HPE Community read-only access December 15, 2018
This is a maintenance upgrade. You will be able to read articles and posts, but not post or reply.
Hours:
Dec 15, 4:00 am to 10:00 am UTC
Dec 14, 10:00 pm CST to Dec 15, 4:00 am CST
Dec 14, 8:00 pm PST to Dec 15, 2:00 am PST
BladeSystem Virtual Connect
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Virtual Connect Active\Active Hyper-V setup

 
ALgon
Advisor

Virtual Connect Active\Active Hyper-V setup

Hello,

 

I’m quite new to Virtual connect and have come up with a design for our Hyper-v 2012R2 environment that I’d like some feedback on if possible.

 

We have a C7000 chassis with 2x 10Gb FlexFabric 24 port modules and we have an ISCSI P4000 SAN.

 

I’d like this setup to be an active\active configuration

 

In virtual connect I’ve configured the following:

 

Production Networks

 

For the production vSwitch, live migration, CSV, and management networks I’ve created two SUSes carrying multiple VLANS

 

1x SUS mapped to port X1 and X2 in VC module bay 1

Both uplinks are connected to 2 Trunk ports on switch 1 (Cisco Nexus 5548) link aggregation configured

 

1x SUS mapped to port X1 and X2 in VC module bay 2

Both uplinks are connected to 2 Trunk ports on switch 2 (Cisco Nexus 5548) link aggregation configured

 

For ISCSI

 

1x dedicated link mapped to port X5 and X6 in VC module bay 1

Both uplinks are connected to 2 Access ports on Switch 3 (Cisco Nexus 5548) link aggregation configured

 

1x dedicated link mapped to port X5 and X6 in VC module bay 2

Both uplinks are connected to 2 Access ports on Switch 4 (Cisco Nexus 5548) link aggregation configured

 

On each blade, I would team the FlexNics assigned to the SUSes, create a Vswtich on top of the team, and then create tagged Vnics for live migration, management and CSV networks.  Virtual machines would connect through the same Vswitch and be tagged for their specific network.

 

My questions,

 

Do I need to use SUSes, or should I instead configure and replace them with two Tunnelled Vnets instead?

 

What are the advantages\disadvantages of doing this?  From what I understand, if I use VLAN tunnelling, which seems like less to configure in VC, the Hyper-V switch identifies the tag and directs the packet as necessary.  Whereas, if I continue to use SUSes, then VC will need to identify the tag first and then the Hyper-V switch will still need to do it again anyway.

 

Are there any issues with using link aggregation for my ISCSI NICs on the upstream switch?

 

Do I need SmartLink enabled on any of these Vnets with the way I’ve configured it, and if so, why?

 

Many thanks