Scalability is pretty good, provided that you design it properly from the get-go. I think it does the job well, but they can definitely improve on the monitoring and analytics side. So, again, that comes down to product design, but that's definitely an area for improvement. Even if you're to extract a report, it just takes a lot of time. Of course, you can export the data into other products to get that visibility, but we would like to have a better type of monitoring, maybe better dashboards, and better analytics capabilities within the product.Īnalytics is one thing that's really lacking. At the end of the day, we're implementing ISE for security. ISE has a very good logging capability but because their GUI is so slow, we feel it's not as flexible or user-friendly as we would like it to be, especially when it comes to monitoring and logging. From a functionality standpoint, we would rather the GUI was light and faster to navigate. We've had issues with different browsers, and sometimes it's really slow. We always look for functionality over fancy features. We pretty much look for functionality, but I think Cisco, for some reason, is putting an emphasis on its GUIs looking better. It's a technical product - I don't think a lot of engineers really need fancy GUIs. By heavy, I mean it's quite fancy. It's equipped with a lot of features and animations that sometimes slow down the user interface. I would say that the biggest issue we're having is with all the product bugs.Īlso, the graphical user interface is very heavy.
Whenever you have a bug, if something doesn't work, that always creates a lot of noise. Because the product is kind of intrusive, right? It's in the network. Even if you go to a Cisco website and you type all the bug releases for ISE, you'll find a lot of bugs. I think, overall they need to form a quality assurance standpoint. We've always found ourselves battling out one bug or another. An issue with the product is it tends to have a lot of bugs whenever they release a new release.
0 kommentar(er)
