We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Arista Networks Platform OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Arista Networks Platform is #2 ranked solution in top Data Center Networking tools and #12 ranked solution in top Ethernet Switches. PeerSpot users give Arista Networks Platform an average rating of 8 out of 10. Arista Networks Platform is most commonly compared to Cisco Catalyst Switches: Arista Networks Platform vs Cisco Catalyst Switches. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 31% of all views.
What is Arista Networks Platform?
Arista Networks is the leader in building scalable high-performance and ultra-low-latency networks for today's data center and cloud computing environments. Purpose-built hardware, and Arista EOS, the world's most advanced network operating system, provide single-binary system images across all platforms, maximum system uptime, stateful fault repair, Zero Touch Provisioning, Latency Analysis and a fully accessible Linux Shell. Arista Ethernet switches are the perfect network solution for your most demanding workloads.With native support for VMware Virtualization and hundreds of Linux applications integrated into hardware platforms designed to meet the stringent power and cooling requirements of today's most demanding datacenters, Arista delivers the most efficient and best performing 10Gb Ethernet platforms.

Arista Networks Platform was previously known as 7000 Series.

Arista Networks Platform Buyer's Guide

Download the Arista Networks Platform Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: January 2022

Arista Networks Platform Customers
American Internet Services
Arista Networks Platform Video

Archived Arista Networks Platform Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
CTO at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
A future-proof solution with good performance to price ratio
Pros and Cons
  • "What we like most is its performance to price ratio."
  • "The intent-based networking management, together with the provider of these solutions that are already free, would be beneficial."

What is our primary use case?

It's our main platform. We centralize all network functionalities inside of our hospital network in two locations. From the data center to the distribution level.

In the past year, we have implemented this solution in two new hospitals. Arista is on the core and distribution layer, so our experience is approximately six core units and 36 lead switches of Arista and the pooling layer three overlays that they are providing.

We are using the most recent version, the release tracks had some overlap. Arista is suggesting a change to the release track.

Arista has been in our network since we started the new hospital building in August.

We are striving to exchange all existing hardware with Arista.

What is most valuable?

What we like most is its performance to price ratio. We also like the standard-based approach in contrast to other vendors in the network market, and the constant and timely support.

What needs improvement?

Some new features are needed.

Arista is technology-driven by themselves. At times they are limited by standards that are not formally closed. 

I would like to see more integration with one of the providers from each intent-based network for compliance documentation and IT security purposes. For future development of the product, being able to manage the security or relevant paths with intent-based networking is important. The intent-based network is a management that is on our security level.

The intent-based networking management, together with the provider of these solutions that are already free, would be beneficial.

I don't worry that there is a time gap between finalizing as triple E standards before integrating with the future release.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using this solution for one year

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This solution is stable, it is rock solid.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable up to a point where we don't have enough requirements so far.

For each location, we have approximately 30,000 clients, so approximately 60,000 total.

For the network, we are the IT solution provider for the hospital. The workgroup section has six staff members, but we will increase it to eight because we added more wireless capabilities and real-time location services.

How are customer service and technical support?

In a hospital network, you have to sometimes support old systems. For instance, patient entertainment with an old fashioned multicast structure, they seem able to provide us with the proper solution within two days. 

They set up our environment back in California and they'll be able to provide us next Monday morning with a proper solution.

We would rate the technical support a ten out of ten. We can't complain and we are always surprised about the proficiency of the speed.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is complex because our environment is complex. The hardware setup itself is quite straightforward.

What about the implementation team?

We had implementation support by a gold partner here in Germany who are closely attached to Arista. We never ran into any issues where we had to go back to another point.

What other advice do I have?

We are a publicly funded hospital in North Germany, so we are limited in what we would like to add to our infrastructure.

If you are looking for a future-proof solution, you just need to ask questions about the scalability and stability. You should do a proof of concept with Arista.

Get in contact with them to see how they solve problems. This is a beneficial experience. Even if somebody chooses another vendor, they should base a valid opinion about Arista.

I would strongly recommend this solution. 

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Network Engineer at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Linux shell helpful for troubleshooting and capturing traffic, but the documentation needs improvement
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable feature is the Linux shell, which is useful for troubleshooting or capturing traffic."
  • "The CVP management platform needs to be improved."

What is our primary use case?

We use three different models of the 7000 series switches to make up the network in one of our data centers. We use the 7060SX as an active leaf, the 7260 as a border leaf, and the 7500 series as the spines.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the Linux shell, which is useful for troubleshooting or capturing traffic. 

What needs improvement?

The documentation for this solution needs to be improved. In the documentation, it is not easy to find the exact solution which describes the configuration step by step. It means that we've had to ask our supplier how to use certain features, and which commands to use. We can find a simple description on the website, as well as a list of the features, but a more complete description is not available. It is not clear exactly how to configure and use each of the features. For other vendors, we can find the exact configuration, with examples, that we need to deploy for any new features.

The documentation did not explain that we could not vary the speed between ports that are in the same block. For example, we cannot have 1G and 10G on the neighboring ports. All four ports have to be 1G or 10G, which was very annoying for us when we realized that we needed to change the configuration and the cabling that we had already prepared.

In the next release of this solution, we would like the option to use two switches as one virtual switch.

The CVP management platform needs to be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with this solution for more then eighteen months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This solution is quite stable if the configuration is done according to the best practices. We found, however, that when we made some changes, we ran into problems.

These were temporary changes for test purposes. Nowhere was it explained that making these types of changes could lead to the problems that we observed, or that we would have any trouble. One such problem was that the utilization of links was very high because of an error in our test configuration.

Generally speaking, this is a very stable solution.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In our environment it is scalable. We can find the proper models to meet our requirements. I'm not sure how it would be in the case of very large networks, but in our data center there are a few hundred switches, so it is scalable.

We have thousands of users who use this network. This includes internal and external clients for our data center.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support for this solution is quite good, but the deepness of the explanation in the documentation is not as good as I expect.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Most of the equipment that I have used is Cisco, although I have also used Juniper and Cumulus. For this new type of data center architecture, however, we did not use a solution prior to this one.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup of the individual switches is simple.

Using the Zero Touch Provisioning (ZTP) feature with the CloudVision Portal (CVP) is not simple, and it takes quite a long time.

Each of the switches can be deployed in about ten minutes, after several restarts, using the management interface. If I deploy using the command line then it will take a minute or two.

The CVP is supposed to be automated, but it is rather complicated and takes time.

What about the implementation team?

For the initial deployment, we needed the help of our local supplier, the Arista representative. It was very helpful for us because we could not find good examples on the website. The best practices were descriptive from a very high-level view and did not contain detailed configuration examples.

I think that it would be very hard to prepare the whole configuration for the data center architecture without the help of our local supplier and Arista engineers.

What other advice do I have?

This solution was my first experience with the new, modern data center architecture.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this series of switches is to carefully check the features that are supported on each model. Some new features are not supported on all platforms. I know that Arista still sells some old models that do not support the newest features.

This is a good solution, but the documentation needs to be improved. More detailed configuration examples are definitely needed.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Arista Networks Platform Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.