Arista CloudEOS Router (PAYG)

The primary use case for Arista is data center networking. We utilize it to meet certain application requirements, specifically those needing low latency.

The most valuable features of Arista include low latency, scalability, and sustainability of the products. We're using Arista to provide faster response times to clients using our applications, thanks to its low latency. 

Other benefits include manageability, allowing us to manage the entire data center network from a single console, and security, enabling us to deploy security policies.

Currently, Arista is too costly for its customers. Feature-wise, it addresses most customer requirements. However, we sometimes face challenges when integrating with proprietary protocols and solutions from other OEMs, like Cisco.

I have been working with Arista solutions for the last one or two years.

There is zero maintenance required, which signifies a stable solution.

Scalability is a key feature of Arista, owing to the possibilities to manage the entire data center network from a single console.

I am not the right person to evaluate the tech support, but according to my team’s feedback, we receive extended support from the Arista team.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward due to the zero-touch provisioning feature in CloudVision . We prepare based on the availability of required data and we can easily deploy entire solutions.

We design and plan the implementation based on customer requirements, as we are system integrators.

A higher procurement cost doesn’t significantly affect ROI as it is usually higher accordingly.

Arista products are perceived as costly, especially compared to competitors like Cisco.

We work with Cisco products as well. Cisco caters to all market segments while Arista generally focuses on enterprise-level solutions.

I recommend Arista solutions based on customer requirements. Being system integrators, we engage with customers to understand various aspects of their application requirements and suggest the best fit solutions. 

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Arista as a nine.

We are using Arista Networks Platform  for operations like switching, routing, and monitoring in our network systems.

Arista router is very cost-effective compared to Cisco. The plug-and-play auto-discovery features allow automatic central configuration and monitoring, providing ease and efficiency.

Arista Networks offers similar features to Cisco. They provide a cost advantage and a high performance level. Features include plug-and-play auto-discovery, allowing centralized configuration and management.

Arista Networks is currently less popular as they were initially more focused on data centers than campus networks. They should expand further into campus networks.

Arista's customer service is excellent. They provide instant support and maintain commitments regarding replacement products.

Positive

We previously worked with Alcatel solutions, however, due to the high pricing, we switched to Arista.

The setup is straightforward with Arista. Configuration and deployment can be accomplished very quickly compared to competitors.

Compared to Cisco, Arista routers are significantly cheaper. The customer price for an Arista router is approximately $7,000 USD, while Cisco's is around $18,000.

We evaluated solutions from Alcatel, Cisco, and Nokia.

Arista is recommended for cost benefits without compromising performance. Their automatic firmware updates and synchronization features are very advantageous for reducing downtime.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

In the broadcasting industry, I use Arista extensively for production trucks, especially with media involved like video and audio. Arista switches have excellent PTP support. I also find Arista useful in setups such as Spine-Leaf architectures in networks, where each port on the device acts as a gateway.

I find the operational system used by Arista to be very valuable, and the hardware is exceptionally nice. Arista has a unified operational system called EOS that is easy to set up and replicate on other devices. 

The ease of configuration and transition between devices is a significant advantage for me.

In my opinion, the solution for network monitoring is quite expensive. More ACLs and traffic filtering make setups complex. I believe there could be improvements to make the initial configuration less prone to errors.

I have a lot of experience with Arista as it is heavily used in the broadcast industry.

When I configure it properly, the setup is stable and reliable.

I have not dealt with Arista's customer service, as we do not have Arista devices on our premises.

Positive

We have used RTL devices before, which, in my view, offered almost the same features but were less powerful.

From my experience, the complexity of the setup depends on the network. For simple networks, I find it manageable with CLI, but more complex networks requiring ACLs and filtering increase the difficulty.

Two years ago, I found Arista to be more expensive than RTL devices with almost the same features.

We have used RTL devices before.

I would recommend Arista to others because of its powerful processors and superior performance.

I would rate Arista a ten out of ten.

I use the solution in my company's data center, so I use ethernet switches.

The tool's most valuable feature is its cost per port compared to what other vendors offer.

A lack of skills across multiple teams is a concern when it comes to Arista Networks Platform. Arista Networks Platform isn't one of the major players. Even though Arista's operating system looks very much like Cisco, it isn't so. A weakness would be that in our company, we don't have many people within our team who support the product because there are different vendors, and most of them are not tier-one vendors, so the skills required sometimes are just not there. With Cisco, everyone is certified by Cisco in the area of DC.

There are some commands in the tool which I don't understand because I am a Cisco person. Everything that we need for it to do, it does quite well.

I have been using Arista Networks Platform for five to six years. My company has a partnership with Arista.

In my company, we have a global team of 12 people, and we have a global workforce of about 5,500 people.

We may expand the tool as we are currently setting up new data centers in Europe.

I have never contacted the technical support for the solution.

I have used Cisco and pretty much all the big vendors. I have used Cisco, Juniper, Dell, and HP for storage. My company started to use Arista Networks Platform as it helped with the cost-savings part.

The product's implementation phase was easy.

For each site, the solution can be deployed in a week.

I am satisfied with the tool's ROI. If you compare Arista Networks Platform to Cisco NAC, Cisco DNAC, or even Cisco DNA, the tool is almost 50 percent cheaper. It offers huge cost-saving benefits. I work in a global company with over 500 sites. Our data centers are fairly robust, and they are at a global level. You can imagine the sort of cost savings we would have if we had four of the switches from Arista per data center running six days a week so there would be a huge cost-saving benefit.

I am satisfied with the tool.

Arista's EOS has not really helped solve a complex network challenge.

AI as a platform is nowhere near stable enough to be used in a real network.

I recommend the tool to others.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.