I'm not sure what you mean by the CFS tab. I'm running FM 3.2(3a). IMO, it's too bad McData fell down and lost their technical advantage.; they really knew how to manage a SAN.
If you open FM server and expand "end devices" in the bottom left pain, there will be a device-alias section. Highlight that and the CFS tab will show in the right hand pain. Anway, CLI or GUI, does anyone know why I would have different device aliases across my switches? Everything is set to distribute.
It appears that my "A" fabric has 884 entries, while all the switches in the "B" fabric have 659.
Replacing an HBA thru FM is weird. CLI is the way the go but I do most of my device alias work thru FM and I need to know what I'm doing wrong and what's causing each switch to have a different amount of device aliases defined on each switch.
Jim is correct in that each fabric may or may not have the same number of aliases. Are you thinking that each fabric should have the same number of aliases?
What I was thinking earlier was that device aliases were global across the SAN but now I think it make sense that they should be specific to each fabric. So the fact that the numbers differ isn't the concern. What is of concern is the fact that there are device aliases that appear in both databases. I'm not sure how they got there. The aliases in question have the same names and wwns. I know sometimes FM will error out if an alias already exists under a different wwn which is expected but I'm trying to figure out how I have 50 entries that are common to both databases in 2 separate fabrics. Also, do I need to set a master in FM for both fabrics as I only have one selected right now.
Were the attached devices in both fabrics at some time or were they always limited to only one Fabric? CFS handles the updates of the aliases and it should handle any issues of duplicates.
it's too bad McData fell down and lost their technical advantage
Brocade for president ! I obviously prefer Brocade. One of the things I hate about Cisco is that you have some sort of control over what info is distributed to other switches. With the original SAN vendors simply everything (aliases, zones and zonesets) was sent to each and every switch, so you couldn't make mistakes or overwrite data on other switches, since the whole config was identical on each switch.
healyj
141 Posts
0
November 28th, 2017 06:00
Hi there,
In our effort s to clean up the forum, we came across your question / statement.
If the question / statement is still valid, not expired and you need an update please reach out again and we try to get it answered.
As for now we set it to “answered.”
Regards,
Jim
jimkunysz
259 Posts
0
June 10th, 2008 08:00
IMO, it's too bad McData fell down and lost their technical advantage.; they really knew how to manage a SAN.
nuggetz
8 Posts
0
June 10th, 2008 08:00
It appears that my "A" fabric has 884 entries, while all the switches in the "B" fabric have 659.
Message was edited by:
nuggetz
nuggetz
8 Posts
0
June 10th, 2008 08:00
jimkunysz
259 Posts
0
June 10th, 2008 08:00
config terminal
device-alias database
device-alias name pwwn
device-alias commit
One piece I don't know how to do is how to rename a pwwn to a different alias - like if you reuse a host/hba.
jimkunysz
259 Posts
0
June 10th, 2008 10:00
each fabric has 1 9513 and 2 blade switches.
we have the 9513 directors set as the Master in each fabric.
You shouldn't expect to see everything identical in each Fabric but in each Fabric, each switch should have the same configuration.
ConnectrixHelpe
259 Posts
0
June 10th, 2008 10:00
Thank you.
nuggetz
8 Posts
0
June 10th, 2008 13:00
ConnectrixHelpe
259 Posts
0
June 11th, 2008 08:00
RRR
4 Operator
•
5.7K Posts
0
June 12th, 2008 02:00
Brocade for president ! I obviously prefer Brocade.
One of the things I hate about Cisco is that you have some sort of control over what info is distributed to other switches. With the original SAN vendors simply everything (aliases, zones and zonesets) was sent to each and every switch, so you couldn't make mistakes or overwrite data on other switches, since the whole config was identical on each switch.