Billing system or network-adjacent CRM?
Splynx and UISP CRM often appear in different parts of the ISP toolchain. Splynx is commonly reviewed for billing and ISP management, while UISP is common where Ubiquiti-heavy WISPs already use UISP network data.
ISPAgents should fit around this decision by supporting coexistence with both API/import paths while giving the operator a broader operations surface.
Comparison framework
| Area | What to ask | |---|---| | Billing | Which platform handles the finance model: prepaid, postpaid, invoices, adjustments, deposits, and aging? | | Network data | Which system already has trusted site, device, or customer identifiers? | | Access control | How do payments trigger RADIUS, MikroTik, CPE, or custom connector changes? | | Support | Can support see customer, billing, access, CPE, ticket, and outage context together? | | Field service | Can installs, relocations, and equipment swaps update inventory and customer records? | | Migration | Can the new platform coexist before cutover? |
ISPAgents approach
ISPAgents should integrate with UISP and Splynx where needed, then move the highest-value workflows into one operating layer: billing, payments, access, support, field service, inventory, and AI assistance.
FAQ
Can ISPAgents work with both UISP and Splynx?
Yes. The product direction includes UISP API, Splynx API, CSV, Excel, MikroTik, RADIUS, and custom connector paths for coexistence and migration.
Should UISP remain in place?
If UISP is useful for network visibility, keep it while moving broader operations into ISPAgents gradually.