Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
103 Posts
0
1232
Zoning CX4-480 with Cisco 5596
Hey everyone,
I know this topic has been hit on many times, but I'd like to get a better understanding by the experts on what they would recommend in my situation.
My current environment consist of 4x8Gb FC ports per SP (so that is a total of 8 FC ports). These ports are connected to two different fabrics with 2 switches each (that is a total of 4 switches, with the two switches in a fabric being ISL'd). In my zoning, I have maintained a single-initiator/single-target. Most of my hosts (ESXi with PowerPath and 2 HBAs each) are zoned on the first ports indicated below:
Fabric A
zone1: server1_hba1-->SPA0
zone2: server1_hba1-->SPB1
....
...
Fabric B
zone1: server1_hba2-->SPA1
zone2: server1_hba2-->SPB0
....
...
Because our CX4-480 was an upgrade from a CX3-40, four additional FC ports were installed, hence the total of 8x8Gb ports. And as time went on, we would have new ESX hosts and we would zoned them on the other ports as indicated below. If I'm not mistaken, this provided a balance between the SP ports.
Fabric A
zone1: server15_hba1-->SPA2
zone2: server15_hba1-->SPB3
....
...
Fabric B
zone1: server15_hba2-->SPA3
zone2: server15_hba2-->SPB2
....
...
OK...so we are now replacing the existing 4 switches with a pair of 2 cisco 5596. Here are my questions:
1. Should I maitain the single-iniator/single-target zoning practice? Or should I implement the single-initiator/multiple targets such as the one below:
zone1: server1_hba2-->SPA1 and SPB0? I will not be doing an SAN Copy in the future.
2. Primus emc158478 indicates "The recommendation is to use just one path to both SPs per HBA" and I'm assuming that is the same thing as my zoning example of: zone1: server1_hba2-->SPA1 and SPB0?
3. Would this zoning also work: zone1: server1_hba2-->SPA1 and SPB0 and SPA3 and SPB2?
4. How about zoning a host using a single-initiator/single-target to the four different ports such as:
zone1: server1_hba2-->SPA1
zone1: server1_hba2-->SPB0
zone1: server1_hba2-->SPA3
zone1: server1_hba2-->SPB2
Since A1,B0,A3,B2 are on the same switch along with HBA2, couldn't this configuration work? What are the benefits on zoning 4 FC ports vs 2?
As mentioned, I have a new switch and i'll be migrating my hosts and storage to this new switch and it would be great to implement some good practice.
Thanks everyone for your time.
etaljic81
1K Posts
1
October 20th, 2011 07:00
Question 1: Yes, maintain single-initiator, single-target zoning. EMC Best Practices is to do just that
Question 2: Correct. You zone one HBA to 2 SP ports and that's what you are doing with you zoning
Question 3: Yes, that zoning would work. You can zone an HBA to 4 SP ports
Question 4: The benefits are that you are using 4 SP ports instead of 2 so you are load-balancing across more ports. Do you have PowerPath/VE on the ESX servers or are you using NMP?
If your hosts are requiring very high bandwidth then go with 4 SP ports. This is rare and most of the times 2 SP ports per HBA are enough. However, there are times when bandwidth requirements from the host are high and that's when you would zone it to 4 SP ports from one HBA. There is really no downside to zoning an HBA to 4 SP ports except if you are reaching the maximum number of host initiators that can log in to the VNX. That number is very high and you will not reach it with a few dozen hosts.
etaljic81
1K Posts
0
October 20th, 2011 08:00
Sorry, misread #2. Stick with single-initiator, single-target zoning. So for #2 you should create:
server1_hba2-->SPA1
server1_hba2-->SPB0
odurasler
103 Posts
0
October 20th, 2011 08:00
Hi Ernes,
thanks for that quick reply.
I'm a little confused on your answer for Q2. Isn't the S-I/S-T contradicting the answer on Q2 where it would be single initiator (HBA) zoned to multiple targets which in this case SPA1 and SPB0 in the same zone?
Yes, I'm using PP/VE.
thanks again!