I have not tested Sophos on a larger scale, as I use Sophos in a very office environment and Juniper in telecom.

Because we have Juniper switches and Juniper firewalls, we have not centralized them really. I do not prefer centralizing things, as I feel that if someone gains access, they have so much information about my network. This is a personal feeling rather than a professional one.

I do use its real-time analytics and visibility features, but I still prefer Sophos to that.

Real-time notifications are where Sophos beats Juniper.

For telecom companies, I think zero-trust segmentation is the way to go because if you allow anything that you do not understand, then it becomes a problem. I am all for zero-trust.

Juniper Session Smart Router could improve its documentation to become more competitive.

It has very little documentation, and you have to rely mainly so much on support to do something, which I feel should not be that way. Otherwise, functionality-wise, I feel it is perfect.

It is way high and expensive; that is why most of my clients on the lower end, I cannot suggest Juniper. It is too pricey.

Of late, I am seeing them changing the interface; the UI is changing, and that is a good thing. But still, I feel you can standardize the syntax to be in line with the rest of them.

I have been using Juniper Session Smart Router for seven years.

It is scalable, but it is scaling upwards. The only reason I say enterprise is because those people usually have the budget for it, and because it is what I have used in large enterprises, it is what I usually fall back to.

It is good and perfect, but I do not prefer relying on support. I prefer knowing that they are available rather than having to contact them to fix things for me.

Juniper Session Smart Router is not easy to implement; its syntax is totally different, and it is not very easy to implement. If I had to implement things, I would choose Sophos over anything.

We are using it as a DNG. This means all subscriber PPPoE sessions or ILS Smart VPN connections are terminated through the access network to this BNG, Uniphore BNG. From there, they are managed.

Everything has been fine. Although we did not explore much about the solution, they provided us with a customized product according to our requirements. It was very well executed.

I did not find any problem with Juniper. Regarding improvement, we still need to see what it can do.

I have used Juniper for around five years.

We have a limited edition, so we did not use much of the resource capacity. We have our licenses only for the limited edition, and we did not address that yet. As and when licenses are included, we think it will improve scalability.

Customer service is very prompt.

The installation took around three days. I managed the deployment, and the delay was only due to physical arrangements.

Each installation per area or per field or per session involves around two people.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate the solution nine.

We use Juniper Session Smart Router to streamline and automate our operations across nearly 3,000 global branches.

We replaced outdated routers with a more flexible and automated design, involving access and channel boxes at the network edge. These routers efficiently handle point-of-sale and online transactions, automatically balancing the load and routing traffic based on available bandwidth. Our goal is to eliminate manual configuration, allowing the devices to smartly filter and route various types of data traffic. This upgrade ensures our network is more responsive, handling transactions seamlessly and optimizing overall performance.

The most valuable feature of Juniper Session Smart Router is its unique SDR channel. Unlike other SD-WAN solutions using IPsec, Juniper sends secure IP packets without adding extra headers, saving bandwidth. This unique approach ensures a secure connection from our stores to the data center, all within Juniper devices. There is no unnecessary overhead for bulk traffic.

Juniper Session Smart Router could be better in terms of software performance. Sometimes, there are glitches, especially with MTU issues that affect application communication, although this seems to be a common problem across various SD-WAN solutions, not just Juniper. Another thing that could be improved is the setup process. It would be great if configuring the SSR could be simpler, like making firmware updates to the 128 version without the need for complex linking with interfaces. Also, reducing the delay in reflecting interface changes on the GUI would make the user experience smoother.

I have been working with Juniper Session Smart Router for almost four years.

The stability of Juniper Session Smart Router has been a bit inconsistent. While issues do crop up regularly, I wouldn't solely blame the box itself. It seems like the lack of robust support is hindering the device from reaching its full potential. For instance, in a recent MTA issue, we were advised to upgrade to a new version, only to discover another bug that hampers the device's performance in a mixed environment. Overall, I would rate the stability at a six out of ten.

I would rate the scalability as a nine out of ten. It is quite scalable. In our organization, we use Juniper Session Smart Router across 4,000 sites, totaling around 40,000 users when considering redundancy.

I would rate Juniper's support team as a five out of ten. In comparison to other support teams I have worked with, they could improve. Many engineers, including those with several years of experience, find the support lacking in expertise. The team often relies on generic information from guides and searches, rather than providing specific solutions to the problem at hand. It seems like they might need better training or a more efficient process to address issues promptly. Overall, it takes them some time to get to the root of the problem, which can be frustrating.

The initial setup of this router is a bit complex even for experienced engineers. It runs on Linux and requires extra steps for configuration. The blasting process, where you load the software, often gets stuck, and we end up doing it a few times. It is not very reliable, and even Juniper tech support hasn't given a clear fix. Both the setup steps and software stability can be a bit of a hassle. Deploying Juniper Session Smart Router takes some time. After all the planning and documentation are done, it usually takes more than a week or around ten days to get the connector set up on our on-premises data center.

Juniper Session Smart Router is not significantly cheaper than, for example, Cisco.

My advice for others considering Juniper Session Smart Router is to improve the GUI-based management. Right now, it heavily relies on CLI, which can be less reliable and time-consuming. Overall, I would rate Juniper Session Smart Router as an eight out of ten. While it has some good new features, the overall performance could be better.