Interaction and demarcation of CAF to WAF

#1 CAFfe-Zeit Video

How do the two frameworks, the Cloud Adoption Framework and the Well Architected Framework, play together and where do you differentiate from each other?

These two frameworks from Microsoft complement each other perfectly. The Cloud Adoption Framework (CAF) describes the iterative process model of cloud adaptation and the Well Architected Framework (WAF) deals with setting up the individual workload or otherwise called the individual application in the cloud according to best practices.

As soon as the Adopt module is reached in the Cloud Adoption Framework and the first workload is to be migrated to the cloud or rebuilt in the cloud, we need the WAF. The Well Architected Framework looks at the workload from the following perspectives:

• Reliability
  The ability of a system to recover from failures and ensure operational readiness.
• Security
  Protect applications and data from threats.
• Cost optimization
  Manage costs to maximize realized value.
• Optimal operation
  Operational processes that ensure the execution of a system in production.
• Efficient performance
  The ability of a system to adapt the changes in load.

Here the interaction between the two frameworks is exciting. Parts of these aspects may already be solved by the landing zone from the CAF and do not have to be considered additionally per workload. I am thinking of e.B. the recovery of workloads that may have already been covered by the Manage in the CAF or implemented in the landing zone by a policy.

So both frameworks look at different aspects of cloud adoption:

The Cloud Adoption Framework looks at the entire portfolio of applications or workloads in a company, the changes for culture and processes. It establishes a landing zone for the use of the cloud platform in the company.

The Well Architected Framework focuses on the workloads and the individual assets in the workloads. So that it is then built and operated according to cloud best practices.