Consolidating MDS Switches

Question

Hello all. I am a few months into the MDS world and need to consolidate 2 x 9210 (all host dual connected) to 2 x 9222i. Currently, our CX700 is connected to the 9210's and the CX3-80 is connected to the 9222i's.

I am forming a plan as follows:

1. 9222i - create fcalias ahead of time with pwwn via cli (FM will not see pwwn if not physically connected)

2. 9222i - add fcalias to zone, add zone to zoneset, activate and save via FM

3. Move a pair of sp frontend port with "all" host connected to it (must be done in pairs since each hba is zoned with 2 sp ports). This will result with a single host connected to a 9210 and a 9222i

4. Restart NaviHostAgent

5. Move the remaining sp pairs every weekend until everthing is migrated over

Questions for the experts:

1. What do you think about the plan above. How would you make it better?

2. I already have a different vsan setup on all switches. I do not plan to migrate the vsan over. Everything will be on vsan 50 on one switch and vsan 60 on the other. With that said, do you see any reason why I should at least create two vsans, one for each Array? I'm not looking for theory but practical reasons.

3. Is there a bandwidth limitation on a vsan?

Finally, we do not have performance issues today (top talking sp port is < 10%), and would like to leave it as simple as possible. The number of ports should be plenty for the next 3 years. I do not envision creating ISL's to other switches. I will like to use iSCSI at some point so not sure how it needs to factored in today.

Sorry for the loaded questions, it snowballed as I was writing.

Thanks.

RRR · Answer

What's a 9210 ?

hersh1 · Answer

Overall I think your planning looks good. We did the same thing a month or so ago and if you have all the zoning configured prior to the move it is extremely easy (just moving cables). Is there a reason you would take multiple weekends to complete this?

If I understand what your saying with 1. you can create aliases in FM by right clicking on a VSAN and selecting "Edit Local Full Zone Database". In there right click FC-alias and select insert.

I don't think there is a bandwidth limit for a VSAN, my thinking is that if there was a limit and you ran the switch with 1 VSAN Cisco would be putting you in corner with regards to bandwidth.

ironcheflouie · Answer

Thanks dynamox. I have that info already. I was curious on how hersh migrated his switches using only FM. CLI will be needed to 'pre-configure' the fc-alias.Thanks.

dynamox · Answer

is this what you need ?Create Aliases1.Conf T 2.Fcalias name [SERVER_NAME_HBAx] vsan [XX] 3.Member pwwn [world wide name] 4.Exit 5.end Create Zones 1.Conf t 2.Zone name [ZNE_SERVER_STORAGE] vsan [XX] 3.Member Fcalias [SERVER_NAME] 4.Member Fcalias [STORAGE_NAME] 5.Exit Add Zone to Active Zoneset 1.Zoneset name set[XX] vsan [XX] 2.Member [ZNE_SERVER_STORAGE] 3.End Activate Zoneset 1.Conf t 2.Zoneset activate name set[XX] vsan [XX]

ironcheflouie · Answer

Thanks for the feedback hersh.But getting back to what you said, how did you pre-configure a fc-alias via FM if there is not flogi? In FM, it's all point and click and if the host is not physically connected to the new switch, I don't see how you can click/grab the pwwn.Thanks.

ConnectrixHelpe · Answer

A couple of pieces of the equation that would be helpful to know would be what kind of hosts are involved? Are you using HP or AIX hosts? Also do you have existing connections (ISLs) between the two switches now?

Thank you.

ConnectrixHelpe · Answer

Hello,Process overall looks good to me. No guaranties though as the unexpected can always happen.I would definitely think about placement of multiple paths to different switches / modules / port groups to maximize redundancy. You also might want to look into configuration of more VSANs and DPVM at the same time. This would allow for better peformance, redundant services for failures, and allowance for ports to be moved easily if they fail. Thank you.

ironcheflouie · Answer

Hey CiscoKid. No ISL. We are running Microsoft 200x and ESX 3.x. On the 9222i's, we have the 18 and 24 port mod, more than enough FC ports. I will want to use iSCSI at some point (4 x GigE ports) but down the road.

When all said and done, I expect no more than 25 host in production.

Thanks.

ironcheflouie · Answer

How would I gain performance by creating a vsan?Thanks.

hersh1 · Answer

I have taken a screen shot of where you can manual type WWNs into FM. Not sure how I can get that to you other then email (doesn't look like we can post on here or even send PMs). My internet access here at work blocks online file storage, so if your patient you will have to wait until Sunday/Monday.

I tend to use both the CLI and FM it really depends how many I'm doing and what's currently open. But I would say mass changes are much easier in CLI.

ConnectrixHelpe · Answer

Separation of ports into VSANs creates separate processes to handling the underlying dataflow. Kind of like toll takers on the highway. You can imagine if you only had one toll take for 6 lanes of highway how slow it would be. Adding additional VSANs creates all the underyling services for just that VSAN. While I've never seen reports in regards to the exact speed performance it provides I know that as far as traffic isolation and redundancy it is worth it alone. If one particular VSAN service fails, it has no affect on the others.

Thank you.

ironcheflouie · Answer

I guess thinking from an IP perspective (VLANS), I would separate the traffic due to broadcast traffic, etc. I am trying to get a better understanding for vsans.

Can't you also argue that if you create more vsans on a single FC switch, you have more oppurtunities for process failure due to separate processes (per your statement). Since I have 2 x HBA's on all servers connected to 2 x FC switches, do you thinking it is really needed? It's already redundant.

Thanks for the feedback.

ironcheflouie · Answer

hersh, I overlooked this post, sorry. You can enter pwwn in FM? Very interesting, I do not recall this. Could you type out simple directions.Thanks.

ConnectrixHelpe · Answer

Hello,Tonydcdi. I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you on not using multiple VSANs. You should always move the hosts, storage, etc. out of the default VSAN and into their own VSAN or VSANs depending on the configuration you are creating. Cisco and EMC's documentation in addition to the training both provides states this. I've also been told the same thing in my many discussions with Cisco Engineering. Even though it may not provide any increased performance in most situations, it will protect you form experiencing a variety of problems and also increase security.Thank you.

tonydcdi-ymiT1 · Answer

Hey IronWhen I do switch migrations from Cisco to Cisco, I get the output from the show tech-support. The output already has all the alias, zoning, and zoneset information in it so that not only can you create the alias, but the zones and zonesets as well. I take that section and enter the commands via cut/paste vi CLI to put in all the entries (yes you can run the entire thing, but I prefer one entry to make sure each command takes). Make sure that you edit the Vsan entry to your new 50 and 60 Vsan.2) There is no practical reason to seperate the Vsans unless you do not want a zone change to effect the RSCN of each host. So if you have one array and hosts in one VSAN and activate it, then only the hosts in that VSAN will be effected. On the downside, you will need to use IVR if you want to use a host in one vsan and the array in the other. Stick to one VSAN.

Connectrix

Consolidating MDS Switches

Was this post helpful?