Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
54 Posts
0
2027
August 11th, 2009 03:00
multi-homed (multi-NIC) NetWorker cluster
hello,
i have a customer who is running their NW 7.5.1 in EMC AutoStart cluster (on Solaris 10 platform). they have multiple NICs in their servers and they would like to have separate backup networks for some clients if possible.
i have studied and tested lots of scenarios but none of them seems to be 100% suitable. this is two node cluster where NetWorker virtual server is by default bound to one network interface. other network interfaces are currently not used (except cluster heardbeat).
both cluster nodes are also storage nodes. most of their clients send data over LAN to these 2 nodes. about half clients have node1 as primary and node2 as secondary, another half have it vice versa. and few clients use separate local storage nodes.
i have tested with "server network interface" attribute from client's properties, also played around with aliases etc. none of these methods is 100% bulletproof. for some clients it works for some not. for example, there are also few additional local storage nodes in their environment. i did not manage to get such clients who need to send its backup data to storage node and meta-data to clustered server to work correctly at all.
have anybody used multi-homed NetWorker server which is also clustered? is there any usable networking scenario how should it be configured? is it possible at all?
regards,
kipz
i have a customer who is running their NW 7.5.1 in EMC AutoStart cluster (on Solaris 10 platform). they have multiple NICs in their servers and they would like to have separate backup networks for some clients if possible.
i have studied and tested lots of scenarios but none of them seems to be 100% suitable. this is two node cluster where NetWorker virtual server is by default bound to one network interface. other network interfaces are currently not used (except cluster heardbeat).
both cluster nodes are also storage nodes. most of their clients send data over LAN to these 2 nodes. about half clients have node1 as primary and node2 as secondary, another half have it vice versa. and few clients use separate local storage nodes.
i have tested with "server network interface" attribute from client's properties, also played around with aliases etc. none of these methods is 100% bulletproof. for some clients it works for some not. for example, there are also few additional local storage nodes in their environment. i did not manage to get such clients who need to send its backup data to storage node and meta-data to clustered server to work correctly at all.
have anybody used multi-homed NetWorker server which is also clustered? is there any usable networking scenario how should it be configured? is it possible at all?
regards,
kipz
No Events found!
ble1
6 Operator
•
14.4K Posts
•
56.2K Points
0
September 3rd, 2009 07:00
dobocs
14 Posts
0
April 9th, 2014 02:00
Sorry,mistyped some words.
We have a working networker setup within our network. Local clients connect etc.
Now we have another lan with networker clients to whom the networker server should provide backup as well.
They see each other on the OS level but not sure how to set up the networker server software?
On the separate LAN the networker host have another name but when we query the host on that separate LAN it returns with the name the clients in the separate LAN's clients have no knowlede of.
So it seems as if I should set up networker server to know about itself this other name for the second lan.
Does this makes sence?
Someething like this for multihome setup on page 21
http://symmstor.com/pdf/technical_papers/Configuring%20TCP%20Networks%20and%20Firewalls%20with%20EMC%20NetWorker.pdf
dobocs
14 Posts
0
April 9th, 2014 02:00
edited last one
We have a working networker setup within our network. Local clients connect etc.
Now we have another lan with networker clients to whom the networker server should provide backup as well.
They see each other on the OS level but not sure how to set up the networker server software?
On the separate LAN the networker host have another name but when we query the host on that separate LAN it returns with the name the clients in the separate LAN's clients have no knowlede of.
So it seems as if I should set up networker server to know about itself this other name for the second lan.
Does this makes sence?
Someething like this for multihome setup on page 21
http://symmstor.com/pdf/technical_papers/Configuring%20TCP%20Networks%20and%20Firewalls%20with%20EMC%20NetWorker.pdf
ble1
6 Operator
•
14.4K Posts
•
56.2K Points
0
April 9th, 2014 02:00
It is not clear from your question what is really the problem. Can you describe it with more details please?
ble1
6 Operator
•
14.4K Posts
•
56.2K Points
0
April 9th, 2014 05:00
ok, so you have:
backup server VLAN1 and VLAN2
You have clients in VLAN1 and no big deal, right?
Then you have client in VLAN2 (only?). For those, you define clients over VLAN2 name and you set their storage node and server backup interface to be the one belonging to VLAN2.
dobocs
14 Posts
0
April 9th, 2014 06:00
We have 8.0.1 version. Could you please tell me where to find server backup interface section?
Perhaps a screenshot, thank you.
ble1
6 Operator
•
14.4K Posts
•
56.2K Points
0
April 9th, 2014 07:00
Go to client properties - it is in tab called Globals 1 of 2 on right side.
dobocs
14 Posts
0
April 9th, 2014 07:00
Thanks,
that did the trick.
dobocs
14 Posts
0
April 24th, 2014 05:00
Hello again,
May I ask another question?
In this setup like I mentioned earlier with RDZ, now I would like to create automated clones of the VTL-s to tapes like once a month.
Can I do that without assigning a tape drive specifically for that one RDZ?
I tried to create for the clones: a label template, tape volume and just hit clone. But it hangs with: "waiting for 1 writable volume to ... backup pool..."
In the media pools section I did not specify the data source for the clone pool, since it is part of the RDZ.
Does this make any sense to you?
thx
ble1
6 Operator
•
14.4K Posts
•
56.2K Points
0
April 24th, 2014 06:00
If data belongs to RDZ, then devices/volumes must too. That means devices must be part of RDZ (bare in mind that I have no experience with RDZ so I'm talking just what I think I feel it should be the case).