2023 State of Network Automation Survey

Wed Mar 1 16:12:18 UTC 2023

>
> Fair play, Tom. All I can say is that after 20 years of working on, in,
> and around the Internet, I'm sure as hell not going to ruin my reputation
> now.
>

Apologies if I implied anything like that. Wasn't my intent to do so.

> And whether we engineers like it or not, one of the best ways to measure
> trends is in the relative amount of money organizations spend on them...
>

I am not sure I completely agree with that assertion honestly.

Seen plenty of projects that saw dumptrucks of time/money thrown at only to
never be completed or implemented. Have also seen plenty of projects that
didn't get much investment, yet ended up yielding massive benefits in
productivity and money.

There is of course some merit there , but I would disagree that spend
itself is a good barometer.

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 7:34 PM Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 2:30 PM Tom Beecher <beecher at beecher.cc> wrote:
>
>> Having the opt out is nice, but if I am being completely honest, it gives
>> me pause as to what the intent of this survey is in the first place.
>>
>> I perhaps may be hyper cynical, but those feel like a straight line
>> towards the standard salesperson line of "look at what you are spending now
>> on FOO , you could save X if you used BAR".
>>
>
> Fair play, Tom. All I can say is that after 20 years of working on, in,
> and around the Internet, I'm sure as hell not going to ruin my reputation
> now.
>
> The intent of the survey is exactly as I stated: To report network
> automation trends back to the community.
>
> And whether we engineers like it or not, one of the best ways to measure
> trends is in the relative amount of money organizations spend on them...
>
> HTH,
> ~Chris
>
>
>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 4:12 PM Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 12:15 PM Tom Beecher <beecher at beecher.cc> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was also off put by some of the financial questions in there.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The financial questions (2 of them) both allow opt-out if that is a
>>> sticking point. They are also both as vague as possible (large ranges, not
>>> exact figures) while still providing something to baseline against.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20230301/58392adb/attachment.html>