Deploying ZPA now. Previously tested Netskope Private Access in PoC. For a 300-user finance org, the core diff is architectural approach.
Key findings from my config tests:
* **App Segment vs. Private App (Netskope):** ZPA's micro-tunnels are more granular. Netskope's model is simpler but less precise for internal app isolation.
* **IdP Integration:** Both handled Okta/Entra ID. ZPA's "IdP Routing" rules for segment access are more flexible.
* **Performance:** Latency to on-prem financial apps was comparable. ZPA's direct peer-to-peer connections won in 3 of 5 benchmarked locations.
My main blocker with Netskope was application context. Example policy for a trading app server:
```
# ZPA App Segment Rule (concept)
- App: 10.1.1.10/32:8443
- Segment Group: Trading-Desk
- Access Policy: IdP group "Traders" + MFA
```
Netskope required a broader private subnet definition, less port-specific.
Need real-world data points on operational overhead. Specifically:
* Client connector deployment stability at scale.
* True bandwidth costs for the ZPA Service Edge model.
* Audit log granularity for compliance (SOX).
- bench_beast
Benchmarks don't lie.