Network Design: Conformance vs. Customization

Whenever you approach a new computer network project where you are replacing an existing system with something new you run into one of the classic conundrums of the Information Professional and Information Technology fields: The argument between conformance and customization.

There is a very human tendency to want to provide a customized, tailored, and unique solution to every situation,  This I call a customized network solution.  I am convinced that there is something in our DNA that makes that feel like a natural course of action.  The problem is that it can be expensive, detrimental to security, and drastically increase your long tail costs for maintenance, support, and administration as you attempt to operate a “one-of-a-kind” solution. 

On the other side of the coin, there is strong arguments for forcing your network instantiation to conform to a standard solution set.  Whether this is using only industry standard equipment, forbidding any custom software, only using web protocols, or strictly following some off-the-shelf model, the befits to standardization are many.  First, support and administration are less expensive because you can easily replace and scale your team without being beholden to intellectual property or corporate knowledge dependencies.  Second, your long term maintenance costs will be minimized since you can easily replace components and upgrade equipment from wide palettes of available equipment and never ask, “Will this work with our setup?”  Finally, in the computer security business every customization or deviation from the standard is just a vulnerability waiting to be exploited by bad guys or worse forgotten by your own support folks. 

In my experience some network engineers are of one camp and some are of the other.  So if you are in the market for one or the other types of setups, choose your architect wisely.  The challenge comes because nearly all users are usually for customization unless they are also responsible for paying for it.  Since the upfront costs are not too different, it can sometime be difficult to explain to a non-tech savvy executive that the difference in sustainment expense for a customized solution can easily fun 5-10 times greater over the standard 3-7 year lifecycle of a computer network.

I believe that the best practice is to formally force the customer to define their requirements for the new network up front.  Make sure that you have all of their concerns addressed and cost estimated.  Being able to show, with numbers, the business effects of each customization decision is key to a satisfied network owner.  Once requirements have been agreed to, make sure that the network design is truly aligned to those requirements and include funding estimates on one, three, and five year horizons in the deliverable of the installation.

The pros and cons of each approach are clear.  In reality, you cannot have one or the other in total, but rather have to ensure that you manage the polarity between customization and compliance carefully to deliver the required solution set at the expected cost.

Does this adequately describe this challenge?  Do you have any stories how one or the other becoming unacceptable dominant.  Do you know of any times that the wrong one was emphasized?

That is my Information Technology Thought of the Day (ITTOD) for May 4, 2009 ©Scott Coughlin.

Related posts:

1. Poll: Where Should You Start With Network Design? Today, our Information Thought of the Day (ITTOD) is another...
2. Seven Best Practices Of Network Configuration Management? Do you have integrity in the moment of decision when...
3. Network Topology: Federation vs. Integration Federation and Integration are two words that all Information Professionals...
4. Information Technology Cost Trends Recently, it was brought to my attention that even though...
5. Poll: What is the Power of a Computer Network? Today, our Information Thought of the Day (ITTOD) is a...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.