The first question most IT organizations have when starting a network automation project is “build or buy?” In reality, most networking teams end up doing both.
“We have a hybrid strategy,” an IT tools architect at a Fortune 500 media company recently told Enterprise Management Associates (EMA). “If it makes sense, we can buy commercial tools, but we also develop tools in-house that don't provide the functionality we need from vendors. Commercial tools meet about 80% of our needs. I can.”
Network teams are often forced to make binary choices when it comes to network automation. Some companies take a vendor-centric approach, purchasing their own software or adopting open source solutions supported by vendors or managed service providers. Others take a DIY approach, installing unsupported open source software or developing in-house software with teams of network automation engineers who combine networking and coding expertise.
EMA recently surveyed 354 IT professionals about their network automation strategies and another 1 in 10 for their recently published research report, “Enterprise Network Automation: Emerging from the Dark Ages and Reaching NetDevOps.” I interviewed 1.
Our research found that 100% of IT organizations use commercial network automation tools and 94% use DIY tools. In other words, they don't make binary choices. They use a combination of commercially available and DIY tools.
All of the above approaches make sense when you understand that a network automation strategy is rarely about implementing one tool. Network automation strategies are often configurable, with networking teams pulling together multiple solutions to address key use cases and different types of requirements. In fact, only 9% of IT professionals responded to the EMA that network automation is covered by one tool. Instead, 42% claimed he has three tools. Another 23% said he had four or more.
Powering DIY network automation
Survey respondents identified three key drivers of DIY automation: First, you need features tailored to your specific network. For example, you may have specific business requirements that make your network unique.
“You can't get all the features you need. [from a commercial vendor]said a network automation engineer at a Fortune 500 company. “Typically they do some of the things. It's about the customization level. [With DIY]You can get what you want when you need it. ”
The second most important factor is security and compliance requirements. For example, if an organization evaluates a commercial tool that is only available as a SaaS product, a cybersecurity group may object because the company cannot store network data in the vendor's SaaS cloud.
The last big factor with DIY is cost. “Several [commercial] The tools we were considering purchasing were far too expensive,” said a network engineer at a private gaming company. “The price far exceeds the value compared to writing the code yourself.”
Driving forces for commercial network automation
Readers may be surprised to learn that while security and compliance requirements are the biggest driver for commercial tools, they are also cited as a driver for DIY tool development. There are nuances to consider here. For DIY tools, many cybersecurity organizations prohibit the use of open source. This may also be a use case issue. The tool that acts as a source of truth may have different security requirements than his second tool used for automated change management.
The second factor is general platform requirements such as resiliency and scalability. An in-house development team may build a tool that easily performs dozens of changes on the network, but it may be difficult to scale to thousands of changes. One network automation engineer told his EMA that it takes several hours to apply changes to all routers on a network using an in-house tool. He described a situation where he noticed an error in a change he pushed, but had to wait hours for the tool to complete the change before he could tell the tool to undo the change.
Finally, many respondents told EMA that they chose commercial tools because of their breadth and depth of functionality. According to EMA's experience, DIY network automation teams typically tackle one or two key use cases in their first effort. Once you demonstrate success, upper management will give you resources to expand into other use cases. Commercial tools are the opposite, with a set of features that can address multiple use cases out of the box. If implemented in a timely manner, commercial tools can deliver more value faster.
Emphasis on flexibility over rigidity
Taking a build-and-buy approach to network automation is really about being flexible and making things work with the resources you have. For example, switching vendors typically bundle network automation tools with their hardware. Although this tool is inexpensive, it only has a subset of the functionality that network teams need. To fill the gap, network teams may adopt open source tools or create internal software to address their specific needs. Multiple IT managers have told EMA over the years that they developed homegrown software solely to automate specific workflows with switching vendor automation tools.
Additionally, your network team may have a multi-vendor network, with only a subset of those vendors covered by commercial automation tools. Open source tools may be adopted to address these gaps.
None of these scenarios may sound perfect to the average reader, but the network team makes it work. And they always aim for better. A key consideration is to remain flexible and know when you need to change your strategy. Taking all of the above approaches gives you flexibility.