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.
External reviews
12 reviews
from
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Handles traffic spikes effectively and allows configuration of policy profiles across multiple layers for enhanced security
What is our primary use case?
How has it helped my organization?
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.
What is most valuable?
I like the virtualization aspect, similar to what you get with cloud services or VMware.
What needs improvement?
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.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for three months. I use the latest version.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the stability a seven out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
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.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
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.
How was the initial setup?
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.
What about the implementation team?
My company is a system integrator.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It is a yearly-based license. I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, with ten being expensive.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
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.
What other advice do I have?
I would recommend using this solution. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.
showing 11 - 11