses, and its performance and stability, which give almost 100% uptime for the application because we have high availability. The security part is also helping us achieve that using the WAF module. Overall, the application stability and performance are all at par.

I feel that F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition could be improved because overall, it is a pretty good product, but the licensing is rather costly. It would be great if the team can do something for their existing customers regarding the costing and the licensing because each module needs a separate license on top of the base LTM model, and that is one thing that I feel they should address for their customers.

While licensing is a main area for me, I think there is also a need to improve the iRule functionalities within F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. Currently, with iRules, the customer or administrator needs to investigate and write them, and there is no kind of base support for writing them. It would be an advantage if F5 creates a user interface or dashboard within F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, so there would be ready, available iRules, or any support could be given on the platform itself instead of searching for it on outside websites.

I have been using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition since my first job, so for around 10 years, I have been working on the different platforms and virtual editions of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition.

The uptime improvements with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition are almost close to 100%, as it only goes down if a failover happens. We do the failover on the weekends during off-business hours or during upgrades when required. Mostly, only in these scenarios could we see a bit of fluctuation or a glitch for the application. Apart from that, I do not see any issues. We have not had any issues, and it rarely happens that if there is an issue, it might cause a problem for some of the applications, but apart from that, I do not see any major issues happening in my past experience with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. It was pretty much stable.

I can confidently say that F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is stable.

Overall, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is a scalable product, and with the licensing for the additional modules, whenever we need, we can add it on top of the existing licensing without any major impact. It is pretty much scalable and advanced. We can even have multiple units in high availability based on the requirement, and based on that, we can have active-active or active-passive configurations.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has pretty good customer support, and they also have pretty good documentation available on their community platform. Support is overall good.

I have seen a return on investment with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, and the most important metrics are the money and time saved because, as I mentioned earlier, there was less use of public IPs for each application, as well as less application overhead for the administrator to manage from the network point of view.

My advice for others looking into using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is that if you have any application or application delivery requirement where you need to host the application on the internet, and you need to fulfill different kinds of application requirements such as load balancing, persistence, security, SSL offloading, or WAF security for OWASP Top 10 signature attack mitigation, you should definitely explore F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. It is one of the best products that comes with a different feature set, and its performance is very good. Also, it is a pretty stable product on the platform. You should definitely explore this product for your use cases, and it is definitely going to fulfill your use cases.

Overall, I find F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition pretty good, and I always enjoy exploring it because it gives a variety of customizations that we can do as an administrator. I always look for new approaches or customizations for our use cases, and I enjoy experimenting with it. I would rate this product a 9 out of 10.

My main use case for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is to load balance the incoming traffic in our environment. When users want to access our internal infrastructure or web applications located in our internal infrastructure or DMZ environment, their traffic is load balanced into the internal environment. Users arrive from the internet and either land into our DMZ web application, from which we redirect the same application via F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition to our internal environment. We are using the LTM edition in our environment for this purpose.

Apart from that, we are also using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition as BIG-IP DNS, which was previously known as GTM. We use F5 products for DNS traffic as well. We have two data centers, one on the west side and one on the east side in the Azure environment. BIG-IP DNS edition load balances the traffic into different data centers. In some cases, for disaster recovery scenarios, we use this virtual IP DNS capability. Additionally, we are also using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition with ASM tools and WAF, which provides Web Application Layer 7 firewall capabilities.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition offers several best features. It is very easy to deploy within fifteen to twenty minutes. We can deploy F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition anywhere, either in an on-premises environment or in the Azure environment. If we want to discard a virtual IP, we can do that easily. We can span as many virtual IPs in a very fast time. If an F5 virtual edition becomes corrupted, we can easily redeploy the same snapshot of that virtual machine into the environment very quickly. It is very scalable and easy to use compared to hardware applications. In comparison with hardware applications, if a failure happens with hardware, we need to replace the hardware, which takes considerable time. However, with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, we can redeploy very quickly, within ten minutes.

Scalability with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is excellent in terms of current usage where we have one thousand to two thousand users landing into the DMZ zone who want to access DMZ applications. Sometimes on weekends, holidays, or during peak seasons, if ten thousand, fifty thousand, or even a million people want to access the application simultaneously, we have configured auto-scalability. Automatically, additional F5 virtual machines will deploy, and the increased virtual load will be served by F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. This auto-scalability feature is very useful. If we want to use F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition for other purposes, such as internal deployment, we can also redeploy the same F5 instance internally.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has positively impacted my organization with an excellent dashboard that has been very much revamped. The features are refreshed compared to earlier versions, such as version thirteen. Version sixteen has a very clean and easy-to-use dashboard that is very fast compared to our physical F5. The ordering and registration processes are very easy to navigate. We can choose the F5 version very easily. Another very scalable and user-friendly feature is that we can add as many interfaces as needed. In physical F5 systems, the hardcoded interfaces are typically eight or sixteen, and we cannot increase those interfaces. However, with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, we can span as many virtual interfaces as required. As per the use case, if it increases, we can increase the interfaces very easily. These capabilities are very useful for our company.

Regarding F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition's improvement areas, the current dashboard is very useful, but I believe the registration process should be simplified in the virtual edition. Especially in the Azure environment, many features are not currently aligned and working with Azure. We need to make efforts to ensure it is well integrated with Azure. Currently, if we want to integrate route tables with the virtual F5 edition, we need to deploy scripting inside the virtual F5 instances, and then that script performs the virtual IP route table changes in the Azure environment. This feature should be auto-configured, and efforts are needed to ensure the virtual edition is very much aligned with the Azure environment. I am expecting this improvement in the next edition.

The failover capability is also not as good as it should be. We have tested the failover functionality, and sometimes we have observed that failover fails. F5 does not successfully fail over to other instances perfectly, so that also needs to be improved. Security should also be enhanced, as in the past I have seen some security loopholes. Tightening of security should be included in the new software. These improvements should be present in near future editions.

I have been using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition specifically for five years.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is very much stable. The stability rating is one hundred percent.

The scalability of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is excellent. Within ten minutes of time, we can scale and boot as many virtual machines as needed in the environment. It is very fast.

The customer support for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is very fast. Within logging the ticket, we get the invitation link within fifteen minutes, and support personnel are in the room to help us. The service is very fast and very useful.

I did not previously use any other load balancing solution. The only thing is that earlier we were using physical F5, but currently we are using the virtual edition. I can also remember that earlier we were using NetScaler. Currently, we are not using it because it is not as much improved.

Compared to our physical environment, with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition we have saved approximately one hundred thousand dollars. In terms of employees, earlier we were using ten applications, so we had a team of five people. Currently, we are only a team of two people. We also saved expenses in this area. Overall, I can say the ROI includes a twenty-five to thirty percent cost reduction, with some areas achieving forty percent cost reduction in our expenses.

The experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is that the setup cost is not very high, but licensing is very substantial. The licensing is very heavy, and prices are very costly for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. I have observed that the real pricing is not fully visible to me because it is handled by my sales team, but the pricing is very high for licensing.

Before choosing F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, we evaluated F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition with NetScaler and Azure's native solution.

With F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, I find it easy to configure interfaces and span multiple interfaces, which has saved our time. It also reduces cost because in the physical environment, we need to spend considerable money for sixteen interfaces even if we are using only four interfaces and need to pay the price for all sixteen interfaces. However, with the virtual solution, if we want to use interfaces, we can span four interfaces and need only a very small amount of money. It is time-saving because configuring interfaces requires human interaction. The user experience has also improved as we can configure as many virtual environments as needed, such as DMZ environment, internal environment, and other environments per our use case.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition a nine out of ten. I cannot give a ten out of ten because there should always be improvements needed in the software domain. I cannot rate it as ten out of ten because improvements are always necessary in the software and IT domains. I reduced the number by one for this reason, as there are no other reasons for this rating.

I can advise other organizations or colleagues that if they want to use any scalable, faster, or better stable solution, I usually recommend F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. It is cost-effective compared to other solutions, such as Azure native solutions. Compared to those alternatives, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is a very cost-effective solution, and they can easily redeploy and deploy with significant cost savings. The easy-to-use dashboard and all features make it an excellent choice.

My main use case for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition at the State of Oregon involved migrating from Cisco ACS to F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, specifically using their LTM module. Day to day, I handled a lot of services, including load balancing and certificate management. I onboarded customers looking to balance loads between servers using their LTM module, and I also worked extensively with the AFM module, which is a firewall, and the APM module, which is their VPN.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is especially useful for its load balancing capabilities. They excel in round-robin load balancing methods and offer persistence methods that can be beneficial for hosting websites where customers navigate multiple times to fill out forms. For instance, in an application hosted on a server, I could implement a persistence method to maintain session continuity, combined with round-robin methods that optimize performance on the application side.

I also utilized F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition for their APM module, which provides a solid VPN solution. They have a user-friendly flow where, for example, I could add a one-time password easily. The remote access VPN capabilities are notable, and I appreciate their AFM module for firewall functionalities. The GUI is very user-friendly, allowing me to create rules and NAT policies with ease.

The best features F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition offers, in my experience, include their flow method and APM module. I have used Palo Alto and Cisco products, but I find F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition's APM module exceptional for its visual representation of authentication processes. Additionally, I appreciate how clearly F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition handles certificate management, all accessible from one dashboard for easy renewal or creation.

The flow method in F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition stands out for its GUI, as I can visually compare different customers without digging into details the way I would have to do in Cisco or Palo Alto. For example, if I want to see differences between customers, in F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, I can visualize it all in a flow diagram while seeing the features associated with each customer, which simplifies the comparison process significantly.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has positively impacted my organization at the State of Oregon by streamlining operations. The load balancing module, in particular, was very effective, as it simplified the user experience compared to Cisco's extensive tab system, which made it hard to correlate user authentication. F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition's customer-centric approach allows me to see individual client configurations without confusion.

I have noticed specific positive outcomes with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, such as significant time savings and a reduction in errors. I have a clearer overview of which features each customer has, which minimizes mistakes during operations and enhances our overall efficiency.

In terms of improvements for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, I encountered issues with load management when multiple modules such as AFM, APM, LTM, and GTM are handled together. If one customer has all modules in use, I found that F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition struggles with load capacity, leading to problems, particularly with high traffic volumes.

The primary concern I noted regarding F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is its scalability during high-load situations. While their iRules and LTM modules perform well, handling large traffic volumes remains a challenge, necessitating improvements in their load handling capabilities.

I am not currently using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition in my role, but I used to work for the State of Oregon, and I migrated to F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, which is how I know about this product, having worked on it for approximately five years.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has proven to be stable, although it faced challenges handling high traffic volumes. At times, we experienced difficulties that required close monitoring, especially with traffic loads, but the load balancing module still performed admirably.

The scalability of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition was quite impressive, as it allowed us to onboard many customers efficiently. I particularly appreciated the APM and LTM modules, which facilitated an easier onboarding process for additional customers. However, the primary concern I noted regarding F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is its scalability during high-load situations.

Customer support for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has been excellent. We received quality assistance for our inquiries, and I appreciated their forums, which provided comprehensive answers to many questions and architectural queries.

Before adopting F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, we were using Cisco solutions. We transitioned to F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition after reviewing budgetary concerns and architectural advantages, prompting our move to incorporate load balancing, VPN, and AFM modules into our infrastructure.

We have seen a return on investment with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. By using multiple integrated modules such as AFM, APM, and LTM in one platform, we avoided the need for separate components, which saved considerable money and space.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has been very favorable, especially compared to competitors, as F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition's pricing structure was significantly more advantageous and aligned with our budgetary considerations.

In our evaluation process, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition really stood out among competitors. Although we considered other options, we ultimately decided to pursue F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. For firewall solutions, however, we also looked at Palo Alto for potential improvements.

My advice for others considering F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is to focus on the LTM and APM modules. As for the AFM module, I would recommend checking if there have been significant improvements over the last five years since I last worked with it. I believe I have provided all the insights and feedback regarding F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition that I can. I have rated this product an eight out of ten.

My main use case for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is that we are in the process of publishing services, observing the traffic of the published services publicly, and any backend servers. We assign the virtual IPs and then check the traffic and bypass the traffic which is blocked according to the requirements of the customer.

A specific example of how I have used F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is a recent troubleshooting scenario where we had to whitelist one of the API calls that was passing through the WAF of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. We went onto the physical servers, checked the log traffic, added the text file, and whitelisted the text file and applied the configuration. This is how the traffic was exempted from passing through the WAF.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition offers extensive documentation available for any help required and the capability for multiple licenses within a single platform.

The documentation has helped me significantly by allowing me to avoid having to install new hardware or separate appliances for WAF, BIG-IP, load balancers, and different ADCs, as I can manage everything in one big box and purchase the licenses. The ease of use of the documentation makes it straightforward for many users here, so it is easy to find use cases on the internet.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has positively impacted my organization by providing separate candidates for managing F5 traffic, leading to more effective publishing of services publicly, assigning public IP addresses, and then assigning the virtual IPs, nodes, pools, pool members, and all of that. It definitely provides a granular approach to the device.

I truly appreciate the power of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition compared to any other vendor we have used, and we have seen more use cases coming in, proving it to be better than other products.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition could be improved by enhancing the GUI, as I think it should be more user-friendly.

Aside from the GUI improvements, I find that with other products, everything appears more organized. For instance, with FortiWeb, we have a dashboard where I can check the policy status with just one click, and everything is easily accessible. In F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, it tends to require navigating through menus and sub-menus.

I have been using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition in different roles, specifically in banking, where I used BIG-IP LTM in one infrastructure. Currently, I am working in an environment where we are using the ASM module as a WAF.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is very stable.

When my organization needs to handle more traffic or add more applications, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition scales up easily without running into any issues, and it is very smooth.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition provides very good customer support. I would rate the customer support on a scale of one to ten as a perfect ten based on all of the experience I have had so far.

Before F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, we were using a different solution, specifically FortiADC for Application Delivery Controller and FortiWeb for ASM.

It was relatively easy to deploy F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition initially due to my team receiving support from F5. We were there for them, and it was pretty much taken care of by the F5 support team.

I would describe the learning curve for my team adopting F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition as definitely present. We learned a lot from it, especially from the provided documentation and many use cases available over the internet.

Integration with other solutions or platforms in my environment through F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has not posed any challenges. It is pretty straightforward with the appliances that we currently have.

I have seen a return on investment with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition as compared to other appliances we have used. With F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, we have not faced any RMAs, which has made a positive operational impact.

My advice to others looking into using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition would emphasize its scalability, the power of the appliance, and its reliability, which are big pluses for the product.

I have a positive response on F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. However, I strongly feel that the GUI needs to be a bit more user-friendly, as I find FortiWeb's GUI more accessible, even though the product is not as powerful as F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. My overall rating for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is eight out of ten.

My main use cases for using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition are mainly WAF. That's the main purpose.

We use F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition mostly for the login functionality with our Salesforce and for security login purposes.

The features I appreciate the most about F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition are the WAF capabilities.

The advanced web application firewall protection and SSL offloading capabilities of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition have been utilized in my organization. These features are contributing to our application security and compliance posture.

I find it too complex to assess the impact of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition's automated deployment and integration with container orchestration platforms, such as Kubernetes and OpenShift, on my applications delivery speed and reliability.

I don't use F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition's automated deployment and integration with container orchestration platforms such as Kubernetes and OpenShift.

I have been using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition for about five to six years, possibly longer.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is stable and reliable. I have not experienced any stability or reliability issues with the solution.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition scales with us as we are continuously expanding the deals of the product.

The solution is performing well and keeping up with our needs as we continue to increase our usage.

I do not use customer service and technical support directly with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. We have an integrator called Spider. They are satisfactory and whenever they encounter issues, they open a case with F5 and assist us.

I would rate the customer success and technical support for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition an eight out of ten.

I have no idea about the ROI from using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. We use the technology on the technical side, not on the financial aspects.

I don't have information about the pricing, setup costs, or licensing for F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition.

I do not use the load balancing and traffic management features of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition.

I use other container orchestration platforms, but they are not relevant to F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition.

I have utilized F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition's ability to integrate with cloud platforms including AWS, Azure, GCP, and Salesforce.

I have no idea how this integration has helped my organization manage hybrid or multi-cloud environments.

The seamless integration of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition with existing F5 technologies is not important to me as I do not use other technologies from F5.

Financially, we require F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition because we need the product. We don't have anything else that performs the same functions, so we use it without trying alternatives.

I just use and manage F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition, though I didn't handle its deployment.

I would recommend F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition as a solution to others.

I would rate F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition an eight out of ten overall.

I use the solution in my company to meet the virtualization needs of our customers. In the case of a payment gateway, according to the application, every VirtualBox gets segregated. Every VirtualBox will have multiple banks connected to one particular vCMP for a specific application.

The solution's most valuable feature is its good virtualization concepts. My company is very happy with all the basic features of the product.

On-the-go upgrades are an option that the tool currently lacks, making it an area where improvements are required. If you have an instance where you have a specific configuration of CPU memory when you want to increase it, you have to parallelly create a new instance, and you have to export and import the configurations. On the go, if you could give any option to shut down VirtualBox, increase CPUs, and start it again, that would be a good option.

I have been using F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition for more than four to five years.

It is a scalable solution.

In F5 BIG-IP i5800, if you have assigned a single CPU and memory for a virtual instance and if it increases, you can just add a CPU and memory to the existing vCMP. What you have to do is spin one more virtual instance with the two CPUs and double the memory, like eight GB memory, for example. You can't just increase the existing VirtualBox. You have to create another VirtualBox parallel, download the configurations, and import it.

My company provides one banking application to around ten customers. My company has around seven virtual instances and seven applications, each application having around 70 customers running on one F5 BIG-IP i5800. My company has created seven VirtualBox.

The solution's technical support was good. Whenever my company reached out to the product's support team, we got solutions to our issue. In case an issue doesn't get solved, then it gets escalated, and the product's support team provides our company with an engineer to deal with the problem.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model and the cloud model. For the on-premises version, my company deployed it on something like F5 BIG-IP i5800, and for the cloud deployment, we have installed the virtualizations on Cisco CSP kind of tools. My company ensures that VirtualBox is deployed on CSP. In both the aforementioned scenarios, we have tested the tool, after which we started to use the product in the past two to three years.

My company's customers need to make payments for the licensing charges attached to the product. It is an expensive product. As per the requirements of our company's customers, we opt for it if it is the only hosting option available. My company also needs to see which box from F5 matches the requirements of our customers.

Speaking about the impact of the tool on the application delivery process, I can say that static routes are limited. For every vCMP, there are some limitations of VLAN IDs and static routes, like the number of routes that can be added. There are some limitations in the product that are likely to impact our company's applications.

In terms of performance and scalability features, according to the application limit, my company can add a single CPU per vCMP or two CPUs per vCMP, which is dependent on the load requirements that we plan. The company also needs to plan according to the application requirements. My company didn't face any issues following the aforementioned process.

My company provisions vCMPs based on the concurrent session support and SSL support criteria. Based on the data sheets, my company checks the total concurrent connections, SSL connections, and throughput limit. Even when my company plans to do segregations, we plan to do them according to the specifications described in the data sheets.

You need ten pieces of the tool for load balancing. If my company's customers' requirements only consist of a product that offers five features, then they can adopt a basic OEM tool. If some customers need more features in a product, my company recommends F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. Mostly our company's customers do accept our suggestions and choose F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition.

I recommend the product to others who plan to use it since it is a user-friendly and not-so-complex tool.

The integration capabilities of the product are easy to use, and there is no complexity involved in it.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for web application firewalls and VPNs. It could be your VPN concentrator, intelligent DNS, and load balancing.

For public clouds like AWS in Azure, the solution can use AutoDiscovery to discover the members of the virtual machines in AWS and Azure based on their tagging mechanism. This way, when you add a new virtual machine, it will automatically be added to the Virtual Edition's post.

It has a web application firewall (WAF) module. It has to get web application security. It has DoS layer 7 protection, which not many vendors have. The solution also automatically builds the thresholds for DoS attacks so that you don't have to configure the DoS manually. You enable it with basic settings, and it's using machine learning to learn the baseline and detect DoS attacks.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is a heavy system that needs a lot of CPU, memory, and hard disk. Also, the solution's center management is not very well managed.

I have been using the solution for seven to eight years.

The solution has been much more stable over the last few years because it's an old product, and its bugs were fixed.

The technical support is good for a complex product like F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition.

The solution's initial setup is easy because most bugs are fixed.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is an expensive solution, but it's worth the price.

We have deployed the solution on VMware, private cloud, and public cloud. F5 is going to release a new product, BIG-IP Next, which will be a new implementation of BIG-IP with many more features. BIG-IP Next is going to be more cloud-friendly because it's going to be based on containers.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition has a scripting module. If something is not in the default functionality, you could always make a script that will solve your issue. Even if it's something that would take a week, you'll still be able to write a script to solve your custom use case. Most vendors don't have such scripting functionality.

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is worth it, but it's a complex solution that has many functions. Users may have to do some learning instead of using it straight away. The learning material is publicly available to learn, but it will take time.

The solution's integration is straightforward because it integrates well with others like Splunk. The solution's security functionality is one of the best for the on-premises device. Nowadays, the solution has integration with shared security.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use it for two applications.

I've also used the Virtual Edition in the network core alongside the hardware appliances. I don't think there's any issue with either. Both seem to be working well simultaneously.

It's easy to integrate with others. I've integrated it with McAfee Solutions, Aruba NAC, and the EMS tool from Micro Focus.

It's easily manageable with various solutions.

I like the virtualization aspect, similar to what you get with cloud services or VMware.

I have a specific issue with the network interface connector, the NIC.

We're limited to a maximum of two NICs in a virtualized environment. It's a limitation of the tool.

So, Network Interface Connectors (NICs) need to be improved. More NICs would be helpful.

I have been using it for three months. I use the latest version.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten.

No issues with scalability. Virtual Edition handles traffic spikes.

The main difference between the Virtual Edition and the hardware is that you run the F5 image on VMware or any other cloud platform. In my experience, I haven't faced any issues with scalability or manageability due to virtualization. It's been good.

In our IT department, no one uses the Virtual Edition for F5. However, our customers use the Virtual Edition.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

We were using the hardware initially because it was too expensive for our client. That's why they wanted to go with the BIG-IP Virtual Edition.

There weren't any major issues with the deployment, but it wasn't completely seamless.

Virtual Edition required some additional work compared to hardware, like provisioning and sizing tasks.

However, once configured, it's easy to scale by increasing the VM size.

VM size adjustments weren't difficult, but it's not as straightforward as hardware deployment.

The deployment time depends on the configuration. It might take one day or one hour, depending on the number of applications that need to be configured.

My company is a system integrator.

It is a yearly-based license. I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, with ten being expensive.

We had Redware and Palo Alto.

We had limitations in Redware with the number of virtual servers and tools. F5 doesn't have those limitations.

Plus, for security, we can configure policy profiles across layers 3, 4, 7, and even 2. F5 also has persistence and separate mechanisms for things like server acceleration.

I would recommend using this solution. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.