- AutoCon 2 explored challenges in defining and standardizing network automation
- The CEO of Stardust Systems Dinesh Dutt emphasized the role vendors play in shaping that landscape
- The Network Automation Forum community was urged to collaborate on a unified lexicon for network automation
DENVER, CO — An animated discussion took place at this year’s AutoCon 2, where the Network Automation Forum (NAF) brings together network engineers, architects and developers from across industries. The topic at hand? What network automation truly means, how to measure it and who should be in charge of deciding those things.
With its modest size of around 500 attendees, AutoCon fosters a tight-knit community of network professionals. Many have been there before, giving the event a college-reunion-like atmosphere. Addressing the conference on Wednesday, Dinesh Dutt CEO of Stardust Systems (maker of network automation tool SusieQ) framed network automation as a journey, but one with a big challenge: there’s no shared map.
“If network automation is a journey, are we all going to the same place? And do we all want the same things?” Dutt asked. According to him, the lack of consistent terminology hinders collaboration, as network professionals often define key automation concepts differently.
Referencing the 2024 State of Network Automation Survey conducted by the NAF, Dutt pointed out that responses to “What is network automation?” varied widely.
“We want to go somewhere, but we are not even capable of sharing this journey, because the words we choose are not the same. The way we understand the problem is not the same,” he said. “We need a systemic way of thinking about it, because network automation is not just a set of scripts thrown together, a set of tools thrown together. It's a system, and as a system, we need a systemic way of thinking.”
Decoupling tools from the task
Dutt challenged the community to rethink the influence of tools and vendors on how network automation is defined and practiced. Drawing on a quote by Canadian philosopher Marshall McLuhan, he warned, “We shape our tools and therefore our tools shape us.”
Essentially, there’s a “very limited” way engineers today think about network automation, and often it’s because their understanding is confined to the tools each company has chosen to use. Dutt said the industry should decouple the tasks of network automation from the tools used to perform them.
As Anna Claiborne said during the event keynote, the "most successful product Cisco ever built was certifications." Thus, Cisco taught engineers not "how to think about a BGP [border gateway protocol], but how to type the command that enabled BGP," Dutt said.
“So when you pick a tool, it doesn't matter what it is… whatever you pick, that tool will shape you, and you've got to be aware of that and not forget that your task is independent of the tool,” he added. “If you confuse the two and put one in front of the other in the wrong direction, you can find yourself in a log jam sooner than later.”
Vendors versus community
During Dutt’s Q&A session, Steinn Bjarnarson, lead product development engineer at Advania Ísland, raised the issue of resolving disagreements over what network automation means. “Vendor A is going to fight vendor B like bloody dogs,” he said.
Dutt’s solution? Minimize vendor influence. “If I participate as a vendor and a bias as a vendor shows, then please feel free to tell me to shut up,” he said. The community of network engineers should drive the discussion, not the companies selling automation tools.
"We need to understand, when I show up and you ask me my opinion, no matter how unbiased I am, implicit bias plays in my state, because of the fact that I sell SuzieQ. You cannot take that away from me and to think that I somehow am this very nice human being who can rise above all of that is total BS," Dutt added.
Co-founder of NAF, Scott Robohn, pushed back to that, cautioning against excluding vendors entirely. “I think the criteria for judging input shouldn’t be where they get their paycheck from,” Robohn said. He advocated for a balanced approach that allows vendors to contribute, provided their input aligns with the needs of network engineers.
Dutt conceded that vendors don't have to be totally excluded, but maintained they should be held accountable for biases. “Good vendors are really aligned with you, but at the end of the day, their job is to make and sell tools. Your job is to make your life easier,” he said. “I think it's something that needs to be driven by the community. You are the practitioners.”
The session closed with a call to action for the NAF community to collaborate on a document establishing a shared lexicon for network automation. Dutt warned against waiting for traditional standards bodies, which he said are often too slow to adapt. “The longer we wait, the more the community moves on, and what you're dealing with is actually very old,” he said.