Our clients are using Fortinet FortiADC primarily for load balancing, which serves as the application server load balancer. We have worked with one or two cases of Fortinet FortiADC. For application load balancer solutions, we prefer either A10, which is a leader product present in Gartner leader and Forrester leader, or Radware. We worked with a customer who was in the Fortinet environment, so we suggested Fortinet FortiADC, which helps integrate with FortiWeb, a WAF solution.

For integration purposes, we implemented Fortinet FortiADC, and they had around four applications and 20 servers. We were able to do the load balancing based on the round robin method in that ADC, which was the use case objective of having the ADC solution. It was placed behind the WAF solution, so SSL offloading and transitions were taken care of in the SLB part, specifically Fortinet FortiADC.

Regarding SSL offloading, we had the same use case since they need the certificate for external communications, but for internal communications, they had a separate certificate. We just offloaded the SSL in WAF, and we do the SSL transition in the Fortinet FortiADC part.

When speaking about load balancing, this refers to GSLB, which stands for Global Server Load Balancing. The use case was to balance the loads in a hospital environment with one main application and other side applications supporting doctors, the database for their medical equipment, and related systems. The main application was an online consulting application. The task of Fortinet FortiADC was to load balance the number of hits based on the round robin algorithm and manage the balances between the four or five servers allocated to the application.

In terms of analytics and reporting capability, when integrated, we integrated with FortiAnalyzer. As a standalone solution, it doesn't show much impact, but when integrated with FortiAnalyzer, it has much more significance.

Some customers need custom management for handling their applications across the servers. Instead of having a predefined solution, if we had space for custom-based algorithms to load balance the traffic, it would be better. We have faced such cases with A10, where we can leverage many custom scripts and do much more. Even though A10 primarily focuses on SMBs, they have also ventured into the enterprise market. Fortinet has been a pioneer for enterprise solutions, such as firewalls, SASE, ZTNA, and SD-WAN solutions, and they are in a leader quadrant. Therefore, they should have more options.

From a pricing perspective, it is expensive.

Fortinet FortiADC has been a stable product until now; however, lately we are facing some small issues. It cannot be classified as unstable since they have good support. Overall, it has been good; in the past it was very good, and now it is still performing well.

Even though it is on-premise, there might be some limitations with scalability. Fortinet FortiADC has both virtual and physical appliance options. For those opting for a SaaS or cloud solution, there is scalability and flexibility. Additionally, FortiGSLB cloud integrations provide maximum service availability and some flexible licensing options. Apart from the physical on-premise model, everything else regarding scalability and functionality is excellent.

Technical support from Fortinet is satisfactory. It varies depending on the engineer assigned; in most cases, we resolve issues on the first attempt. There have been one or two rare instances where they fail to provide complete support, but it's not solely their fault; overall, the support is good.

On a scale from one to ten, the support deserves an eight.

When comparing Fortinet to other competitors such as SentinelOne, Trend Micro, and Trellix, Fortinet provides a comprehensive platform that goes beyond just solutions; it creates an end-to-end security platform. You can have mail security, web security, and firewall perimeter security. In contrast, Trellix and Trend Micro mostly focus on endpoint security levels and occasionally offer secure web gateway or mail security solutions. Rarely do they cover as much as Fortinet. SentinelOne focuses heavily on the attacking path regarding endpoint security and identity security. Their roadmap is extending to data DLP, data security, and cloud security. They have begun working on cloud security and their product is promising. Ultimately, Fortinet constructs every solution needed for each defense layer, making it comparatively better than Trellix, Trend Micro, or SentinelOne.

The installation of Fortinet FortiADC rates around six or seven out of ten in terms of difficulty.

Our clients typically have the solution on-premise. I would rate Fortinet FortiADC a seven out of ten overall as a product.

Mostly, I use FortiADC for web applications. For example, we have multiple trading websites where we need to load payments for many clients accessing from outside.

I use server load balancing and employ layer seven features, which provide more granular traffic shaping and detailed logs.

Additionally, I use load balancing technology like Round Robin or low weight to maintain session-based connections. This ensures that clients can connect to their applications without interruption. In contrast, using standalone solutions can lead to network conditions that disrupt user connectivity and necessitate additional components before deploying FortiADC.

Primarily, I use this setup for trading platforms.

I will queue all the details clearly on the ticket, including the diagram, log files, and everything else. Once a case is assigned, they ask the same questions again without checking the submitted details. Instead of getting notifications, I start sharing articles I already know, which are supposed to fix issues and help in troubleshooting. Still, I often have to contact FortiADC support again.

After a week, once my remote system is assigned, their support is very good. However, if I need design help, they do not assist; they say it is a design issue they cannot support, and I must approach the system integrator. For troubleshooting, they are very effective once connected to remote support.

I have used it for almost three years, deploying it for a few clients.

The service is helpful yet not excellent. It is good, just not very good.

If I consider traffic shaping and latency, FortiADC does not add any more latency within our internal network. Monitoring the application is very helpful. The alert system is efficient, sending alerts within a fraction of a second if any power issues arise.

In comparison, Kemp support is not at the same level. If any hardware fails, Fortinet ensures a next business day delivery, whereas Kemp often asks many questions and does not support as effectively. I have encountered many issues with Kemp compared to FortiADC.

This solution is quite expensive compared to Kemp.

Kemp load balancing is an alternative, however, customers still prefer FortiADC.

I would rate FortiADC eight out of ten. I did not explore FortiADC's link balancing features; my focus has been primarily on server wellbeing, not on link balancing. This is a feature I need to explore.

The primary use case involves load balancing, which can be integrated with various platforms such as FortiGate and FortiMail. Administrators choose FortiADC as a load-balancing platform due to its integration capabilities with end-user technologies.

It supports the creation of virtual IPs and configuration of server nodes, applying algorithms like route roaming, which depends on the administrator's choice.

FortiADC provides load-balancing capabilities needed for integration with other Fortinet platforms. It allows for the creation of virtual IPs and applying various algorithms for traffic management.

Although it offers fewer algorithms than competing platforms like F5, its capability to manage load balancing makes it valuable. The security features depend on the environment, relying on firewalls like FortiGate.

When the FortiADC is part of a platform with components like FortiManager and FortiGate, automation and pushing configuration are very inconvenient. The limitation of managing all components and the differing versions pose challenges. Migration to the cloud could solve these limitations, allowing for easier upgrades.

The solution has been used for just one year.

The platform is very stable. The support system is reliable when issues like automation or configuration arise.

It is scalable for some versions, however, as components reach their end of support, upgrades are necessary to maintain scalability.

Customer service is excellent. The support team is knowledgeable and efficiently assists with automation and configuration problems. They provide timely responses and thorough explanations for user queries.

A comparison was made with F5's local traffic management. Although F5 has more algorithms, FortiADC follows similar load balancing procedures. The platform's choice seems influenced by specialization in security across different devices.

The process seems to be straightforward if one has basic skills and understands the prerequisites in the support database.

F5's LTM was evaluated, which offers more specialized traffic management capabilities compared to FortiADC's diverse devices for different functionalities.

I rate Fortinet FortiADC an eight. While it effectively integrates load balancing within the Fortinet ecosystem, F5 is rated higher due to its specific capabilities in traffic management. However, FortiADC aligns with Fortinet's specialization in security.

We are expanding our internal network with more virtual servers, and each needs to be defined on the Fortinet gateway. The FortiADC facilitates communication for servers meant for public access and supports load balancing. My main tasks involve defining new servers and importing SSL certificates.

Initially, I was intimidated by FortiADC. That said, it has a good user manual, allowing management even with basic knowledge. It helps with defining server load balancing tasks and managing SSL certificates, ensuring the communication flow through the Fortinet gateway.

Though FortiADC is useful, I'd appreciate more user-friendly features and in-depth insights into network activity, like detailed logs and AI-driven feedback for optimization. While there's logging, I'm cautious about large log sizes.

We've been using FortiADC for about five or six years.

FortiADC is very stable. We don't face issues or need to worry about unexpected shutdowns or bugs. Its reliability benefits our operations significantly.

I rate the scalability of FortiADC as a seven or eight. While it's fairly adaptable, feedback on whether our setup is optimized would be beneficial.

We communicate with the technical support team from the company that sold us FortiADC. They have been helpful, with the representative demonstrating strong instincts in problem-solving.

We previously used Coyote Equalizer, which became outdated. We needed to implement TLS 1.2, but it only supported TLS 1.0. Fortinet acquired Coyote, leading us to choose FortiADC.

The initial setup and deployment were not done by me. The company that sold it did the initial setup.

As a government organization, reliability and security are crucial. FortiADC is an essential investment, providing these vital elements.

I'm unsure about pricing comparisons, but it seems affordable. Six out of ten might reflect its cost-effectiveness.

It's likely no other vendors were evaluated, as Fortinet acquired Coyote, so the transition to FortiADC made sense.

Find a reliable partner for technical support to ensure peace of mind. Without proper support, addressing problems can be challenging. I rate FortiADC a nine out of ten.

I use Fortinet ADC solution for SSL offloading, certificate management, and load balancing.

The solution enhances performance by efficiently balancing the load across multiple backend servers. It ensures client experiences remain unaffected even if a server starts or encounters issues. Additionally, it manages SSL offloading, relieving our servers from handling certificates.

One of the product's areas of improvement includes reducing the number of components requiring additional licenses, such as antivirus and IDS, which are already covered by our firewall. These additional licenses are redundant for our needs.

The platform has been very stable for the past five years, requiring no maintenance from anyone. There have been no hardware or software issues.

The solution supports numerous virtual servers, approximately a hundred.

I have relied on documentation and online resources for troubleshooting. Our support license is valid for two more years.

Before implementing Fortinet ADC, we used an application delivery system from a company acquired by Broadcom. Due to its discontinuation, we could not upgrade this system, preventing firmware updates necessary for new certificates.

The previous solution required extensive command-line configuration, while the Fortinet ADC offers a more user-friendly web interface with various configuration options, simplifying the setup process.

I carefully reviewed the documentation and configured the product, avoiding default settings. While the setup was complex, thorough preparation facilitated a smooth deployment. It took approximately a year to complete it.

The return on investment is moderate.

Our basic license excludes features such as antivirus and IDS. Due to license limitations, some functionalities are not configured.

I evaluated another platform but found it a single-device system lacking fault tolerance. It was also more expensive and did not perform as effectively, so I chose Fortinet ADC.

The product's advanced capability improves network efficiency and performance by concurrently managing thousands of client connections and optimizing overall network traffic.

I recommend it to others and rate it a seven out of ten. It performs very well for the functions it provides.

The tool offers Web Application Firewall to protect against threats such as what is outlined in the OWASP Top 10 and robust load-balancing functionality with in depth health monitoring of application availability.

The FortiADC provides greater insight into the root cause of problems. Often application issues are blamed on the network team first - by having the app servers behind the FortiADC we get detailed statistics on app performance and availability helping narrow down the root cause of problems far quicker. FortiADC has also enabled horizontal scaling of applications allowing the organization to better respond to increased demand for an app at short notice.

I like the load-balancing components because they are very straightforward. The interface is easy to get around and follows a very logical pattern and the API's are very easy to follow. The basic OWASP protections it offers in the web application firewall are also useful.

The tool does what it says on the box. Setting up priority groups and using health monitors is easy.

We can do patches offline to application servers without causing outages that would affect the customer. The web application firewall features, especially those related to the OWASP Top Ten, provide easily integrated and automated protections. This helps with legislative compliance for our Apps and for compliance with the PCI security standards.
This allows more flexibility in patching the back end applications and it offers visibility into the requests being made to the applications - you can't protect what you can't see.

The solution needs to better integrate sFlow, providing more of this information in the dashboard. The sFlow data would help provide significantly more context when reviewing app performance.

I have been working with the product for 18 months.

I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten. Over the past 18 months of operation we haven't had a single issue.

I rate Fortinet FortiADC's scalability a ten out of ten. It's capable of significant throughput and Fortinet's ASICs mean that most functions can happen at line speed which is a huge advantage compared to other competitors. We have three enterprise customers currently utilizing the solution.

I haven't contacted the solution's support yet.

F5 BIG-IP, and we moved as FortiADC was a tenth of the cost.

I rate Fortinet FortiADC's deployment a ten out of ten. It takes a couple of hours to complete, and it's usually deployed in a network that's already set up for application delivery. The interface is very similar to what you would see on a FortiGate firewall, and is very intuitive. Once you have set up basic networking, setting up your first VIP takes a matter of minutes - the majority of the rest of your setup time is testing the application and fail over to ensure that the apps teams are happy.

Fortinet FortiADC's pricing is incredibly competitive and a fraction of what its competitors charge. The licensing structure is straight forward and without any nasty surprises.

We also evaluated Kemp load balancers.

You should attempt a trial before making the decision. Your reseller should be able to obtain a trial license for a VM without too much trouble.

We use the solution for deploying applications on local servers. Most customers use it for local traffic management and use the benefits of a security profile.

Fortinet FortiADC’s basic feature is present in all models, providing control over load balancing. Additionally, extra features found in FortiADC include bridging, which enables load balancing for CDB, UDP, and SDP.

The solution includes all the features, as well as support for global traffic management and local traffic management tools. It offers forward compatibility to integrate smoothly with Sandbox environments.

The user interface is very easy and integrates with Sandbox easily. It has its own antivirus.

The solution’s pricing could be improved.

I have been using Fortinet FortiADC as an integrator for five years.

The product is stable.

The solution is scalable. Every virtual machine can expand easily. You must make size coding for three or five years for flexibility. FortiADC doesn’t have restrictions on the number of applications. It provides high availability and built-in security features like antivirus and sandbox integration.

Technical support is very good.

The initial setup is straightforward and depends on the number of nodes and applications. Deploying one node takes around 50 minutes.

It depends on the node and server application, source address, communication delivery control, URL, or port ID.

The product is cheap and has a yearly license.

I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

The deployment and the audio trimming may take one day.

FortiADC is stable and operates on a proprietary operating system. One advantage it has over some competitors, which run on Linux, is the strength of its operating system. This strengthens its security control. It offers a good service.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use Fortinet FortiADC as a resource proxy and load balancer.

The product has flexible and interesting licensing options. If you buy a low-end licensing plan, you get all the features with a lower version. You can buy an expensive version if you need advanced features, including security, web application firewall, etc.

The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced.

We have been using Fortinet FortiADC for a few months.

It is a stable platform.

It is a scalable product.

The technical support services are quite good.

The initial setup process is easy for me as I have experience working with FortiGate. It requires half a day to complete.

The product has average pricing. I rate its pricing a five out of ten.

I rate Fortinet FortiADC a nine out of ten.

We use Fortinet FortiADC for controlling applications by Microsoft and Google. We use the solution to block content that must be blocked and allow content that can be allowed.

Fortinet FortiADC is a good product because each and every piece of content is monitored by it. I can perfectly take control of the service provided to the end user. The solution's policy also works on the group level and individual level.

Fortinet FortiADC is easy to operate and has single-handed control.

Fortinet's fixed application version has very good policies. Some features have been reduced in the new version of Fortinet FortiADC. Whenever Fortinet updates its application version, it should provide the same features.

For example, I was using MAC-based control for end users. Six months back, I updated the version of Fortinet OS. The MAC-based control on the new version was CLI-based, which is difficult to manage. I wanted the MAC-based control to be GUI-based.

Fortinet FortiADC should include an advanced-level SD-WAN.

I have been using Fortinet FortiADC since 2014.

Fortinet FortiADC is a stable solution.

Fortinet FortiADC is a scalable solution. More than 100 users are using the solution in our organization.

Fortinet FortiADC’s technical support is good.

It takes two to three hours to deploy Fortinet FortiADC.

The solution's pricing is an issue and should be improved. We have a yearly subscription for Fortinet FortiADC.

One person is required for the maintenance of Fortinet FortiADC. The solution is deployed on-cloud in our organization.

Overall, I rate Fortinet FortiADC ten out of ten.