Like most people, Cisco’s SD-Access ( or Intent Based Networking or DNA, or whatever its called this week) is a tactical move makes obvious sense (and probably a few years late in starting). Eyvonne Sharp gives an excellent take and thoughts on the SD-Access strategy :
Those of us who’ve been around networking for any length of time have history. We remember the Cisco Live where OnePK was all the rage. Sessions were packed to the gills with eager networkers learning a new API that was going to be integrated into every Cisco platform. OnePK didn’t survive a year. We remember hyped, but incomplete, products that never delivered on their promises. Beyond the failed promises, we’ve given countless sleep-hours unexpected production outages caused by software bugs. Many of us can’t remember the last TAC case we opened whose root cause wasn’t a software bug.
I’m a little doubtful that Cisco can execute correctly but willing to take it on face value and see how the product works in real life. Maybe the Campus BUs can make a reliable, predictable product where the other BUs (such as INSBU ACI) have been lacking.
I do think Cisco should stop its standard practice of delivering half-baked, buggy and soon-to-arrive features while selling the product at premium pricing and positioning. Savvy engineers are getting antsy about this.
Can Cisco Restore Confidence with SD-Access? : http://www.esharp.net/can-cisco-restore-confidence-with-sdaccess/