Go back

It’s Not the Network!

May 26, 2017

“It’s not the network!”  If you’re like me, that’s what you proclaim when troubleshooting an application issue. The only problem, though, is that sometimes it really is the network.

that moment you prove it's not the network

A joke among network engineers is that when something is amiss with anything related to a computer, everyone blames the firewall. Yes, this might be funny, but it’s also one of the most frustrating things for a network engineer to deal with. We’re good at getting pings to work across a network, but troubleshooting an application beyond that can feel like taking shots in the dark.

Only a few months ago I was tagged on an email chain started by one of our developers to help troubleshoot a legacy application used for monitoring scientific instruments. The application worked just fine at the main location, but this was a new site and something was wrong.

I was surprised to hear that they already spent time troubleshooting the application prior to bringing me in. That was nice, but it also suggested that the problem really could be the network.

I checked the basics like access lists and MTU settings, but since the symptoms they experienced didn’t happen at the main site, I didn’t know what to look for. Both sites were configured identically, so in my mind this should have worked. The logs for the application itself didn’t reveal anything helpful, so there was very little I could do except wait for it to happen again and log into devices in real-time.

Capturing relevant information at the time of an incident can be extremely difficult – especially with a network of hundreds of switches and dozens of routers and firewalls. For example, tracing the layer 2 path an application takes is next to impossible because traceroute looks only at layer 3. And even when we look at the layer 3 information for a flow, it’s in only one direction at a time.

Also important to troubleshooting in real-time is network device information along the path such as interface errors, duplex mismatches, and CRC errors. We can get some of this by going device by device manually, but that means we’d need to be on the CLI at the ready just as a user reports an issue.

This is where an automated system can be a life-saver for network engineers troubleshooting real-world problems. I had network monitors, but I needed a mechanism that could be triggered to automatically capture critical information at the time of the incident. That way, I could use a runbook containing a series of debugs and show commands to deliver data about routing tables, interfaces statistics, ephemeral network information, and even the path an application is taking just as an incident occurs.

Using only the ad-hoc methods we had, we continued troubleshooting by taking the devices out of production in order to run tests while they were directly connected. The application worked perfectly. After putting everything back into production, it failed. To say I was frustrated would be a gross understatement.

This time I was on top of it, though, and just as the scientists began using the application again, a packet capture revealed the issue right away. The problem was so simple, but not something that occurred to me to check.

I didn’t know how the application was supposed to work, and through all our conference calls I learned the developers were just doing their best to maintain an ancient program they didn’t write.

It used multicast, and no one knew.

The main site was the only place the application was used, so this was never a thought. But now that it was being used across layer 3 boundaries to another location, the network and the application needed to have multicast properly configured for communication to work.

The remediation was relatively simple, and management was happy that we were able to get this ancient application working at the new site. No one questioned why it took so long, but I think that’s only because there was already an understanding that this was an old application.

Though I shrugged off the inordinately long time to resolution, I also wished there was an easier way to capture the data I needed at the time the problem occurred. In fact, a tool like that would be priceless for troubleshooting daily network operations issues.

NetBrain’s Adaptive Network Automation platform, for example, enables network engineers to easily visualize the paths applications take through our networks. Moreover, it can auto-trigger customizable runbooks to gather the incredibly valuable network data we need to address the vague trouble tickets hitting our queues that come with little to no information.

In the end, fixing my application problem wasn’t rocket science. I’ve learned that many problems we face are often the result of very common issues. However, finding the problem, even if it’s simple, can be very difficult without the right tools.

Tools like the Adaptive Network Automation platform give us, as network engineers, the ability to create dynamic network mapping and executable runbooks that ultimately help us to prove, once and for all, that it’s not the network, except, of course, when it is.

Related Content

Networking Perspectives

"Human Error" is a Big Bucket

We all use the term “Human Error” as a catch-all as it relates to the cause of outages and service availability issues. We typically think of an operator hitting the...
Read More
Networking Perspectives

Bringing No-Code Innovation to Network Operations

If you’ve been in enterprise IT over the last several years, you’ve probably heard a lot of buzz surrounding the concept of “low-code” and “no-code” development. These innovations don’t mean...
Read More
Networking Perspectives

NetBrain Amplifies PRTG for Seamless, Faster Troubleshooting

One sometimes overlooked aspect of automating network operations is leveraging data from your IT ecosystem for better network operations. Understanding the power of IT monitoring data, NetBrain integrates seamlessly with...
Read More