Info tech research group enterprise lan vendor landscape

  • 1,253 views
Uploaded on

Balancing a strong product with a stable vendor, Avaya should be a contender on most organizations’ shortlists.

Balancing a strong product with a stable vendor, Avaya should be a contender on most organizations’ shortlists.

More in: Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,253
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
15
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Vendor Landscape: Enterprise LANBe the talk of the campus by choosing the right LAN vendor. Info-Tech Research Group 1
  • 2. IntroductionToday, few basic features differentiate LAN solutions, but examine advancedfeatures, price, and viability to make the right decision. This Research Is Designed For: This Research Will Help You:  Organizations seeking to select a solution for  Understand what’s new in the enterprise LAN enterprise LAN (also known as campus LAN). market.  Their enterprise LAN use cases may include:  Evaluate enterprise LAN vendors and products for • Initial deployment of an enterprise network. your enterprise needs. • Upgrading an existing network with new components.  Determine which products are most appropriate for particular use cases and scenarios. Info-Tech Research Group 2
  • 3. Executive SummaryInfo-Tech evaluated eight competitors in the enterprise LAN market, Info-Tech Insightincluding the following notable performers: 1. The Network of the Future is Wireless:Champions: The LAN solutions reviewed here are wired,• Avaya: Balancing a strong product with a stable vendor, Avaya but the network edge will become almost should be a contender on most organizations’ shortlists. entirely wireless soon. Consider vendors• Cisco: Cisco remains the leader in the enterprise networking that offer wired hardware that is compatible market in both mind share and market share, and continues to with wireless hardware. carry a broad, comprehensive, full-featured product lineup. 2. Management is Key:• Enterasys: Enterasys’ enterprise LAN products contain many advanced features, including an admin interface that ties the whole Often, ease of management is more of a network together. differentiating feature than hardware specs. Look for single pane of glass management• HP Networking: HP is a strong vendor with a complete enterprise across all parts of the network, and demo LAN portfolio that is gaining mind share and market share in a very interfaces to see which one feels right. competitive market. 3. Price Still Matters:Value Award: The commoditization of the market is• Alcatel-Lucent: Alcatel-Lucent secured the award by having reflected in the very close list pricing from slightly lower list pricing than competitors. vendors that provided pricing. However, list pricing does not even remotely resembleTrend Setter Award: street pricing, and vendors will vie for• Extreme Networks: Extreme Networks pushes the boundaries of business in competitive situations. Expect a raw performance. Advancing other unique features and entering minimum of 40% discounts off list pricing, key partnerships keeps Extreme Networks viable in a very and in some cases vendors will discount in competitive market. excess of 50%. Info-Tech Research Group 3
  • 4. Market Overview How it got here Where it’s going• The evolution of networking technology has been • With the commoditization and standardization of core extensive and rapid – reliability has increased LAN infrastructure, vendors strive to differentiate by: exponentially, features and standards development have • Unifying and converging across networks – from been staggering, and speeds have increased 1000 data center to wireless edge. times (10Mbit to 10Gbit) in the last 20 years. • Providing unified visibility, administration, monitoring, and management through a single• While features and speeds have increased pane of glass network management system. exponentially, prices have remained relatively stable. A • Driving performance, reliability, and resiliency 10Mbit port on a shared hub in 1992 was $192, while a through proprietary protocols and techniques. 2012 64 port Mellanox switch comes in at $188 per 10Gbit port. Based on speed alone that is a 100,000% • Mobility and cloud computing are changing the demands price to performance improvement. of enterprise LAN users. The next generation of the enterprise LAN access network will be largely wireless,• The LAN hardware market is now near-commodity, with and vendors are adapting and differentiating enterprise vendors attempting to differentiate through feature LAN offerings with WLAN offerings. additions, convergence, and ease of management. • Network management has been added to this Vendor Landscape, and WLAN will be amalgamated with the next version of this Vendor Landscape. As the market evolves, capabilities that were once new and innovative become default and new functionality becomes differentiating. Quality of service and traffic visibility have become Table Stakes capabilities and should no longer be used to differentiate solutions. Instead focus on network management and end-to-end network unification to get the best fit for your requirements. Info-Tech Research Group 4
  • 5. Enterprise LAN vendor selection / knock-out criteria: marketshare, mind share, and comprehensiveness• In a largely commoditized market, vendors need more than functioning LAN hardware. Integration with other network components, and unified management across all aspects of the network, were some of the criteria that warranted inclusion in this vendor landscape.• For this Vendor Landscape, Info-Tech focused on those vendors that offer a broad portfolio of enterprise LAN products and that have a strong market presence and/or reputational presence among mid-sized enterprises. Included in this Vendor Landscape:• Alcatel-Lucent. A European contender coming to enterprise LAN from a telephony background.• Avaya. After acquiring Nortel’s networking technology, Avaya is back in the enterprise LAN market.• Brocade. Brocade wields a recently boosted LAN portfolio after its acquisition of Foundry.• Cisco. The networking heavyweight, Cisco has a comprehensive line of enterprise LAN products.• Enterasys. Enterasys has collaborated with Siemens to take on the campus LAN market.• Extreme Networks. Purple and proud, Extreme Networks offers high performance hardware.• HP Networking. One of the leaders in networking, HP’s FlexCampus portfolio puts it in the enterprise LAN competition.• Juniper. Juniper is a quickly rising contender in the enterprise networking market. Info-Tech Research Group 5
  • 6. Enterprise LAN criteria & weighting factors The Table Stakes Criteria Weighting: Usability Product Evaluation Criteria 15% Features The solution provides basic 40% 10% Affordability Features and advanced feature/functionality. The solution’s dashboard and reporting tools are Usability intuitive and easy to use. 35% Architecture The three year TCO of the solution is Product Affordability economical. 50% The delivery method of the solution aligns with Architecture what is expected within the space. Vendor Evaluation Criteria 50% Vendor is profitable, knowledgeable, and will be Vendor Viability around for the long-term. Viability Strategy Vendor is committed to the space and has a Strategy future product and portfolio roadmap. 30% 35% Vendor offers global coverage and is able to sell Reach and provide post-sales support. 15% Vendor channel strategy is appropriate and the 20% Channel channels themselves are strong. Channel Reach Info-Tech Research Group 6
  • 7. The Info-Tech Enterprise LAN Vendor Landscape The Zones of the Landscape Champions receive high scores for most evaluation criteria and offer excellent value. They have a strong market presence and are usually the trend setters for the industry. Enterasys Cisco Market Pillars are established players with very strong vendor credentials, but with more average product scores. Extreme Networks Innovators have demonstrated innovative product strengths that act as their competitive advantage in Avaya HP appealing to niche segments of the market. Emerging players are newer vendors that are starting to gain a foothold in the marketplace. They balance product and vendor attributes, though score Juniper Alcatel- lower relative to market Champions. Lucent BrocadeFor an explanation of how the Info-Tech Vendor Landscape is created, please see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation in the Appendix. Info-Tech Research Group 7
  • 8. Balance individual strengths to find the best fit for your enterprise Product Vendor Overall Features Usability Afford. Arch. Overall Viability Strategy Reach Channel Alcatel-Lucent Avaya Brocade Cisco Enterasys Extreme Networks HP Juniper Legend =Exemplary =Good =Adequate =Inadequate =PoorPricing was not available for Brocade, Cisco, HP, or Juniper.For an explanation of how the Info-Tech Harvey Balls are calculated, please see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation in the Appendix. Info-Tech Research Group 8
  • 9. The Info-Tech Enterprise LAN Value Index What is a Value Score? Champion The Value Score indexes each vendor’s On a relative basis, Alcatel-Lucent product offering and business strength maintained the highest Info-Tech Value relative to its price point. It does ScoreTM of the vendor group. Vendors not indicate vendor ranking. were indexed against Alcatel-Lucent’s performance to provide a relative view of Vendors that score high offer greater value for its product offerings. your money (e.g. features, usability, stability, etc.) than the average vendor, while the inverse is true for those that score lower. Price-conscious enterprises may wish to give the Value Score more consideration than 100 those who are more focused on specific 90 vendor/product attributes. 80 70 Average Score: 18 *Note that list pricing provided by vendors 60 50 was very close (~10% difference between 40 the highest and lowest), but even the 30 vendor with the highest value score noted 23 20 that street price is less than 50% of list 14 14 10 price. As a result, affordability has a lower weighting in this Vendor Landscape. * Pricing was not available for Brocade, Cisco, HP, or Juniper. For an explanation of how Price is determined, please see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation in the Appendix.For an explanation of how the Info-Tech Value Index is calculated, please see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation in the Appendix. Info-Tech Research Group 9
  • 10. Table Stakes represent the minimum standard; without these,a product doesn’t even get reviewed The Table Stakes What Does This Mean? The products assessed in this Vendor Feature What it is: LandscapeTM meet, at the very least, the requirements outlined as Table Stakes. Directory Integration with LDAP / Active Directory. integration Many of the vendors go above and beyond the outlined Table Stakes, some even do so in IPv6 hardware multiple categories. This section aims to Direct traffic using the IPv6 protocol. support highlight the products’ capabilities in excess of the criteria listed here. Power over Power over Ethernet plus (PoE+) on at least Ethernet plus some hardware. Redundancy VRRP, HSRP, or other redundancy protocols. and failover Simple Port-based 802.1x authentication. authentication Quality of Standards-based QoS for real-time services, service such as voice and video. If Table Stakes are all you need from your enterprise LAN solution, the only true differentiator for the organization is price. Otherwise, extend your search to find the right feature-set at the best price. Info-Tech Research Group 10
  • 11. Advanced Features are the capabilities that allow for granularmarket differentiation Scoring Methodology Advanced FeaturesInfo-Tech scored each vendor’s featuresoffering as a summation of its individual scores Feature What we looked for:across the listed advanced features. Vendorswere given one point for each feature the Automated Automatically apply policy when device provisioning connects, based on identity and device type.product inherently provided. Some categorieswere scored on a more granular scale, with Energy Organizational focus on efficiency and advancedvendors receiving half points. power-saving features. efficiency Visibility into flows using technology such as Flow visibility NetFlow and sFlow. High capacity Top of rack switches with at least 10Gbps aggregation aggregation and 40 Gbps uplinks. Native network access control (NAC) or NAC integration integration with third-party NAC. Stacking Stacking of at least eight units. Support / Not a necessarily a feature, but a limited lifetime warranty warranty on edge switches can be essential. Virtual machine Virtual machine switching and VEPA compliance. switchingFor an explanation of how Advanced Features are determined, please see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation in the Appendix. Info-Tech Research Group 11
  • 12. Each vendor offers a different feature set; concentrate on whatyour organization needs Evaluated Features Auto Energy Flow High NAC Virtual Stacking Warranty Provision Efficiency Visibility Capacity Integration SwitchingAlcatel-Lucent Avaya Brocade Cisco Enterasys Extreme Networks HP Juniper Legend =Feature fully present =Feature partially present/pending =Feature AbsentFor an explanation of how Advanced Features are determined, please see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation in the Appendix. Info-Tech Research Group 12
  • 13. Cisco comes out on top in terms of advanced features Champion Overview • Cisco is the competitor to beat in the enterprise LAN market, Products: Catalyst Security EndpointSwitches & Data with the largest market share and mind share for LAN hardware Cisco Network Control System Protection and software. Employees: 73,408 1,200+ Headquarters: San Jose, UK Abingdon, CA Website: cisco.com Sophos.com Founded: 1984 1985 Strengths Presence: NASDAQ: CSCO Privately Held • The most complete set of advanced features that we evaluated. • Advanced troubleshooting options, such as a traffic simulator and hop by hop troubleshooting. • Cisco has the resources for strong channels and worldwide support. The vendor declined to provide pricing, andpublicly available pricing could not be found. Challenges • Cisco has a reputation for being expensive, and for most organizations that reputation will prove to be justified, although the gap is narrowing. • Some proprietary solutions can lead to vendor lock-in, but Cisco also supports open standards. Each organization must choose $1 $1M+ how deeply to entrench themselves in Cisco’s ecosystem. Info-Tech Research Group 13
  • 14. Cisco Vendor Landscape Product Vendor Overall Feat. Use. Afford. Arch. Overall Via. Strat. Reach Chan. What we’re hearing “Cisco offers a broad suite of products that allow for consistency across the enterprise, and integrate well with their own server solution, as well as other vendors. Tom, Technical Director, Hosting Service What clients don’t like about the product: Value Index “Price. “Price. Israel, Advisor, Information Industry Vladimir, Officer, Finance NA Auto Provision Energy Efficiency Flow Visibility High Features Capacity NAC Integration Stacking Warranty Virtual Switching Info-Tech Recommends: Cisco offers the most full-featured LAN evaluated, and it is a stable vendor that continues to innovate. Just be prepared to pay for Cisco’s quality. Info-Tech Research Group 14
  • 15. Enterasys stands out with unified management Champion Overview • Enterasys recently entered into a joint venture with Siemens Products: Enterprise LAN Switching Endpoint Security & Data Enterprise Communications, providing opportunities for Products and OneFabric Protection integration with voice services as the merger solidifies. Control 1,200+ Center Employees: 1,000+ Abingdon, UK Headquarters: Andover, MA Sophos.com Website: enterasys.com 1985 Strengths Founded: 1983 (as Cabletron) Privately Held • A full-featured admin interface, OneFabric Control Center, that Presence: Privately held unifies management across the network, including wired and wireless components. • Integrated NAC, also managed through OneFabric Control Center.3 year TCO for this solution falls into pricing tier 9, between $500,000 and $1,000,000. Challenges • Hardware is lagging behind in some areas; for example, it lacks 40Gbps uplinks. • Enterasys, while a healthy private company involved in a fruitful joint venture with Siemens, struggles to shed the reputation that it caters almost exclusively to large enterprises, and regain mind $1 $1M+ share in the mid-market. Pricing provided by vendor. Info-Tech Research Group 15
  • 16. Enterasys Vendor Landscape Product Vendor Overall Feat. Use. Afford. Arch. Overall Via. Strat. Reach Chan. What we’re hearing Enterasys was one of the top rated enterprise LAN vendors in a small survey of Info- Tech clients, citing good feedback and ease of use as reasons for choosing Enterasys. Value Index 23 2nd out of 8 Auto Provision Energy Efficiency Flow Visibility High Features Capacity NAC Integration Stacking Warranty Virtual Switching Info-Tech Recommends: Enterasys offers feature-rich hardware and an impressive admin interface. Its solutions should be a consideration for any business shopping for enterprise LAN. Info-Tech Research Group 16
  • 17. HP has a full range of innovative enterprise LANproducts Champion Overview • Through innovation and acquisitions, HP has become one of the Products: FlexCampus Networking Endpoint Security & Data most significant networking vendors. Its FlexCampus portfolio is Solutions Protection targeted at enterprise LAN customers. Employees: 324,600 1,200+ Headquarters: Palo Alto, UK Abingdon,CA Website: hp.com Sophos.com Founded: 1939 1985 Strengths Presence: NYSE: HPQ Privately Held • HP is at the forefront of efforts to optimize virtualization in the network (along with Cisco), giving its LAN products an edge in virtualized IT environments. • With an enormous client base and a worldwide presence, HP is a stable vendor likely to support its products for years to come. • HP was at the forefront of vendors offering lifetime warranties on networking products. The vendor declined to provide pricing, andpublicly available pricing could not be found. Challenges • HP has made some progress digesting 3Com and rationalizing its product portfolio, but the product lineup retains a sometimes confusing combination of former 3Com and HP ProCurve switches. $1 $1M+ Info-Tech Research Group 17
  • 18. HP Vendor Landscape Product Vendor Overall Feat. Use. Afford. Arch. Overall Via. Strat. Reach Chan. What we’re hearing “We like having a single cohesive product line in the E-series, and a lifetime warranty. Scott, IT, Educational Services “Consumer-based mentality with limited product life cycles for upgrades and updates. Ordering an HP product and receiving a device that says HP on the front Value Index and 3Com on the back can be disconcerting. John, Information Systems Manager, Legal Services NA Auto Provision Energy Efficiency Flow Visibility High Features Capacity NAC Integration Stacking Warranty Virtual Switching Info-Tech Recommends:HP’s enterprise LAN portfolio is strong, and products have a lifetime warranty to back them up. Most businesses shouldhave HP on their shortlist. Info-Tech Research Group 18
  • 19. Avaya has strong virtualization features Champion Overview • Avaya acquired Nortel’s enterprise solutions technology and Products: 5000 Series Switches Endpoint Security & Data talent in 2009, boosting its networking line. Employees: 19,000 Protection Headquarters: Basking 1,200+ Ridge, NJ Website: avaya.com Abingdon, UK Founded: 2000 Sophos.com Presence: Privately held 1985 Strengths Privately Held • Strong energy saving features for cost savings and green initiatives. • A focus on virtualization results in products that can support a highly virtualized business. • Excellent integration with Avaya’s telephony and communications products.3 year TCO for this solution falls into pricing tier 9, between $500,000 and $1,000,000. Challenges • While Avaya has high-port density 10Gbps, high-capacity stackable switches, it does not yet support 40Gbps uplinks on enterprise LAN products. • A single management interface for wired and wireless does exist, but it lacks the level of integration of other leading $1 $1M+ solutions. Tighter integration and simplified single pane of glass administration are expected in 2012. Pricing provided by vendor. Info-Tech Research Group 19
  • 20. Avaya Vendor Landscape Product Vendor Overall Feat. Use. Afford. Arch. Overall Via. Strat. Reach Chan. What we’re hearing “Reliable equipment, operates well in adverse conditions. Local specialists have high skills, but they are under-resourced. Next day replacement of parts or hardware does not occur because spares are held for higher value clients. David, IT Director, Entertainment Industry Value Index 14 3rd out of 8 Auto Provision Energy Efficiency Flow Visibility High Features Capacity NAC Integration Stacking Warranty Virtual Switching Info-Tech Recommends: Avaya’s virtualization features and energy efficiency make for solid hardware, and it is a stable vendor. However, the current lack of a unified management interface provides reason for caution. Info-Tech Research Group 20
  • 21. Extreme Networks is all about networking Innovator Overview • Extreme Networks has been in the networking business since Product: Summit Switches Endpoint Security & Data 1996, and continues to do well in the enterprise LAN market. Ridgeline ProtectionNetwork Mgmt Employees: 800 1,200+ Headquarters: Santa Clara, CA Abingdon, UK Website: extremenetworks.com Sophos.com Founded: 1996 1985 Strengths Presence: NASDAQ: EXTR Privately Held • Extreme Networks’ purple hardware is powerful in terms of raw numbers. • Automatic provisioning is a focus of Extreme Networks. • A partnership with McAfee allows for powerful integrated NAC and other security options.3 year TCO for this solution falls into pricing tier 9, between $500,000 and $1,000,000. Challenges • Pure-play networking vendors like Extreme Networks are susceptible to market volatility. $1 $1M+ Pricing provided by vendor. Info-Tech Research Group 21
  • 22. Extreme Networks Vendor Landscape Product Vendor Overall Feat. Use. Afford. Arch. Overall Via. Strat. Reach Chan. What we’re hearing Info-Tech was unable to solicit third-party insights for this solution. Value Index 14 3rd out of 8 Auto Provision Energy Efficiency Flow Visibility High Features Capacity NAC Integration Stacking Warranty Virtual Switching Info-Tech Recommends: Extreme Networks is ideal for demanding networks, but it also has easy deployment and provisioning. Businesses with busy networks should resort to Extreme Networks measures. Info-Tech Research Group 22
  • 23. Juniper stands out with a unified network operating system Emerging Player Overview • Juniper has been growing in the enterprise networking market Products: EX Series Switches Endpoint Security & Data for several years. Its Simply Connected Campus portfolio offers Junos Pulse Protection a full range of enterprise LAN products. Employees: 9,000 1,200+ Headquarters: Sunnyvale, CA Abingdon, UK Website: juniper.net Sophos.com Founded: 1996 1985 Strengths Presence: NYSE: JNPR Privately Held • Juniper’s networking client, Junos Pulse, unlocks advanced features, such as integrated security. • Junos has a single network operating system that underlies and unifies all of its network equipment, simplifying deployment and maintenance. The vendor declined to provide pricing, andpublicly available pricing could not be found. Challenges • Coming from a background of service provider networking and security, Juniper’s main focus is not small-medium enterprise network hardware. $1 $1M+ Info-Tech Research Group 23
  • 24. Juniper Vendor Landscape Product Vendor Overall Feat. Use. Afford. Arch. Overall Via. Strat. Reach Chan. What we’re hearing Clients were impressed with Juniper’s ease of use, but less enthusiastic about its technical support and availability of channel partners. Value Index NA Auto Provision Energy Efficiency Flow Visibility High Features Capacity NAC Integration Stacking Warranty Virtual Switching Info-Tech Recommends: Although not as strong as some larger competitors, Juniper balances solid enterprise LAN products with a vendor that is increasing its market share. Stay up to date with Juniper’s growth. Info-Tech Research Group 24
  • 25. Brocade doesn’t stand out from the crowd, and may be a riskychoice Emerging Player Overview • Brocade has been in business since 1995, and boosted its Products: ICX 6610 Series Switch Endpoint Security & Data enterprise LAN offerings with its acquisition of Foundry Employees: 4,000 Protection Networks in 2008. Headquarters: San Jose, CA 1,200+ Website: brocade.com Abingdon, UK Founded: 1995 Sophos.com Presence: NASDAQ: BRCD 1985 Strengths Privately Held • Brocade’s management interface allows admins to manage both wired and wireless Brocade infrastructure in one pane of glass. • Energy efficiency is a priority for Brocade. The vendor declined to provide pricing, andpublicly available pricing could not be found. Challenges • It is widely rumored that Brocade is actively up for sale, making the long-term viability of the company uncertain. • High-capacity aggregation on top of rack switches is lagging behind competitors. $1 $1M+ Info-Tech Research Group 25
  • 26. Brocade Vendor Landscape Product Vendor Overall Feat. Use. Afford. Arch. Overall Via. Strat. Reach Chan. What we’re hearing Info-Tech was unable to solicit third-party insights for this solution. Value Index NA Auto Provision Energy Efficiency Flow Visibility High Features Capacity NAC Integration Stacking Warranty Virtual Switching Info-Tech Recommends: Brocade’s hardware stands up to competitors in basic features, but is falling behind on innovation, and disruptions in the business could affect customers. Info-Tech Research Group 26
  • 27. Alcatel-Lucent has a competitive product, but comeswith some limitations Emerging Player Overview • Better known for its telephony products, Alcatel-Lucent has a Products: OmniSwitch Switches Endpoint Security & Data small, but significant presence in the enterprise LAN market as OmniVista Protection Network Mgmt well. Employees: 79, 796 1,200+ Headquarters: Paris, France Abingdon, UK Website: alcatel-lucent.com Sophos.com Founded: 1986 1985 Strengths Presence: EPA: ALU Privately Held • Energy efficiency is a priority for Alcatel-Lucent. It claims that its FY10 Revenue: $21.4B dynamic power over Ethernet hardware is the most efficient in its class. • The OmniSwitch product line is economical, and the recipient of our value award as a result.3 year TCO for this solution falls into pricing tier 9, between $500,000 and $1,000,000. Challenges • Alcatel-Lucent’s client base and operations are primarily in Europe. Although expanding, its presence in North America is still limited. • Networking is not Alcatel-Lucent’s primary focus, and it is not targeted at the mid-market. $1 $1M+ Pricing provided by vendor. Info-Tech Research Group 27
  • 28. Alcatel-Lucent Vendor Landscape Product Vendor Overall Feat. Use. Afford. Arch. Overall Via. Strat. Reach Chan. What we’re hearing Info-Tech was unable to solicit third-party insights for this solution. Value Index 100 1st out of 8 Auto Provision Energy Efficiency Flow Visibility High Features Capacity NAC Integration Stacking Warranty Virtual Switching Info-Tech Recommends: Alcatel-Lucent’s LAN hardware and management is functional, but with limited geographical reach and limited viability in the LAN market, many businesses will have better options. Info-Tech Research Group 28
  • 29. Identify leading candidates with the Enterprise LAN VendorShortlist ToolThe Info-Tech Enterprise LAN Vendor Shortlist Tool is designed to generate acustomized shortlist of vendors based on your key priorities. This tool offers the ability to modify: • Overall Vendor vs. Product Weightings. • Individual product criteria weightings:  Features  Usability  Affordability  Architecture • Individual vendor criteria weightings:  Viability  Strategy  Reach  Channel Info-Tech Research Group 29
  • 30. Consider ease of management when choosing a LAN vendorIn a largely commoditized market, a vendor can differentiate itself throughits network management.1 Network Management Exemplary Performers23 Why Scenarios? Viable PerformersIn reviewing the products includedin each Vendor LandscapeTM ,certain use-cases come to theforefront. Whether those use-casesare defined by applicability incertain locations, relevance for Adequate Performerscertain industries, or as strengths indelivering a specific capability, Info-Tech recognizes those use-casesas Scenarios, and calls attention tothem where they exist. For an explanation of how Scenarios are determined, please see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation in the Appendix. Info-Tech Research Group 30
  • 31. If network security is a priority, choose a vendor withintegrated NACStandalone NAC is available, but save in costs and integration hassles bychoosing a LAN vendor with access control built in. 1 Exemplary Performers2 NAC Integration3 Why Scenarios? Viable PerformersIn reviewing the products included Logoin each Vendor LandscapeTM ,certain use-cases come to theforefront. Whether those use-casesare defined by applicability incertain locations, relevance forcertain industries, or as strengths indelivering a specific capability, Info-Tech recognizes those use-casesas Scenarios, and calls attention tothem where they exist. For an explanation of how Scenarios are determined, please see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation in the Appendix. Info-Tech Research Group 31
  • 32. If a unified data center, enterprise, and wireless LAN arepriorities, choose a vendor that brings the network togetherA vendor with a product portfolio that spans data center to wireless edge iscompelling if you are looking for consistency and simplicity.1 Exemplary Performers23 Unified Network Why Scenarios? Viable PerformersIn reviewing the products includedin each Vendor LandscapeTM ,certain use-cases come to theforefront. Whether those use-casesare defined by applicability incertain locations, relevance for Adequate Performerscertain industries, or as strengths indelivering a specific capability, Info-Tech recognizes those use-casesas Scenarios, and calls attention tothem where they exist. For an explanation of how Scenarios are determined, please see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation in the Appendix. Info-Tech Research Group 32
  • 33. Appendix1. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Overview2. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Product Selection & Information Gathering3. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Scoring4. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation5. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Fact Check & Publication6. Product Pricing Scenario Info-Tech Research Group 33
  • 34. Vendor Landscape Methodology:OverviewInfo-Tech’s Vendor Landscapes are research materials that review a particular IT market space, evaluating the strengths and abilities of boththe products available in that space, as well as the vendors of those products. These materials are created by a team of dedicated analystsoperating under the direction of a senior subject matter expert over a period of six weeks.Evaluations weigh selected vendors and their products (collectively “solutions”) on the following eight criteria to determine overall standing: • Features: The presence of advanced and market-differentiating capabilities. • Usability: The intuitiveness, power, and integrated nature of administrative consoles and client software components. • Affordability: The three-year total cost of ownership of the solution. • Architecture: The degree of integration with the vendor’s other tools, flexibility of deployment, and breadth of platform applicability. • Viability: The stability of the company as measured by its history in the market, the size of its client base, and its financial performance. • Strategy: The commitment to both the market-space, as well as to the various sized clients (small, mid-sized, and enterprise clients). • Reach: The ability of the vendor to support its products on a global scale. • Channel: The measure of the size of the vendor’s channel partner program, as well as any channel strengthening strategies.Evaluated solutions are plotted on a standard two by two matrix: • Champions: Both the product and the vendor receive scores that are above the average score for the evaluated group. • Innovators: The product receives a score that is above the average score for the evaluated group, but the vendor receives a score that is below the average score for the evaluated group. • Market Pillars: The product receives a score that is below the average score for the evaluated group, but the vendor receives a score that is above the average score for the evaluated group. • Emerging Players: Both the product and the vendor receive scores that are below the average score for the evaluated group.Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscapes are researched and produced according to a strictly adhered to process that includes the following steps: • Vendor/product selection • Information gathering • Vendor/product scoring • Information presentation • Fact checking • PublicationThis document outlines how each of these steps is conducted. Info-Tech Research Group 34
  • 35. Vendor Landscape Methodology:Vendor/Product Selection & Information GatheringInfo-Tech works closely with its client base to solicit guidance in terms of understanding the vendors with whom clients wish to work and theproducts that they wish evaluated; this demand pool forms the basis of the vendor selection process for Vendor Landscapes. Balancing thisdemand, Info-Tech also relies upon the deep subject matter expertise and market awareness of its Senior and Lead Research Analysts toensure that appropriate solutions are included in the evaluation. As an aspect of that expertise and awareness, Info-Tech’s analysts may, attheir discretion, determine the specific capabilities that are required of the products under evaluation, and include in the Vendor Landscapeonly those solutions that meet all specified requirements.Information on vendors and products is gathered in a number of ways via a number of channels.Initially, a request package is submitted to vendors to solicit information on a broad range of topics. The request package includes:• A detailed survey.• A pricing scenario (see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Price Evaluation and Pricing Scenario, below).• A request for reference clients.• A request for a briefing and, where applicable, guided product demonstration.These request packages are distributed approximately twelve weeks prior to the initiation of the actual research project to allow vendors ampletime to consolidate the required information and schedule appropriate resources.During the course of the research project, briefings and demonstrations are scheduled (generally for one hour each session, though more timeis scheduled as required) to allow the analyst team to discuss the information provided in the survey, validate vendor claims, and gain directexposure to the evaluated products. Additionally, an end-user survey is circulated to Info-Tech’s client base and vendor-supplied referenceaccounts are interviewed to solicit their feedback on their experiences with the evaluated solutions and with the vendors of those solutions.These materials are supplemented by a thorough review of all product briefs, technical manuals, and publicly available marketing materialsabout the product, as well as about the vendor itself.Refusal by a vendor to supply completed surveys or submit to participation in briefings and demonstrations does not eliminate a vendor frominclusion in the evaluation. Where analyst and client input has determined that a vendor belongs in a particular evaluation, it will be evaluatedas best as possible based on publicly available materials only. As these materials are not as comprehensive as a survey, briefing, anddemonstration, the possibility exists that the evaluation may not be as thorough or accurate. Since Info-Tech includes vendors regardless ofvendor participation, it is always in the vendor’s best interest to participate fully.All information is recorded and catalogued, as required, to facilitate scoring and for future reference. Info-Tech Research Group 35
  • 36. Vendor Landscape Methodology:ScoringOnce all information has been gathered and evaluated for all vendors and products, the analyst team moves to scoring. All scoring isperformed at the same time so as to ensure as much consistency as possible. Each criterion is scored on a ten point scale, though the mannerof scoring for criteria differs slightly: • Features is scored via Cumulative Scoring • Affordability is scored via Scalar Scoring • All other criteria are scored via Base5 ScoringIn Cumulative Scoring, a single point is assigned to each evaluated feature that is regarded as being fully present, a half point to each featurethat is partially present or pending in an upcoming release, and zero points to features that are deemed to be absent. The assigned points aresummed and normalized to a value out of ten. For example, if a particular Vendor Landscape evaluates eight specific features in the FeatureCriteria, the summed score out of eight for each evaluated product would be multiplied by 1.25 to yield a value out of ten.In Scalar Scoring, a score of ten is assigned to the lowest cost solution, and a score of one is assigned to the highest cost solution. All othersolutions are assigned a mathematically determined score based on their proximity to / distance from these two endpoints. For example, in anevaluation of three solutions, where the middle cost solution is closer to the low end of the pricing scale it will receive a higher score, andwhere it is closer to the high end of the pricing scale it will receive a lower score; depending on proximity to the high or low price it is entirelypossible that it could receive either ten points (if it is very close to the lowest price) or one point (if it is very close to the highest price). Wherepricing cannot be determined (vendor does not supply price and public sources do not exist), a score of 0 is automatically assigned.In Base5 scoring a number of sub-criteria are specified for each criterion (for example, Longevity, Market Presence, and Financials are sub-criteria of the Viability criterion), and each one is scored on the following scale: 5 - The product/vendor is exemplary in this area (nothing could be done to improve the status). 4 - The product/vendor is good in this area (small changes could be made that would move things to the next level). 3 - The product/vendor is adequate in this area (small changes would make it good, more significant changes required to be exemplary). 2 - The product/vendor is poor in this area (this is a notable weakness and significant work is required). 1 - The product/vendor is terrible/fails in this area (this is a glaring oversight and a serious impediment to adoption).The assigned points are summed and normalized to a value out of ten as explained in Cumulative Scoring above.Scores out of ten, known as Raw scores, are transposed as-is into Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscape Shortlist Tool, which automaticallydetermines Vendor Landscape positioning (see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation - Vendor Landscape, below),Criteria Score (see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation - Criteria Score, below), and Value Index (see VendorLandscape Methodology: Information Presentation - Value Index, below). Info-Tech Research Group 36
  • 37. Vendor Landscape Methodology:Information Presentation – Vendor LandscapeInfo-Tech’s Vendor Landscape is a two-by-two matrix that plots solutions based on the Vendor Landscapecombination of Product score and Vendor score. Placement is not determined byabsolute score, but instead by relative score. Relative scores are used to ensure a Innovators: Champions:consistent view of information and to minimize dispersion in nascent markets, while solutions with below solutions with aboveenhancing dispersion in commodity markets to allow for quick visual analysis by clients. average Vendor average Vendor scores and above scores and aboveRelative scores are calculated as follows: average Product average Product 1. Raw scores are transposed into the Info-Tech Vendor Landscape Shortlist Tool scores. scores. (for information on how Raw scores are determined, see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Scoring, above). 2. Each individual criterion Raw score is multiplied by the pre-assigned weighting factor for the Vendor Landscape in question. Weighting factors are determined prior to the evaluation process to eliminate any possibility of bias. Weighting factors are expressed as a percentage such that the sum of the weighting factors for the Vendor criteria (Viability, Strategy, Reach, Channel) is 100% and the sum of the Product criteria (Features, Usability, Affordability, Architecture) is 100%. 3. A sum-product of the weighted Vendor criteria scores and of the weighted Product criteria scores is calculated to yield an overall Vendor score and an overall Product score. 4. Overall Vendor scores are then normalized to a 20 point scale by calculating the arithmetic mean and standard deviation of the pool of Vendor scores. Vendors for whom their overall Vendor score is higher than the arithmetic mean will receive a normalized Vendor score of 11-20 (exact value determined by how much higher than the arithmetic mean their overall Vendor score is), while vendors for whom their overall Vendor score is lower than the arithmetic mean will receive a Emerging Players: Market Pillars: normalized Vendor score of between one and ten (exact value determined by how solutions with below solutions with above much lower than the arithmetic mean their overall Vendor score is). average Vendor average Vendor 5. Overall Product score is normalized to a 20 point scale according to the same scores and below scores and below process. average Product average Product 6. Normalized scores are plotted on the matrix, with Vendor score being used as the scores. scores. x-axis, and Product score being used as the y-axis. Info-Tech Research Group 37
  • 38. Vendor Landscape Methodology:Information Presentation – Criteria Scores (Harvey Balls)Info-Tech’s Criteria Scores are visual representations of the absolute score assigned to each individual criterion, as well as of the calculatedoverall Vendor and Product scores. The visual representation used is Harvey Balls.Harvey Balls are calculated as follows: 1. Raw scores are transposed into the Info-Tech Vendor Landscape Shortlist Tool (for information on how Raw scores are determined, see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Scoring, above). 2. Each individual criterion Raw score is multiplied by a pre-assigned weighting factor for the Vendor Landscape in question. Weighting factors are determined prior to the evaluation process, based on the expertise of the Senior or Lead Research Analyst, to eliminate any possibility of bias. Weighting factors are expressed as a percentage, such that the sum of the weighting factors for the Vendor criteria (Viability, Strategy, Reach, Channel) is 100%, and the sum of the Product criteria (Features, Usability, Affordability, Architecture) is 100%. 3. A sum-product of the weighted Vendor criteria scores and of the weighted Product criteria scores is calculated to yield an overall Vendor score and an overall Product score. 4. Both overall Vendor score / overall Product score, as well as individual criterion Raw scores are converted from a scale of one to ten to Harvey Ball scores on a scale of zero to four, where exceptional performance results in a score of four and poor performance results in a score of zero. 5. Harvey Ball scores are converted to Harvey Balls as follows: • A score of four becomes a full Harvey Ball. • A score of three becomes a three-quarter full Harvey Ball. • A score of two becomes a half full Harvey Ball. • A score of one becomes a one-quarter full Harvey Ball. • A score of zero (zero) becomes an empty Harvey Ball. 6. Harvey Balls are plotted by solution in a chart where rows represent individual solutions and columns represent overall Vendor / overall Product, as well as individual criteria. Solutions are ordered in the chart alphabetically by vendor name. Harvey Balls Overall Harvey Criteria Harvey Product Vendor Balls represent Balls represent weighted Overall Feat. Use. Afford. Arch. Overall Via. Strat. Reach Chan. individual Raw aggregates. scores. Info-Tech Research Group 38
  • 39. Vendor Landscape Methodology:Information Presentation – Feature Ranks (Stop Lights)Info-Tech’s Feature Ranks are visual representations of the presence/availability of individual features that collectively comprise the Features’criterion. The visual representation used is Stop Lights.Stop Lights are determined as follows: 1. A single point is assigned to each evaluated feature that is regarded as being fully present, a half point to each feature that is partially present or pending in an upcoming release, and zero points to features that are deemed to be fully absent. • Fully present means all aspects and capabilities of the feature as described are in evidence. • Fully absent means all aspects and capabilities of the feature as described are in evidence. • Partially present means some, but not all, aspects and capabilities of the feature as described are in evidence, OR all aspects and capabilities of the feature as described are in evidence, but only for some models in a line. • Pending means all aspects and capabilities of the feature, as described, are anticipated to be in evidence in a future revision of the product and that revision is to be released within the next 12 months. 2. Feature scores are converted to Stop Lights as follows: • Full points become a Green light. • Half points become a Yellow light. • Zero points become a Red light. 3. Stop Lights are plotted by solution in a chart where rows represent individual solutions and columns represent individual features. Solutions are ordered in the chart alphabetically by vendor name.For example, a set of applications is being reviewed and a feature of “Integration with Mobile Devices” that is defined as “availability ofdedicated mobile device applications for iOS, Android, and BlackBerry devices” is specified. Solution A provides such apps for all listedplatforms and scores “Green”, solution B provides apps for iOS and Android only and scores “Yellow”, while solution C provides mobile devicefunctionality through browser extensions, has no dedicated apps, and so scores “Red”. Stop Lights Green means a Features Yellow shows feature is fully partial availability Feature 1 Feature 2 Feature 3 Feature 4 Feature 5 Feature 6 Feature 7 Feature 8 present; Red, (such as in some fully absent. models in a line). Info-Tech Research Group 39
  • 40. Vendor Landscape Methodology:Information Presentation – Value IndexInfo-Tech’s Value Index is an indexed ranking of solution value per dollar as determined Value Indexby the Raw scores assigned to each criteria (for information on how Raw scores aredetermined, see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Scoring, above). Vendors are arranged in order of Value Score. The Value Score each solution achieved isValue scores are calculated as follows: displayed, and so is the average score. 1. The Affordability criterion is removed from the overall Product score and the remaining Product score criteria (Features, Usability, Architecture) are reweighted so as to retain the same weightings relative to one another, while still summing to 100%. For example, if all four Product criteria were assigned base weightings of 25%, for the determination of the Value score, Features, Usability, and Architecture would be reweighted to 33.3% each to retain the same relative weightings while still summing to 100%. 2. A sum-product of the weighted Vendor criteria scores and of the reweighted Product criteria scores is calculated to yield an overall Vendor score and a reweighted overall Product score. Average Score: 52 100 3. The overall Vendor score and the reweighted overall Product score are then 80 summed, and this sum is multiplied by the Affordability Raw score to yield an interim Value score for each solution. 4. All interim Value scores are then indexed to the highest performing solution by 40 dividing each interim Value score by the highest interim Value score. This results 30 in a Value score of 100 for the top solution and an indexed Value score relative to 10 the 100 for each alternate solution. 5. Solutions are plotted according to Value score, with the highest score plotted first, A B C D E and all remaining scores plotted in descending numerical order.Where pricing is not provided by the vendor and public sources of information cannot be Those solutions that are ranked asfound, an Affordability Raw score of zero is assigned. Since multiplication by zero results Champions are differentiated for point ofin a product of zero, those solutions for which pricing cannot be determined receive a reference.Value score of zero. Since Info-Tech assigns a score of zero where pricing is notavailable, it is always in the vendor’s best interest to provide accurate and up to datepricing Info-Tech Research Group 40
  • 41. Vendor Landscape Methodology:Information Presentation – Price EvaluationInfo-Tech’s Price Evaluation is a tiered representation of the three year Total Cost of Price EvaluationOwnership (TCO) of a proposed solution. Info-Tech uses this method of communicatingpricing information to provide high-level budgetary guidance to its end-user clients while Call-out bubble indicates within which pricerespecting the privacy of the vendors with whom it works. The solution TCO is calculated tier the three year TCO for the solution falls,and then represented as belonging to one of ten pricing tiers. provides the brackets of that price tier, and links to the graphical representation.Pricing tiers are as follows: 1. Between $1 and $2,500 2. Between $2,500 and $5,000 3. Between $5,000 and $10,000 3 year TCO for this solution falls into pricing 4. Between $10,000 and $25,000 tier 6, between $50,000 and $100,000. 5. Between $25,000 and $50,000 6. Between $50,000 and $100,000 7. Between $100,000 and $250,000 8. Between $250,000 and $500,000 9. Between $500,000 and $1,000,000 10. Greater than $1,000,000Where pricing is not provided, Info-Tech makes use of publicly available sources ofinformation to determine a price. As these sources are not official price lists, the $1 $1M+possibility exists that they may be inaccurate or outdated, and so the source of the Pricing solicited from public sources.pricing information is provided. Since Info-Tech publishes pricing information regardlessof vendor participation, it is always in the vendor’s best interest to supply accurate andup to date information.Info-Tech’s Price Evaluations are based on pre-defined pricing scenarios (see Product Scale along the bottom indicates that thePricing Scenario, below) to ensure a comparison that is as close as possible between graphic as a whole represents a price scaleevaluated solutions. Pricing scenarios describe a sample business and solicit guidance with a range of $1 to $1M+, while the notationas to the appropriate product/service mix required to deliver the specified functionality, indicates whether the pricing was supplied bythe list price for those tools/services, as well as three full years of maintenance and the vendor or derived from public sources.support. Info-Tech Research Group 41
  • 42. Vendor Landscape Methodology:Information Presentation – ScenariosInfo-Tech’s Scenarios highlight specific use cases for the evaluated solution to provide as complete (when taken in conjunction with theindividual written review, Vendor Landscape, Criteria Scores, Feature Ranks, and Value Index) a basis for comparison by end-user clients aspossible.Scenarios are designed to reflect tiered capability in a particular set of circumstances. Determination of the Scenarios in question is at thediscretion of the analyst team assigned to the research project. Where possible, Scenarios are designed to be mutually exclusive andcollectively exhaustive, or at the very least, hierarchical such that the tiers within the Scenario represent a progressively greater or broadercapability.Scenario ranking is determined as follows: 1. The analyst team determines an appropriate use case. For example: • Clients that have multinational presence and require vendors to provide four hour onsite support. 2. The analyst team establishes the various tiers of capability. For example: • Presence in Americas • Presence in EMEA • Presence in APAC 3. The analyst team reviews all evaluated solutions and determines which ones meet which tiers of capability. For example: • Presence in Americas – Vendor A, Vendor C, Vendor E • Presence in EMEA – Vendor A, Vendor B, Vendor C • Presence in APAC – Vendor B, Vendor D, Vendor E 4. Solutions are plotted on a grid alphabetically by vendor by tier. Where one vendor is deemed to be stronger in a tier than other vendors in the same tier, they may be plotted non-alphabetically. For example: • Vendor C is able to provide four hour onsite support to 12 countries in EMEA while Vendors A and B are only able to provide four hour onsite support to eight countries in EMEA; Vendor C would be plotted first, followed by Vendor A, then Vendor B. Info-Tech Research Group 42
  • 43. Vendor Landscape Methodology:Information Presentation – Vendor AwardsAt the conclusion of all analyses, Info-Tech presents awards to exceptional solutions in Vendor Awardsthree distinct categories. Award presentation is discretionary; not all awards areextended subsequent to each Vendor landscape and it is entirely possible, thoughunlikely, that no awards may be presented. Info-Tech’s ChampionAwards categories are as follows: Award is presented to • Champion Awards are presented to those solutions, and only those solutions, that solutions in the Champion land in the Champion zone of the Info-Tech Vendor Landscape (see Vendor zone of the Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation - Vendor Landscape, above). If Landscape. no solutions land in the Champion zone, no Champion Awards are presented. Similarly, if multiple solutions land in the Champion zone, multiple Champion Awards are presented. • Trend Setter Awards are presented to those solutions, and only those solutions, that are deemed to include the most original/inventive product/service, or the most original/inventive feature/capability of a product/service. If no solution is deemed to Info-Tech’s Trend Setter be markedly or sufficiently original/inventive, either as a product/service on the Award is presented to the whole or by feature/capability specifically, no Trend Setter Award is presented. Only most original/inventive one Trend Setter Award is available for each Vendor Landscape. solution evaluated. • Best Overall Value Awards are presented to those solutions, and only those solutions, that are ranked highest on the Info-Tech Value Index (see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation – Value Index, above). If insufficient pricing information is made available for the evaluated solutions, such that a Value Index cannot be calculated, no Best Overall Value Award will be presented. Only one Best Overall Value Award is available for each Vendor Info-Tech’s Best Overall Landscape. Value Award is presented to the solution with the highest Value Index score. Info-Tech Research Group 43
  • 44. Vendor Landscape Methodology:Fact Check & PublicationInfo-Tech takes the factual accuracy of its Vendor Landscapes, and indeed of all of its published content, very seriously. To ensure the utmostaccuracy in its Vendor Landscapes, we invite all vendors of evaluated solutions (whether the vendor elected to provide a survey and/orparticipate in a briefing or not) to participate in a process of Fact Check.Once the research project is complete and the materials are deemed to be in a publication ready state, excerpts of the material specific to eachvendor’s solution are provided to the vendor. Info-Tech only provides material specific to the individual vendor’s solution for reviewencompassing the following: • All written review materials of the vendor and the vendor’s product that comprise the evaluated solution. • Info-Tech’s Criteria Scores / Harvey Balls detailing the individual and overall Vendor / Product scores assigned. • Info-Tech’s Feature Rank / Stop Lights detailing the individual feature scores of the evaluated product. • Info-Tech’s Value Index ranking for the evaluated solution. • Info-Tech’s Scenario ranking for all considered scenarios for the evaluated solution.Info-Tech does not provide the following: • Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscape placement of the evaluated solution. • Info-Tech’s Value Score for the evaluated solution. • End-user feedback gathered during the research project. • Info-Tech’s overall recommendation in regard to the evaluated solution.Info-Tech provides a one-week window for each vendor to provide written feedback. Feedback must be corroborated (be provided withsupporting evidence), and where it does, feedback that addresses factual errors or omissions is adopted fully, while feedback that addressesopinions is taken under consideration. The assigned analyst team makes all appropriate edits and supplies an edited copy of the materials tothe vendor within one week for final review.Should a vendor still have concerns or objections at that time, they are invited to a conversation, initially via email, but as required and deemedappropriate by Info-Tech, subsequently via telephone, to ensure common understanding of the concerns. Where concerns relate to ongoingfactual errors or omissions they are corrected under the supervision of Info-Tech’s Vendor Relations personnel. Where concerns relate toongoing differences of opinion they are again taken under consideration with neither explicit not implicit indication of adoption.Publication of materials is scheduled to occur within the six weeks immediately following the completion of the research project, but does notoccur until the Fact Check process has come to conclusion, and under no circumstances are “pre-publication” copies of any materials madeavailable to any client. Info-Tech Research Group 44
  • 45. Product Pricing Scenario• A mid-level clothing manufacturer/retailer with corporate offices on the US west coast, east coast, and Ireland and 2200 global employees is looking to refresh its enterprise/campus LAN infrastructure. The firm is interested in only the wired LAN (no data center or wireless).• The corporate office breakdown is as follows:• US West Coast (Head Office)• Employing 1600 people (70% of total staff), the west coast office holds Sales, Finance, Strategy, Marketing, Buyers, and the majority of IT. The IT staff here consists of 45 employees, three of which are dedicated network professionals consisting of one Network Manager and two Network Administrators.• US East Coast (Satellite)• Employing 200 people (10% of total staff), the east coast office holds solely a Marketing department.• Ireland (Satellite)• Employing 400 people (20% of total staff), the Ireland office employs Buyers and Manufacturing, and also a DR facility. Manufacturing consists of 300 employees. The company’s remaining five IT staff are located here, though none have dedicated network responsibilities.• The expected solution capabilities are as follows:• The network will be two tiered (no distribution/aggregation layer) and requires the following:• 50 layer 2/3 stackable 48 port Gigabit access/edge switches with 2x10 Gigabit uplink ports.• Redundant core chassis switches for head office with line cards to accommodate up to 72x10 Gigabit and 192 Gigabit ports.• Mini-core, non-redundant switches for satellite offices. Accommodate with either a small chassis switch or stackable switches. One for US East coast should accommodate up to 10x10 Gigabit ports and 48 Gigabit ports. One for Ireland should accommodate up to 20x10 Gigabit ports and 96 Gigabit ports.• Please provide annual or three year 8x5 NBD advanced hardware replacement support and maintenance costs for the solution.• Include the cost of a complete and comprehensive (not a limited free version) NMS to manage the infrastructure. Info-Tech Research Group 45