OpenText Network Automation Reviews

There is a team responsible for network automation to check devices for compliance. I connect to the device, make the necessary configurations, and  inform the team that certain rules must be removed because they do not apply to the specific device. I check the configuration on the device itself, make any required configuration changes

With OpenText Network Automation, firmware can be uploaded for specific devices. If you need to upgrade a device, you can use this tool, though it may not apply to all devices. The software allows you to upload the necessary firmware to your device and perform the upgrade. Additionally, it enables you to check multiple devices for specific configurations and automates the search process and the configuration of multiple devices.

The tool performs slowly.

I have been using OpenText Network Automation for two years.

I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.

20 people are working together in our company.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

When managing a large number of devices, network automation simplifies the process of locating specific configurations. For example, if you need to find a particular configuration, network automation can help you specify the devices that must be checked. This makes it easier to identify which devices have the configuration and which do not, depending on what you are looking for.

I recommend the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Most of the applications and items that I have been working on have been on Micro Focus. 

It goes well if you have the operational test station in place, and you have network automation. then it can be used more efficiently and more extensively.

Micro Focus tools are mature tools, that are well developed.

When compared with SolarWinds, it is more user-friendly, and tasks can be completed more quickly. To work on the application, no special skillsets are required. It is something that could be learned. They have a large community and training videos available online.

When compared to other automation tools that are available in the market, more can be done to improve this solution. For example, the backup configuration every network automation tool should have. Also, you need an optional test station to define the level one and level two flows.

Level one administration task can be defined in Micro Focus Network Automation but it could be more simplified.

It works well when it is integrated with Operation Orchestration. It could be a built-in feature in Micro Focus versions, where you can do the same task features that are in the Operation Orchestration, from a network management perspective.

I have been working with Micro Focus for more than ten years.

I have not used Micro Focus Network Automation very much.  I have used it with some of the customers who have Network Automation. I have completed a couple of implementations, as well as basic configuration and administration.

It's a stable solution. I don't have an issue with the stability of Micro Focus Network Automation

Micro Focus Network Automation is a scalable solution, as are most of the Micro Focus tools.

Scalability is not an issue with Micro Focus. As it is a mature tool they have already factored in scalability.

Technical support is good.

If it's used as an IT operation management solution, it will have the same premium platinum feel and support. As a result, it applies to all Micro Focus application support.

I have worked on the IT operation managing application, as well as NOM (Network Operations Management), and the APM Operations Bridge Suite. I've never worked with a security application, ALM, or any security tools. I only work with the item application management, which is specific to Operations Bridge, Network Management, and Service Management.

In regards to Micro Focus, I have worked with Cloud Automation, Server Automation, and Cloud Optimizer.

The initial setup is satisfactory. It's not difficult or complicated, but it's also not simple.

Pricing is reasonable, but if you compare it with other network Operation Management tools that are available on the market, it's expensive.

Recently people are using more manage engine products for network management. These products are less expensive, but only a few features can be added. It has sufficient features when you compare it.

I would definitely recommend this solution. They are very mature tools, Micro Focus applications, ITOM, and Network Management, for example, are mature products that I have worked with.

The degree of customization available in these applications compared to other applications may not have the same level of exposure or be as customizable.

It's a good product, I would rate Micro Focus Network Automation an eight out of ten.

To back up the configuration of all network devices in our environment on a regular basis so we have the most recent configuration of the device.

It helps the configuration backup be validated before and after any change in the network infrastructure.

Pushing the network configuration to bulk devices. This saves a considerable amount of time that the engineer spends in pushing the network configuration.

• Compatibility of the devices needs to be enhanced, as it seems to be limited. 
• The discovery of the modules needs to be well-defined.

It's great because you have a one-unit solution to aggregate network data. So it's one entry point for getting all the configuration into the same dashboard or same application.

It helps to schedule tasks. We are really thinking about doing a lot of scheduled tasks to ensure that when when an engineer actually runs a script, that the script and the configuration that results after the script runs should be checked. We want all this automated for us.

I spoke with some other HPE customers who are using the same solution. They complain about the same thing. That the technical support is not very good. You have to always explain several times the same explanation just to be sure they understand. And every time we ask for an elevation of the case just because it's not getting where we want.

I have been using this solution for more than six years.

We just spoke with some of the product managers. We are getting some serious performance issues that have some serious repercussions for support. They may be working on it, but it takes time. Right now we have some serious performance issues.

It should be scalable. But right now we have some thresholds. We have older devices we are managing and we have some serious performance issues. So it's not that scalable. But the product manager says it should be okay. They have some customers who have many more devices. The application is working, so we are really are hoping that the support will find some clues.

The support is not very good.

When looking for a vendor, I look for reliability. A name is something, but if we have a solution that on every Monday morning the users are complaining because it's not working as it should, you can't count on it. It is difficult to support a solution that's not reliable.

Setup is quite easy right now. From what I saw in a recent presentation, it will be easier in the future because they will use some containerization. It should be even easier in the future. So installation is not quite an issue.

The most valuable feature is the auto-archiving of the contributions of network devices, including software updates. Another important feature is the policies and being able to see whether devices are compliant or not with those policies.

We're able to set security policies and configure devices exactly how we want them. We can do this quickly and securely.

An additional feature would be an FTP server which can can also be used remotely outside the confines of our physical infrastructure.

We've had no problems deploying it.

We've found some problems that may or may not have to do with our infrastructure. There are also some software defects that we've found. Apparently, we're not alone because other companies have they same issues.

It's relatively new for us and the amount of devices hasn't changed much. I think, though, that it will scale for us.

Technical support has been helpful.

The initial installation is simple, but afterwards you have to customize it and that part is complex.