Cisco Nexus is used in data centers with a simple Nexus OS deployment model. In our environment, we do not use programmability with Cisco Nexus. The switches are used very basically in our infrastructure.

Cisco Nexus is typically used for data centers and layer two connectivity. We do not use ACI, layer three, or any programmability, simply switching. I am currently migrating from the Nexus EX series to the Nexus FX3 series switches. I encountered an issue where different models within the same series, the 95308 DC, do not support VPC between the EX series and FX3 series. Although I asked our account manager to provide a solution for a smooth transition from the EX to FX3 series, we currently have significant work ahead of us. We need to obtain downtime from management because we have VPCs enabled with two switches per cabinet, and we need to replace these two switches with the FX3 series because the EX series is now end-of-life. I am installing them in parallel to minimize downtime. If Cisco could support VPC between the two different models of the same series, the transition would be very smooth.

The biggest problems during migration were corporate issues, including dependencies on other devices such as F5, HSMs, and firewalls from Palo Alto. Everything was connected over the core switches, which made this a quite difficult part to manage and to onboard the teams and to understand the impact of the migration.

We encountered an issue where we have two data centers, and unknowingly we were configuring the devices with the same VPC number on both devices. By doing that, we were not able to terminate the lease lines over those core switches. According to Cisco, we had to change the VPC number of one of the data center's core switches since they are in a VPC. We are still waiting, and it has been more than five to six years just to change the VPC number and migrate back the lease line. Now we are having cabin switches for the lease line and then the core switch. That VPC number issue was quite surprising for us.

However, we have a very frequent issue with Cisco Nexus, particularly with the SFPs. Every time a port or the SFP heats up, it gets faulty. We have almost sixteen Nexus switches per data center. In a year, we experience one or two port issues per annum. We have standard Equinix data centers with standard installations, but somehow the temperature is always maintained and there is no ducting, yet the ports and the SFPs heat up or become faulty. This is a very frequent issue with the SFP-based port.

I have been using Cisco Nexus for about nine years.

Cisco support is helpful. I would rate the support of Cisco an eight out of ten.

We transitioned from the Catalyst 2960 and the Catalyst 6500 series switches to Cisco Nexus switches, which follow our traditional spanning tree and core distribution and access layer models. We kept the same hierarchical models and did not introduce ACI or any other spine-leaf configurations, so VXLAN is not used in our model.

The deployment of Cisco Nexus was very straightforward.

I was part of the team that deployed Cisco Nexus. We have a collective team to deploy Cisco Nexus because we were actually migrating from the Catalyst 6509 to the Nexus 9508, which was our core switch. Although the Nexus configuration was quite easy, the whole migration process was quite difficult and involved almost onboarding all the company.

I participated in the deployment of our core switch 9508 model, Cisco Nexus 9508.

Dependending on the experience and the expertise, I believe a single person can deploy Cisco Nexus.

The migration took about two or three months.

I do not use Cisco Nexus to support multi-tenant environments.

Regarding micro-segmentation, segmentation of the tasks on Cisco Nexus is quite useful.

We do not use the VXLAN feature with Cisco Nexus because VXLAN is used for ACI, and we are not using ACI.

I manage the licensing for Cisco Nexus, but the pricing is handled by a third team, the procurement team. Therefore, I have no idea about how much the cost of all the renewals and the new devices is.

I would rate this product a nine out of ten overall.

We are dealing with Cisco switches and Fortinet firewalls.

I have worked with Cisco Nexus as well.

In the field, I have been working for the last 20, 22, or 24 years.

I have been recommending Cisco Nexus because it's good.

Cisco Nexus is good to work on, but we are mostly working on Cisco core switches and edge switches.

I would recommend Cisco Nexus for large enterprises and the government sector, as they can afford it.

Cisco Nexus may not be very popular because of the requirements that we come across, as it will go into the core data centers, whereas we work with most of the corporate sectors, so Cisco Nexus is not a frequent seller, and you'll find more edge switches selling in the market.

It might be pretty expensive for other companies.

I don't think there are any other particular disadvantages of Cisco Nexus besides their pricing.

I have been working with Cisco overall for almost six, seven years.

In my opinion, Cisco's technical support is good.

We are a reseller, and we sell products to our customers.

We deal with Aruba, Cisco, and HP Aruba, so we mostly deal with Cisco.

It's not necessary it has to be Cisco, but mostly we deal with Cisco.

I can share my experience dealing with Fortinet and Cisco now.

I have to check the technical features then; I don't remember them by heart, honestly speaking, so I need to put it to my technical guy for the interview.

If you wish to align a detailed interview, then let's schedule a proper time for that, as I've been receiving calls continuously for the last three, four days.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate this solution a seven.

We are not using AWS and have never used it. We are using the interface onboard. We are using the web application and trying this solution. We want to try Radware solution for cloud WAF.

We tried some software such as Check Point and FortiNet web, though I don't remember the exact names for these types. We are using Microsoft, Cisco Nexus, and normal products on-premises.

There are no special problems at this moment. It runs efficiently. We aren't using special features on the switch.

Regarding maintaining infrastructure, we have achieved uniformity. For us, we have a time advantage because we know the solution, and the technological refresh is easier. The advantage is approximately 20%.

All solutions are very expensive and not an economy solution.

The solution is on-premises and stable.

We haven't tried integration with the network software.

I rate this solution eight out of ten.

The installation is handled by our partners, so this is not our concern.

The solution is on-premises and stable.

We have a partner that solves our problems through contact with our Cisco Nexus partner.

Regarding maintaining infrastructure, we have achieved uniformity. For us, we have a time advantage because we know the solution, and the technological refresh is easier. The advantage is approximately 20%.

We have never used other solutions. We use Dell for a specific case, but it is installed by Dell for Dell machines. We don't administer these types of switches as the solution is managed by Dell, not by us.

The installation is handled by our partners, so this is not our concern.

We have a partner that solves our problems through contact with our Cisco Nexus partner.

The return on investment is more than 20%.

All solutions are very expensive and not an economy solution.

We have never used other solutions. We use Dell for a specific case, but it is installed by Dell for Dell machines. We don't administer these types of switches as the solution is managed by Dell, not by us.

We are trying this solution and want to try Radware solution for cloud WAF.

We tried some software such as Check Point and FortiNet web.

The installation is handled by our partners, so this is not our concern.

This is private information for Cisco Nexus networking.

The solution is on-premises and stable.

Regarding maintaining infrastructure, we have achieved uniformity. For us, we have a time advantage because we know the solution, and the technological refresh is easier.

I rate this solution eight out of ten.

I use Cisco Nexus for our data center.

The VPC feature of Cisco Nexus is great because it provides an active-active way of forwarding the traffic and avoids blocking any of the links. It also helps prevent STP loops, which is a valuable feature. Additionally, Cisco Nexus allows me to connect additional devices, such as FEX devices, when we need to extend services or connect physical servers. This capability of connecting additional factors as uplinks to Cisco Nexus is very beneficial. Overall, it has helped streamline network-related operations with its automation and API capabilities. It provides visibility and configuration options, aiding significantly in network management initiatives.

When I talk about data centers, which are critical infrastructure and centralized application hubs, the Nexus platforms should be highly stable. Initially, the codes I received through ACI were quite unstable, causing me to frequently replace them, which led to significant issues. However, it is much more stable now. Nonetheless, the initial instability with ACI iOS upgrades was a significant problem.

I have approximately seven to eight years of experience working with Cisco Nexus.

The deployment was a few months project. We have a huge data center catering to the entire region as the central application hub, so it took quite a number of months to get into production.

Initially, the stability of Cisco Nexus, particularly with the ACI, was problematic due to unstable codes, requiring replacements. However, the stability has improved significantly.

I would rate the scalability of Cisco Nexus as eight out of ten.

I would rate Cisco's technical support at seven out of ten.

Before Cisco Nexus, I used Cisco's earlier product, the 6500 chassis-based switches. I switched to Cisco Nexus ACI as it offered more advanced capabilities.

The initial setup of Cisco Nexus, especially with ACI, was complex. Understanding the functionality and operation of ACI was a struggle. However, now that I am accustomed to it, it is manageable.

Overall, ACI has provided beneficial capabilities with software-defined code, speeding up our response times and reducing errors and incidents with automation and available APIs.

The price of Cisco Nexus is on the higher side due to the premium services Cisco offers. Despite the cost, it offers valuable features and services.

Nowadays, many people are exploring other products like Sonic, which are white box solutions. However, larger organizations such as banks still rely on Cisco.

I recommend Cisco Nexus depending on the organization's needs. Bigger organizations, like banks or major enterprises, may benefit from implementing Cisco Nexus in their data centers. I would rate Cisco Nexus overall at seven out of ten.

We use Cisco Nexus as a switching platform in all our data centers. We are running dynamic routing protocols such as OSPF, IS-IS, and BGP. On a few platforms, we also use MPLS and LDP protocols, along with MP-BGP to facilitate network efficiency.

Cisco Nexus provides a reliable switching platform for our data centers. It allows us to run dynamic routing protocols and helps improve network efficiency with features like MPLS.

Additionally, it supports integration with third-party security tools, which is advantageous for our network architecture. Security-wise, we utilize Cisco's solutions while exploring other vendor options too.

Cisco's security features are in line with other OEMs, however, for data center security in terms of layer seven security, we prefer to have different OEMs rather than relying solely on Cisco.

I have been working with Nexus for around ten years.

Cisco Nexus satisfies our needs for scalability.

Support-wise, Cisco generally resolves problems. However, some issues require escalation to higher managerial levels for resolution. It sometimes takes time, but issues are always eventually resolved.

The deployment does not take much time because all the SOPs, templates, and planning are in place beforehand, making the deployment process efficient.

The bill of material and calculation is done while comparing Cisco Nexus with other OEMs. Cisco often provides a competitive price with significant discounts, and since it is a proven technology with well-trained resources available, it is our preferred choice.

Cisco pricing is at the same level as many competitors, however, due to competition, they sometimes lower prices and offer large discounts.

People can also look at other OEMs, though we recommend Cisco Nexus.

Overall, I rate Cisco Nexus between eight out of ten. We recommend Cisco Nexus, however, other OEMs should also be considered.

The primary use case is the implementation of the test data center integrated with ICI and some tools to manage data centers. The network architecture includes configuring the chassis of many virtual switches in the same physical chassis and connecting with management tools.

The seamless integration of Nexus in the data center provides a scalable and stable solution. It enhances the management infrastructure, making it preferable for many clients.

The most valuable feature of Nexus is its high throughput with no latency. This is why most clients prefer to integrate Nexus into their data centers. It is very scalable due to the ability to configure numerous virtual switches within the same chassis. The solution is also very stable, making it highly preferable for data centers, particularly in banking. The integration capabilities with various tools for management further amplify its utilities.

The interface integration of Cisco Nexus with AI can be improved for better infrastructure management. Also, the price is very high, though the solution's stability might justify this cost.

I have used the solution for about five years.

The solution is very stable. This stability is one of the key reasons many banks choose to implement it in their data centers.

The system is very scalable, allowing for various configurations in connection with other management tools.

During the first installation, no additional support was needed thanks to Cisco's comprehensive guide.

The initial setup is straightforward. One person can manage most configurations. However, depending on the size of the chassis, two people may be required for physical installation.

The return on investment is high over five to six years due to the solution's stability and ease of configuration.

The setup cost is very high. The overall cost of ownership is low, allowing for easy configuration and integration, significantly benefiting long-term use.

If compared to other platforms, Nexus stands out in switching capabilities. Palo Alto is superior for firewall solutions, however, in switching, Nexus is unmatched.

I would rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.

I use the solution in my company for interconnecting servers and the nodes with the core switch or distribution switch.

The most valuable feature of the solution is to segregate the network. Cisco Nexus is effective since we can segregate the VLANs properly. I have probably been able to understand that it is an effective tool.

In my company, we encountered some challenges since the network was not stable. The network is unstable, making it an area where improvements are required.

If you do some kind of configuration on the Cisco Nexus and if something happens with the VLAN configuration, there isn't any mechanism that is visible to you. Adding additional visibility to VLAN that can easily be seen by experts will be one of the good features. We know that Cisco already has hardware-based visibility for the routers if you are actually planning to use that router as an SD-WAN. If similar kinds of features, if it was if it is actually included in Cisco Nexus for the VLAN part, then it will be good.

I have been using Cisco Nexus for the last six years.

In terms of scalability, I think it is not scalable based on what we witnessed in our company. Once, if you want to procure something, like a series of Cisco Nexus switches, you have to think about it seriously, and you have to analyze your requirements. Otherwise, it is a bit difficult to scale it up. If you want to scale it, we must reuse what we have, procure another one, and continue the implementation process. In terms of scalability, it is not good.

If you look at Cisco as a network product and a client, I would say that it is a very good tool. There are no users who are expected to log into the hardware. People with a certain level of expertise have access credentials to access the tool directly through console connectivity or another connectivity mechanism.

So far, we have had an expert to take care of the setup phase in the organization. There is no need to actually hire any contractor to configure the switch. It is straightforward. As far as anybody who deals with the product gets involved in the setup phase, everything is straightforward.

For the deployment part, my company does not have the expertise to deal with it, so it is in an area where some professionals are required.

In most cases, there is a need to secure perpetual licenses to be able to use the product. When I set up the product, there isn't just a one-time cost that is involved. If you want to upgrade to iOS along with Cisco Nexus, you need to have Cisco's support. After that, you have to decommission the switches and procure another one because it might actually have some vulnerability points if I look at it from the hardware aspect, making it a reason why it needs to be changed.

Speaking about whether the product has been able to improve our company's network efficiency, I would say that the solution has been efficient in most of the cases, the reason why we use it in our data centers. For instance, we have different clusters that are expected to be in different VLANs or different network configurations. We configure the VLAN on the Cisco Nexus switch. For instance, if anybody else wants to access a specific application location that resides in specific clusters, we use Cisco Nexus' switch to separate such VLANs in a cluster, which helps us to segregate the network properly.

The product can be recommended to others based on their requirements. The product can be used in data centers or servers, but everything depends on the requirements of the users or clients.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

Basically, the Cisco Nexus is an L3 switch, and it offers the capabilities of L2 and L3 switches. The product is used for server farm switches and core switches, where there are big servers and data flow.

The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to handle big data, involving a large volume of data ranging from 3,00,000 to 9,00,000. I have experience with three types of switches from Cisco Nexus, and I know that they can handle lots of data. You can use the features you want and stop the features you don't want.

The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required. Cisco Nexus should lower its current prices.

I have been using Cisco Nexus for six to seven years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The scalability offered by the product is good since it is possible to scale the devices.

Cisco Nexus is a product that is used by only a few people in my company. The tool can handle our company's application data all over the country using the mobile application of Cisco Nexus. In our company, the connectivity part involving all our employees and ERP details is handled through Cisco Nexus. I can't be specific about the number of users who use Cisco Nexus. For management purposes, my company maintains Cisco Nexus for a few people, and it is maintained by two or three people from our team who are also involved with its configuration part.

The technical support for the solution is always good.

The product's initial setup phase is very easy. If a company uses SDN, which is usually used for HCI environments, then the setup phase can get a bit complex.

For deployment, you have to connect the console port to a laptop and then take care of the password setup phase before taking care of the other configurations. If your IP addresses are made local to a VPC network with high availability, you have to configure it through the console.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

Cisco Nexus is not a cheaply priced product. The tool offers a perpetual-based licensing model and subscription-based licensing model. For Cisco's hardware and RMA process, you need to opt for a subscription-based licensing model.

If a client does not have enough money to afford Cisco Nexus, I recommend that they go for Juniper Networks.

In terms of network efficiency, Cisco Nexus is a good product.

The reliability offered by the product is good.

Cisco Nexus integrates very easily with our company's existing network security measures.

I always recommend the Cisco Nexus for your go for those who rely on Cisco's core switches and SDN infrastructure or Cisco's server farm switches' infrastructure. This Cisco Nexus is a very good product, considering the switches offered.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

I work in a cyber security company. My company handles cyber security products as a part of networking. In the networking part, my company handles routers and switches, along with the configurations related to routing and switching areas, while taking care of network troubleshooting. As a network administrator, the aforementioned areas consist of my main tasks.

My company does not get to utilize the tool for our organization's data center architecture since we don't deal in the area of data centers. The tool is useful in the area of networking.

Cisco Nexus and Cisco Catalyst have processing power and offer good utilization of Cisco devices. Cisco Catalyst is defined on Cisco SD-WAN and Palo Alto. The processing power of Cisco Catalyst is good compared to that of Cisco Nexus. Additional features are available on Cisco Catalyst, and its ports offer higher speeds than those of Cisco Nexus. Cisco Catalyst on the cloud offers support in the areas attached to switches and interfaces, along with ports that are faster compared to Cisco Nexus.

As a device meant to lead the processes related to networking and troubleshooting, I feel both aspects can be described as areas with certain concerns where improvements are required.

I have been using Cisco Nexus for years. I am a customer of the tool.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a four to five out of ten.

I rate the stability of the product as four to five out of ten based on the fact that I have checked the tool's features. I also know that there are many more options available in the market, like Palo Alto, Check Point, Fortinet, and other devices, which offer affordable, configurable, and scalable devices that I should plan to buy. Cisco is not providing tools for everything my company needs, but it is a good product. The market competition is high nowadays. Cisco is still handling some old parts. Cisco's old products make up approximately 67 percent of the devices offered in the networking industry. Despite the competition from products like Palo Alto, Check Point, and Fortinet, Cisco is not very scalable, but all its devices are updated regularly.

The scalability of Cisco Nexus has totally changed because of Cisco SD-WAN. Cisco Nexus provides services via the cloud because of Cisco SD-WAN. For example, if I start a new company, I need networking devices as an architect. In my company, since the prices paid for networking devices are not affordable, I am checking out Cisco Nexus on the cloud, which is affordable. The aforementioned aspects have caused the working infrastructure to totally change day by day, prompting users to move to the cloud.

My company deals with 4,00,000 customers of the product, and we also provide services related to the internet and product-related subscription models for a month or three, depending on the security needs of clients. My company is totally dependent on the cyber security business. Only in part does my company take care of areas related to networking and troubleshooting.

The product's scalability feature is okay. When it comes to scalability, the market competition is high due to products from Palo Alto, Check Point, Aruba, Apache, and Fortinet FortiGate. There is not much need for people to be dependent on Cisco Catalyst since there are many options available in the market that are cheaper compared to Cisco.

My company deals with 4,00,000 customers who use the solution.

From a technical support perspective, I offer good performance and work hard on any issues related to the product or its console. I am ready to solve the problems related to the product. If I don't know how to solve an issue, then my company offers me the motivation to help me solve the problem. I have contacted Cisco's support team. I contact Cisco's support team to deal with network issues, troubleshooting parts, and configurations like switching configurations and routing configurations.

The product's initial setup phase needs one to use the user interface based on Cisco IOS CLI. The user base is the same for Cisco Nexus and Cisco Catalyst. The user interfaces offered by Cisco Nexus and Cisco Catalyst are the same.

The solution can be deployed in two to three years.

Cisco Nexus is not cheap compared to Fortinet, Palo Alto, and Check Point.

Speaking about the integration process of Cisco Nexus with our company's existing network infrastructure, the tool used to show us how to become a platinum or gold partner of Cisco. Certain criteria need to be fulfilled so that one can be considered as a partner of Cisco.

I rate the tool a seven to eight out of ten.

We use the solution for the data center.

We are using the vPC and FEX. The integrations are valuable.

The pricing must be improved.

I have been using the solution for four to five years.

There are no bugs or glitches. I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

We have two to three users. I rate the tool’s scalability an eight out of ten.

I rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten. The deployment requires two to three months. It’s a heavy setup. Around three to four people were involved in the setup.

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten.

We are planning to deploy Cisco ACI. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.