migrating from enclosure switches to VC nondisruptively?

[AccuMegalith]

We brought a C7000 with four BL460c blades online last year. At the time, we could only afford a single GBE2c switch for network connectivity (IC bay 1) and a single Brocade 4/12 for FC (IC bay 3).

We now have the budget to move to virtual connect, with redundant modules for each.

What is the possibility of doing this nondisruptively, which is to say without taking the blade-based systems offline? We have redundant SAN fabrics and core switches, so there's no requirement to unplug the existing switches in order to cable up the VC modules. Is there a roadmap for doing this?

Also, the VC v2.10 User's Guide repeatedly refers to the "HP Virtual Connect for c-Class BladeSystem Setup and Installation Guide," which is something I can't locate. Doesn anyone have a link for this?

[David Claypool]

Afraid you're not going to be able to do this non-disruptively. If you had a switch in Bay 2, you might have had an option, but with a single switch, you're going to have to remove that and put the VC-E module in Bay 1 to start the configuration.

[AccuMegalith]

Disruptive is a relative term, which I should've defined more precisely. I have no problem with the down time of moving the Ethernet switch from bay 1 to bay 2. Since all the blade NICs are teamed, I shouldn't have to change anything in the OS.

Can a GBE2c in bay 2 coexist with a VC-ethernet module in bay 1?

The fibre module would be more disruptive. Can I manage a VC-fibre module in bay 4 from a VC-ethernet module in bay 1? Can the fibre module coexist with the fibre switch?

[The Brit]

It is my understanding that you will have a problem transfering your blades to VC because VC uses profiles to define network and SAN paths. Creating the profile is not a problem, however you cannot assign a profile to a running system. The assignment requires that the server blade be powered off.

(fairly disruptive)!!

however if you were only refering to whether or not they could co-exist, I will leave that to others.

Good Luck

Dave.

[Adrian Clint]

Its a destructive change.

1. You cannot apply a VC profile to a running server.
2. VC and non VC in adjacent modules are not supported. (So it may not work even if you want to do it for a few minutes)
Most of the VC manuals are on this page.
http://h18004.www1.hp.com/products/blades/components/c-class-tech-installing.html

You want to review
VC Users guide 8th Edition or later
VC Ethernet Cookbook
VC 2.02 firmware release notes

Personally I'd look at going for a 2nd GbE2c switch (and SAN switch) and have high availability with two connections. To get the best out of the GbE2c switches look at the support site and see if blade harmony manager can give you any value. See downloads at
http://www.bladeconnect.com/index.php

[kris rombauts]

It all depends what you understand with disruptive.... for sure you need some time for downtime to install the VC interconnect modules and remove the current interconnects.

To answer your question: "The fibre module would be more disruptive. Can I manage a VC-fibre module in bay 4 from a VC-ethernet module in bay 1? Can the fibre module coexist with the fibre switch?"

The answer is yes, this is how it works, the VC manager lives in the firmware that resides in the VC Ethernet interconnect module in interconenct bay 1 (and 2) and from the OA GUI you can launch the VC manager in which you manage all Ethenet and SAN configurations.


Once you logon to your VC manager and went through the "first time setup wizard" and defined your Ethenet network, SAN and configured the server profiles you are ready to run again.
I moved a bl465c from a c7000 with no VC to a C3000 with VC and all works fine, you don't see a difference when you log on to the server and as far as i can remember i did not had to change anyhting at the server level and if there was then it was minimal as i can't remember it.

HTH
Kris