SD-WAN vs MPLS: how to decide the network architecture for your company
Should your next enterprise network decision be SD-WAN or MPLS? The short answer: it depends on how many sites you have, what SLA you need, and how much monthly recurring cost matters to you.
Ten years ago MPLS was the default option. Today, for most mid-sized companies in Mexico with 3 to 15 sites, SD-WAN has already displaced MPLS on TCO. But MPLS is not dead: there are cases where it remains the right choice.
What each one is
MPLS is a carrier-managed service that delivers L2/L3 VPNs over the provider’s private network. The carrier manages the routing and the quality of service. You get a transport SLA but depend on the carrier for changes.
SD-WAN (Software-Defined WAN) is an architecture where routing is done from a software layer that orchestrates multiple transports (internet, LTE, MPLS) under centralized policies. The intelligence lives in your controller, not the carrier.
When MPLS is still the right choice
If you have fewer than five sites, if real-time traffic quality of service (voice, video) is critical and you do not want to operate an SD-WAN solution, MPLS is still reasonable.
In financial operations or telcos where the contractual carrier SLA is mandatory and heterogeneous redundancy (4G, internet) does not meet regulation, MPLS is the answer.
When SD-WAN has already won
For companies with 5 to 50 geographically distributed sites, SD-WAN reduces monthly cost by replacing MPLS with business-grade internet and encrypted tunnels. TCO typically drops between 30 and 50 percent compared to equivalent MPLS.
If you need to provision a new site in days, not weeks, SD-WAN lets you do it because the transport is internet. If you need to adjust traffic policies by application without waiting for the carrier, SD-WAN lets you do it from a central portal.
Vendor options you will see in the market
Cisco (Viptela and Meraki), Versa Networks, Fortinet, HPE Aruba (EdgeConnect), and Palo Alto (Prisma SD-WAN) are the main names. Each has different strengths in integration with its own security ecosystem.
The natural evolution of SD-WAN toward SASE (Secure Access Service Edge) and SSE (Security Service Edge) is what leads many companies to choose the same vendor as their perimeter firewalls — Palo Alto, Fortinet, or Cisco — to unify security for remote sites and mobile users under a single console. This convergence reduces operational complexity, unifies policies, and simplifies regulatory compliance in distributed operations.
The vendor choice depends more on your current security stack than on WAN functionality per se. If you already operate firewalls from one vendor, their SD-WAN integrates better and reduces operational complexity.
Questions to decide
- How many sites do you have and where are they geographically? Geographic dispersion defines the viability of each option.
- What SLA do you need? If 99.9 percent annual is enough, SD-WAN delivers it. If you need 99.99 percent sustained with carrier-grade, MPLS may be necessary.
- Do you have staff to operate SD-WAN or do you want the carrier to manage it? Many SD-WAN providers offer a managed model.
- How much does your MPLS cost today per site and what is the trend? If MPLS cost has risen and service has not improved, it is time to compare.
- Is there regulation that obliges you to carrier-grade? Certain industries (financial, healthcare) have restrictions that favor MPLS over internet.
The most common mistake
Treating SD-WAN as an automatic MPLS replacement without analyzing critical applications. SD-WAN is excellent for general enterprise traffic, but real-time voice or video traffic with strict QoS may require a dedicated MPLS connection as backup.
The most common architecture in mature operations is hybrid: SD-WAN as the main transport for data, with dedicated MPLS for real-time or backup traffic. It is not black or white, it is architecture by application.
Sources
