Fabric Quickconnect an efficient way to create virtual connections - Casestudy | Equinix
Equinix is the world’s most expansive, secure and sustainable data center platform which specializes in internet connection and digital interconnection related services. They own and operate a network of 220+ data centers in 44 major metropolitan areas and 22 countries on five continents.
Project Overview
Cloud Solution Architects can create virtual connections with Cloud Service Providers (Google Cloud) to their ports however, current process creates a fragmented experience by requiring users to hop between Fabric and Cloud service providers portals multiple times. If the user wants to create a pair connection (redundant) they need to go through the process twice, which can be time consuming.
Quick connect feature helps Cloud solution architects to instantly create redundant connection with their assets (ports, gateways) to cloud service providers network all inside Fabric.
We solved this by introducing Cloud Service Providers Sign in authentication step that allows Fabric to create redundant connection on behalf of users and automate the additional steps which required users to leave the Fabric portal. Resulting in a seamless and intuitive experience.
My Contributions
• Identified limitations of current create virtual connection user flow in Fabric Interconnection portal.
• Conducted user interviews with internal cloud solution architects and discovered painpoints related with existing create connection user flow.
• Synthesized insights and key findings in the form of user journey maps for 3 Cloud service providers and presented to key stakeholders using Miro board.
• Brainstormed and ideated on potential solutions in the form of interactive Figma prototypes.
• Gathered feedback from Technical Product Manager and Architectures and refined solutions for an improved create connection solution.
• Crafted Analytics Metrics in Analytics tool Amplitude to gain more insights on user interaction behavior as well as product metrics to drive future design decisions.
Quick Facts
My Role:
UX Designer (Individual Contributer)
I am the individual contributer to this project along with a Copy writer, Product Manager, Technical Product Owner, Sr. Backend Architecture and a team of 5 Engineers in Dragon Team. This project is currrently in hi-fidelity design state planned to be delivered in a duration of 6 months in two release cycles.
Time:
February 2022 - Current
Design Process
User interviews, Journey Maps, Wireframes Iterations, Design reviews, Prototypes, Hi Fidelity Mockups, UX Metrics
Tools:
Figma, Miro
1. Multiportal Process: In order to create a connection, users need to visit Cloud Service Providers portal, generate the connection creation pairing key, use the key in Fabric portal to create the connection, go back to Cloud Service Providers portal and activate the connection. This results in a fragmented experience where user has to switch context back and forth between Fabric and Cloud Service Providers portal.
2. Only single connection at a time: Current connection creation flow only supports the single connection creation usecase, if the user wishes to create a redundant connection then they have to go through the multiportal fragmented process twice which can easily add more time to create connection as well as add to the user frustration.
3. Lack of activating the connection: Once the connection is created the user needs to visit the Cloud Service Providers web portal to activate the connection, this adds an additional step in the process of creating connection.
4. Lack of visibility for pricing quote and Naming of location unclear: Current connection creation process is a multipage form process which does not show the pricing details until the last step, if the user wishes to modify pricing attributes they need to swap back and forth in the multipage form to update their connection creation preferences resulting in a time consuming and frustrating experience. Also user research revealed that naming of locations (origin,destination) was not very clear becasue Equinix had defined their own way of explaining these vs the networking industry naming convention.