External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
My main use case for Juniper Session Smart Router in the lab environment where I've tried learning about Juniper networks is basically SD-WAN and application-aware routing for enterprise WAN transformation.
A realistic example regarding my main use case for Juniper Session Smart Router is a branch failover that previously took manual intervention; now it automatically reroutes traffic based on application SLA degradation.
Juniper Session Smart Router is a very good cloud integration router, with very strong application visibility, and WAN path optimization is also present. It has very good simplified branch connectivity, particularly strong automation and API support, and better SaaS performance. Session-based routing instead of tunnel-heavy architecture is one of the best features.
Session-based routing and API support in Juniper Session Smart Router have helped me in my work. It helps in session-based routing changes from route-based packets only on destination IP to application session awareness. This can help with a better application experience, and voice or video traffic automatically takes the best WAN path based on latency, jitter, and packet loss. Faster failover occurs; instead of waiting for routing protocol convergence, sessions can dynamically move to healthier links. Additionally, there is improved SaaS performance. In terms of APIs, I have had a very good experience integrating it with automation platforms like Terraform and Ansible. It has reduced manual errors, and my team has been using the API to automate deployment and dozens of other tasks with branch SSR devices.
Another feature I can think of regarding Juniper Session Smart Router is that there is no traditional overlay tunnel overhead in many scenarios, which is one of the best features. Dynamic path selection based on latency and jitter makes this one of the standout features.
Juniper Session Smart Router can be improved by simplifying onboarding for traditional network teams and providing better documentation for complex deployments, as well as improving the GUI for operational workflows and better migration tooling. Having cloud deployment templates would also be a great simplification.
More intuitive troubleshooting visibility would help enhance the experience with Juniper Session Smart Router. Additionally, reducing the learning curve for policy modeling and strengthening third-party ecosystem integrations would be valuable.
I have been using Juniper Session Smart Router for approximately 1.5 to 2 years.
Juniper Session Smart Router is overall very stable in enterprise deployments. Once properly designed and deployed, it provides good resilience and reliable WAN performance. I can expect a good session-based architecture, dynamic failover, and application-aware routing, and it is generally praised for its stability.
Juniper SSR is generally very stable and is very keen on maintaining its urgent patches.
Juniper Session Smart Router is very scalable for multi-branch enterprises and cloud-first WAN architectures, with its main strength being centralized policy management.
Juniper enterprise support is generally very strong, providing good TAC quality, strong SD-WAN specialists, and a good documentation and training ecosystem. The resolution speed may vary depending on the complexity of the issue, but the support quality is strong technically.
I have seen a return on investment; faster incident resolution is something I have observed in terms of realistic metrics for WAN analytics and improved user experience for voice or video apps. Additionally, there was a significant reduction in MPLS dependency.
I can share specific numbers; we achieved a 30 to 60% WAN cost reduction by reducing MPLS usage. The mean time to identify WAN issues was reduced due to application-aware visibility and path analytics.
Pricing for Juniper Session Smart Router is premium but is usually justified for enterprises needing advanced WAN optimization and application-aware routing. Some challenges arise from initial licensing costs feeling very high, and it requires skilled development teams to realize the full value of the product.
I evaluated other options before choosing Juniper Session Smart Router. I specifically tried to evaluate Cisco SD-WAN and Fortinet Secure SD-WAN for session-based routing improvement, as they were the most common alternatives available.
Juniper Session Smart Router is rated 8 out of 10 based on my experience with the product.
I rate it an 8 out of 10 because the policy design complexity initially is not great and some of it requires a mindset shift from traditional routing concepts. Additionally, it is a smaller ecosystem compared to Cisco, Meraki, or Fortinet.
My advice for others looking into using Juniper Session Smart Router is to build strong observability first, understand cloud connectivity, and train operations teams early.
Juniper Session Smart Router is a great tool for practicing observability integration and other aspects moving towards SD-WAN and cloud networking, all relating to intent-based network operations. It is a great tool to understand cloud connectivity requirements beforehand.
I use Juniper Session Smart Router to connect branch offices to cloud apps like AWS where the router dynamically selects the best path such as MPLS, broadband, or LTE connections based on application performance, ensuring low latency for critical services while enforcing zero-trust security policies.
A key addition to this use case is that because it is session-based rather than tunnel-based, we do not rely on traditional VPN tunnels, which means it has the fastest failovers and better visibility into each application session, along with built-in zero-trust segmentation.
The best features of Juniper Session Smart Router that offer me value are the ones I use daily, including session-based routing and core features that route traffic per session instead of tunnels, giving better performance, seamless failovers, and application-aware path selection. It selects the best link, whether MPLS, broadband, or LTE. It also has built-in zero-trust security which means it controls segmentation without needing a separate VPN setup and advanced visibility and analysis, providing strong insight into traffic, session, and performance. This provides simple branch management.
Juniper Session Smart Router has positively impacted my organization by achieving a 30% to 40% reduction in WAN cost, which means less reliance on MPLS. There is also a 40% faster failover with near-zero user impact during link issues, and 20% to 30% less time spent on troubleshooting. Additionally, I experience fewer outages due to dynamic path selection, which facilitates fast branch deployment.
Juniper Session Smart Router could be better in several areas such as the steep learning curve because the session-based model is different from traditional networking. The UI could also be more functional and intuitive for day-to-day operations. Troubleshooting can be complex because of the deeper session level, and there is a documentation gap in some advanced sessions and a smaller community ecosystem compared to other SD-WAN vendors.
I have been working with Juniper Session Smart Router for almost 14 years.
My advice for someone considering Juniper Session Smart Router is to invest in learning early and understand the session-based routing because it is different from traditional WAN. I also recommend starting with a pilot test with a few branches before full rollout and defining the application policy early and clearly. The biggest value comes from the app-aware routing, so leverage automation because it saves time and scales. Additionally, train your team to reduce troubleshooting friction later. I would rate this solution an 8.5 out of 10.
The typical use case is to manage the data center fabric.
The best feature is the easiest way to deploy configuration and also back up them, and also to roll back quickly if there's an incident.
We have a better view with all this complexity because we have some probes that monitor the response time, and we can see quickly if there's an integration and so on.
We have many controllers, so we deploy a controller by pods. So we have a nice view, and we're thinking about collecting everything in one controller, but we didn't decide that yet.
We have NetFlow included.
They have some improvement to do, so I would say seven.
I found some weaknesses on their hardware. They are sometimes breaking very often.
I would say about seven years in total.
In general, they are robust and reliable, so I would say eight is a good mark.
Customer service rating: 4
From a different vendor.
It was quite straightforward.
I did the architecture and the deployment.
Juniper Session Smart Router is a controller for managing devices. We have real-time analytics through the IBA Probes. For troubleshooting, we have direct access to them. As we use other vendors, we are running also the SASE with another provider. We have the response time, also latency and so on. There are other considerations, but I didn't think about everything right now. My overall rating for this product is 7.
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.