Service Virtualization Brings Speed Benefit and Lower Costs to TTNET Applications Testing Unit


Published on

Transcript of a BriefingsDirect podcast on how Türk Telekom subsidiary TTNET has leveraged Service Virtualization to significantly improve productivity.

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Service Virtualization Brings Speed Benefit and Lower Costs to TTNET Applications Testing Unit

  1. 1. Service Virtualization Brings Speed Benefit and Lower Coststo TTNET Applications Testing UnitTranscript of a BriefingsDirect podcast on how Türk Telekom subsidiary TTNET has leveragedService Virtualization to significantly improve productivity.Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes. Sponsor: HPDana Gardner: Hello, and welcome to the next edition of the HP Discover Performance Podcast Series. Im Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions, your moderator for this ongoing discussion of IT innovation and transformation. Once again, were focusing on how software improvements and advanced HP Service Virtualization (SV) solutions are enabling IT leaders to deliver better experiences and payoffs for businesses and end-users alike.Today, we’re going to learn about how TTNET, the largest internet service provider in Turkey,with 6 million subscribers, has significantly improved on applications deployment, while cuttingcosts and time to delivery.With that, lets join our guest. We’re here with Hasan Yükselten. Hes the Test and ReleaseManager at TTNET, which is a subsidiary of Türk Telekom, and theyre based in Istanbul.Welcome to the show, Hasan.Hasan Yükselten: Thank you.Gardner: Before we get into this discussion of how you’ve used SV in your testing, what wasthe situation there, before you got more automated and before you started to use more softwaretools? What was the process before that?Yükselten: Before SV, we had to use the other party’s test infrastructures in our test cases. Were the leading ISP company in Turkey. We deploy more than 200 applications per year and we have to provide better and faster services to our customers every week and every month. We mostly had problems on issues such as the accessibility, authorization, downtime, and private data for reaching the other third-party’s infrastructures. So, we needed virtualization on our test systems and we needed automation for getting fast deployment to make the release time shorter for greatervirtualization. And of course, we needed to reduce our cost. So, we decided to solve the problemsof the company by implementing SV.
  2. 2. Gardner: What did you do to begin this process of getting closer to a faster and automatedapproach? Did you do away with scripts? Did you replace them? How did you move from whereyou were to where you wanted to be?Yükselten: Before SV, we couldn’t do automation, since the other parties are in discretelocations and it was difficult to reach the other systems. We could automate functional test cases,but for end-to-end test cases, it was impossible to do automation.First, we implemented SV for virtualizing the other systems, and we put SV between ourinfrastructure and the third-party infrastructure. We learned the requests and responses and thencould use SV instead of the other party infrastructure.Automation toolsAfter this, we could also use automation tools. We managed to use automation tools viaintegrating Unified Functional Testing (UFT) and SV tools, and now we can run automation testcases and end-to-end test cases on SV.Gardner: Was there anything about this that allowed you to have better collaboration between the developers and the testers. I know that in many companies, this is a linear progression, where they develop and then test, and it can be something that theres not a lot of communication on. Was there anything about what youve done thats improved how developers and testers have been able to coordinate and collaborate? Yükselten: We started to use SV in our test systems first. When we saw the success, we decided to implement SV for the development systems also. But, wevejust implemented SV in the development site, so I cant give results yet. We have to wait and see,for maybe one month, before I can reply to this question.Gardner: Tell me about the types of applications that you’re using here as a large internetservice provider. Are these internal apps for your organization? Are they facing out to thecustomers for billing, service procurement, and provisioning? Give me a sense of the type ofapplications we’re talking about?Yükselten: We are mostly working on customer relationship management (CRM) applications.We deploy more than 200 applications per year and we have more than six million customers.We have to offer new campaigns and make some transformations for new customers, etc.We have to save all the informations, and while saving the information, we also interact the othersystems, for example the National Identity System, through telecom systems, public switchedtelephone network (PSTN) systems.
  3. 3. We have to ask informations and we need make some requests to the other systems. So, we needto use all the other systems in our CRM systems. And we also have internet protocol television(IPTV) products, value added services products, and the company products. But basically, we’reusing CRM systems for our development and for our systems.Gardner: So clearly, these are mission-critical applications essential to your business, yourgrowth, and your ability to compete in your market.Yükselten: If there is a mistake, a big error in our system, the next day, we cannot sell anything.We cannot do anything all over Turkey.Gardner: Lets talk a bit about the adoption of your SV. Tell me about some of the productsyou’re using and some of the technologies, and then we’ll get into what this has done for you.But, lets talk about what you actually have in place so far.Yükselten: Actually, it was very easy to adopt these products into our system, because includingproof of concept (PoC), we could use this tool in six weeks. We spent first two weeks for the PoCand after four weeks, we managed to use the tool.Easy to implementFor the first six weeks, we could use SV for 45 percent of end-to-end test cases. In 10 weeks,95 percent of our test cases could be run on SV. It was very easy to implement. After that, wealso implemented two other SVs in our other systems. So, were now using three SV systems.One is for development, one is just for the campaigns, and one is for the E2E tests.Gardner: Tell me how your relationship with HP Software has been. How has it been workingwith HP Software to attain this so rapidly?Yükselten: HP Software helped us so much, especially R&D. HP Turkey helped us,because we were also using application lifecycle management (ALM) tools before SV. We wereusing QTP LoadRunners, QC, etc., so we had a good relation with HP Software.Since SV is a new tool, we needed a lot of customization for our needs, and HP Software wasalways with us. They were very quick to answer our questions and to return for our developmentneeds. We managed to use the tool in six weeks, because of HP’s Rapid Solutions.Gardner: Let’s talk a little bit about the scale here. My understanding is that you havesomething on the order of 150 services. You use 50 regularly, but youre able to then spin up anduse others on a more ad-hoc basis. Why is it important for you to have that kind of flexibility andagility?Yükselten: As you say, we virtualized more than 150 services, but we use 48 of them actively.We use these portions of the service because we virtualized our third-party infrastructures for our
  4. 4. needs. For example, we virtualized all the other CRM systems, but we don’t need all of them. Ingateway remote, you can simulate all the other web services totally. So, we virtualized all theweb services, but we use just what we need in our test cases.Gardner: And this must be a major basis for your savings when you only use what you need.The utilization rate goes up, but your costs can go down. Tell us a little bit about how this hasbeen an investment that’s paid back for you.Yükselten: In three months we got the investment back actually, maybe shorter than threemonths. It could have been two and half months. For example, for the campaign test cases, wegained 100 percent of efficiency. Before HP, we could run just seven campaigns in a month, butafter HP, we managed to run 14 campaigns in a month.We gained 100 percent efficiency and three man-months in this way, because three test engineerswere working on campaigns like this. For another example, last month we got the metrics and wesaw that we had a total blockage for seven days, so that was 21 working days for March. Wesaved 33 percent of our manpower with SV and there are 20 test engineers working on it. Wegained 140 man-months last month.For our basic test scenarios, we could run all test cases in 112 hours. After SV, we managed torun it in 54 hours. So we gained 100 percent efficiency in that area and also managed to doautomation for the campaign test cases. We managed to automate 52 percent of our campaign testcases, and this meant a very big efficiency for us. Totally, we saved more than $50,000 permonth.Broader applicationsGardner: That’s very impressive and that was in a relatively short period of time. Do youexpect now to be able to take this to a larger set of applications, maybe beyond yourorganization, more generally across Türk Telekom?Yükselten: Yes. Türk Telekom licenses these tools and started to use these tools in their testservice to get this efficiency for those systems. We have a branch company called AVEA, andthey also want to use this tool. After our getting this efficiency, many companies want to use thisvirtualization. Eight companies visited us in Turkey to get our experiences on this tool. Manycompanies want this and want to use this tool in their test systems.Gardner: Do you have any advice for other organizations like those youve been describing,now that you have done this? Any recommendations on what you would advise others that mighthelp them improve on how they do it?Yükselten: Companies must know their needs first. For example, in our company, we have threeblockage systems for third parties and the other systems dont change everyday. So it was easy to
  5. 5. implement SV in our systems and virtualize the other systems. We don’t need to do virtualizationday by day, because the other systems dont change every day.Once a month, we consult and change our systems, update our web services on SV, and this isenough for us. But if the other partys systems changes day by day or frequently, it may bedifficult to do virtualization every day.This is an important point. Companies should think automation besides virtualization. This isalso a very efficient aspect, so this must be also considered while making virtualization.Gardner: As to where you go next, do you have any thoughts about moving towards UFT, usingcloud deployment models more? Where can you go more to attain more benefits andefficiencies?Yükselten: We started to use UFT with integrating SV. As I told you, we managed to automate52 percent of our campaign test cases so far. So we would like to go on and try to automate moretest cases, our end-to-end test cases, the basic scenarios, and other systems.Our first goal is doing more automation with SV and UFT and the other is using SV indevelopment sites. We plan to find early defects in development sites and getting more qualityproducts into the test.Rapid deploymentOf course, in this way, we get rapid deployment and we make shorter release times because theproduct will have more quality. Using performance test and SV also helps us on performance.We use HP LoadRunner for our performance test cases. We have three goals now, and the lastone is using SV with integrating LoadRunner.Gardner: Well, its really impressive. It sounds as if you put in place the technologies that willallow you to move very rapidly, to even a larger payback. So congratulations on that.Well, Hasan, Im afraid we’ll have to leave it there; weve run out of time. We’ve learned howTTNET the largest internet service provider in Turkey has significantly improved on mission-critical application deployment, while also cutting costs and reducing that important time todelivery.I like to thank first our supporter for this series, HP Software, and remind our audience to carryon the dialogue on the Discover Performance Group on LinkedIn. Of course, Id like to extend ahuge thank you to our special guest Hasan Yükselten. He is the Test and Release Manager atTTNET, which is a subsidiary of Türk Telekom in Istanbul. Thanks so much. Hasan.Yükselten: Youre welcome, and thank you for your time too.
  6. 6. Gardner: And you can gain more insights and information on the best of IT PerformanceManagement at And you can always access this and otherepisodes in our HP Discover performance podcast series on iTunes under BriefingsDirect.Im Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions, and Ive been your host andmoderator for this discussion part of our ongoing series on IT Innovation. Thanks again forlistening, and come back next time.Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes. Download the transcript. Sponsor: HPTranscript of a BriefingsDirect podcast on how Türk Telekom subsidiary TTNET has leveragedService Virtualization to significantly improve productivity. Copyright Interarbor Solutions, LLC,2005-2013. All rights reserved.You may also be interested in: • ERP for IT Helps Dutch Insurance Giant Achmea to Reinvent IT Processes to Improve Business Performance Across the Board • McKesson Redirects IT to Become a Services Provider That Delivers Fuller Business Solutions • Investing Well in IT With Emphasis on KPIs Separates Business Leaders from Business Laggards, Survey Results Show • Expert Chat with HP on How Better Understanding Security Makes it an Enabler, Rather than Inhibitor, of Cloud Adoption • Expert Chat with HP on How IT Can Enable Cloud While Maintaining Control and Governance • Expert Chat on How HP Ecosystem Provides Holistic Support for VMware Virtualized IT Environments