Some Considerations For Buying Enterprise Network Services

Under the current circumstances, and with acquisitions activities moving to the right, there is a bit of time to actually do a bit of thinking about how to meet enterprise network needs.  Maybe  some of our government organizations will take this additional time to consider how they could structure to improve their network acquisition and services performance.

If you get anything out of this post, I want you to ask yourself and your organization two simple questions:

• "Are we buying our enterprise network service the best way possible?"
• "Is my organization structured for effective enterprise network services acquisitions and operations?"

These simple but direct questions should lead you down a journey that will probably end with the conclusion that, no, you are not buying our network services the best way, and it's time for a change.

So, what I am going on about here?  Aren't there telecommunication leaders in the enterprise networking space that solve networking services for large enterprises?  Don't they provide the capabilities and options are critical to success?  Well, the real answer is not really a yes or a no.  This is because the answer is not just about them, it is also the business model that your organization selects to specify, acquire, and operate services.

First, here is a quick review of the major trends in telecommunications solutions for enterprise networks.

As I wrote previously, as far back as 2009, the expanding use of Internet-based services to meet Enterprise networking requirements continues.  The traditional dependency on a single service provider's MPLS/VPN network exclusively for bandwidth and to ensure quality of service is rapidly changing to a blend of services with Broadband Internet (i.e., the Cable company) and wireless (i.e., 4G and now 5G).  There are several factors driving this change: 

• The cost of Broadband Internet services have a capacity per price ratio that depending on location ranges from two to as much as 100 times better than MPLS/VPN services (that is more bang for the network buck).
• The quality of these services has improved dramatically (as proven today by millions of people working at home due to COVID-19 with the use of Internet access-based Software as a Service and high-quality video teleconferencing services).
• The cost effective use of multiple services to improve effective network availability at a site due to a service failure (in most cases the share risk of failure between, for example, 4G/5G and Cable provided Internet is small).
• SD-WAN technology is enabling policy-based use of  these services to improve the network performance experience of users and their applications.

Of course you say, my enterprise network service provider can do all this for me.  As a buying organization, we can pick a blend of my selected services provider's MPLS/VPN service as well as wireless and even Broadband Internet and I am good to do.  In addition, my selected provider offers SD-WAN service.   My organization is all set.

Well, you are, sort of.  As I have found in many areas of Information Technology delivery, it is more about the business model than technology.  If you are large commercial or government enterprise, these are some of the business areas and questions you should consider:

• Are you a "one-and-done" organization?  That is do you perform a competitive acquisition activity once, set pricing, and then ride the solution for five to 10 years?
• Are you an "outsourcing" organization?  That is, except for service requests, status, and trouble management you let your selected service provider to it all.
• Are you an "engineering" organization?  That is, you have network engineers that want to design and engineer the network?

Each of these business processes lead to a different set of principles for buying network services.   Here are some to consider:

• Do you want to avoid the complexity and effort required to perform a transition from the periodic "one and done" network service provider?
• Are you concerned maintaining cost competitiveness during a "one and done" contract?  Global network services pricing, including U.S. domestic services, decreases every year.
• Are you concerned that your organization's engineering staff can not keep up with a combination of technology and working with multiple vendors to pull a solution together and as important sustain the system?
• Did you develop an operations architecture on how to integrate your total Information Technology (IT)environment?  For that matter do you have an IT architecture?
• And most important, is the organization getting the network performance and availability needed to get the mission done with clear incentives for all parties to ensure continued performance.

The place to start is to create a set of objective outcomes for the organization as part of building a strategy:

• Stop the need doing network acquisitions every several years (when you actually get around to putting together the acquisition documents, make an award, and perform a potentially costly and disruptive provider transition).
• Enable the ability to continually shop for price and take advantage of reducing costs without complete redesign of the network.
• Build an engineering staff that is fully integrated into a comprehensive business process that both leverages and builds their skills, and addresses the need to keep the organization's technology current.
• Build a comprehensive network (and really IT) architecture that leverages a full range of network implementation and operations options tailored the various network services required.
• Build and provide network services that meet and continue the organization's evolving needs.

This is a bunch to consider, and in future articles, I will focus on potential government organization structures and approaches to meet the above outcomes.

Google Fiber Fail

I wrote way back in 2012 about Google Fiber.  Although that post focused on the marketing hype associated with Google providing 1Gbps Internet service, it did hint that Google was taking on physical infrastructure issues that could have major impacts to service.

The new installation techniques employed by Google and not tested by decades of real-world installations have come back to haunt Google and more importantly their complete customer base in Louisville, Kentucky.   Google attempted to take a shortcut to the installation of fiber with a technique that directly exposes fiber to the harsh realities of the environment.  This new method uses shallow slit trenching of fiber directly into the asphalt street pavement  and then it is covered with an epoxy - what could possibly go wrong?



Unlike concrete (which has its own issues),

asphalt is not solid or stable.  Asphalt moves and cracks. Years of layers of pavement generate layers that capture water, freeze and become potholes that are the bane of car tires everywhere.  The situation becomes worse depending on the combination of the type of ground under the pavement, weather, and very importantly they types and frequency of truck traffic.  What was the thought process that is approach was going to last a year, let alone the 10 to 20 year set-and-forget typically required to meet fiber or cable plant cost effectiveness?  You can actually see cracks and repairs in the pavement in the picture of Google installing fiber in Louisville.   Again, what were they thinking?

Although the Cable companies (the MSOs) use shortcut techniques of direct-bury of coaxial cable in the ground, this approach has cable systems that have the benefit of years of improvements and well known maintenance needs.  In general, although segments may fail, there are generally no regionally-wide systematic plant failures that require the complete re-installation of cable or fiber.

Google may have a fail-fast (or relatively fast if you are tracking Google's set of messaging applications) approach based on "Internet Time', but in this case, not only did they fail, there is no recovery enabled by the upgrade or download of an Android or iPhone app.  They created a false narrative that there was a shortcut to conventional installation approaches without performing the long-term testing that is the generally hallmark of stable and reliable telecommunications systems.

Finally, unlike other companies that plan for long-term commitments to their customers, Google Fiber is apparently leaving virtually all their Louisville customers forever.  Maybe Google will finally figure-out that although they can fix or abandon applications without significant damage to their main advertising-based revenue, failing at the physical layer to a customer is something that the customer will not soon forget.