dedicated CA Zoning with EVA8100

[PB75]

Hi Everyone,

I have two EVA8100 running and use CA for remote replication between them.
Currently zoning is configured the way that both EVA "see each other" on all eight FC Ports.

I would like to change that config to a dedicated CA Zoning using FP1 and FP2 of each controller for Host traffic and FP3 and FP4 only for CA traffic. Like the screenshot attachement explains.

- EVA Controller Hostports 1 and 3 are connected to fabric 1
- EVA Controller Hostports 2 and 4 are connected to fabric 2
- Server HBA1 is connected to fabric 1 and HBA2 is connected to fabric 2



please confirm my thinking:

this is done per fabric 1:
- I create a replication zone including:
EVA1 CtrlA FP3
EVA1 CtrlB FP3
EVA2 CtrlA FP3
EVA2 CtrlB FP3

- I create a Host Zone (Example Hostname: Host1) for communication between Host1 and EVA1 including:
Host1 HBA1
EVA1 CtrlA FP1
EVA1 CtrlB FP1

- I create a second Host Zone for communication between Host1 and EVA2 including:
Host1 HBA1
EVA2 CtrlA FP1
EVA2 CtrlB FP1

this is done per fabric 2:
- I create a replication zone including:
EVA1 CtrlA FP4
EVA1 CtrlB FP4
EVA2 CtrlA FP4
EVA2 CtrlB FP4

- I create a Host Zone (Example Hostname: Host1) for communication between Host1 and EVA1 including:
Host1 HBA2
EVA1 CtrlA FP2
EVA1 CtrlB FP2

- I create a second Host Zone for communication between Host1 and EVA2 including:
Host1 HBA2
EVA2 CtrlA FP2
EVA2 CtrlB FP2

regards
Patrick

[IBaltay]

Hi,
maybe you could check it here:
CA implementation guide
http://bizsupport.austin.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/c01557203/c01557203.pdf

[Steven Clementi · Accepted solution]

Patrick:

Looks good. Just make sure your zones for your management servers do not contain multiple EVA as this would also "enable" communications on those ports.

Some people zone all of their storage ports into a group with 1 host which can lead to the situation where you still have ports beng able to talk to each other.

If you goal is to dedicate the ports, make sure all of your other zones follow the same rules... 1 initiator and 1 target per zone. If you have 1 server and 2 storage arrays, then you need 2 zones, host1/array1 and host1/array2. (looks like you got it covered.)


Steven

[PB75]

@Steven,

thanks for your feedback. That means I need to handle the Management Server the same way I handle the Zones for my Hosts? (1 initiator and 1 target per zone)

The CA Implementation Guide states a confusing sentence about this on page 61:

Zoning management servers:
Management servers must be in the same zones as the local and remote array host ports that are used for the intersite links. Only one server at a time can be used to manage an array. However, you should include one active management server and one standby management server in each array management/intersite link zone.

Does this sentence mean Management Servers needs to be in the same zone like the CA dedicated storage ports? This would make no sense to me. I incline to zone the mgnt Server the same way I zone a normal windows host.

Patrick

[Steven Clementi]

The doc is somewhat confusing. It only gives very basic rules and best practices about zoning for CA.

It also later mentions that you should not include any servers in your CA zones. (or at least I remember reading that somewhere in that doc)

The Management Server is just another host. I would treat it as such.

Command View is there to manipulate how CA is configured, not to control it. If you remove the server from the fabric... your EVAs still operate and CA continues to work, you just can not manage them.

The statement it makes, if interpreted correctly, simply is stating that your local and remote management servers need to be zoned so that they can manage the 2 EVAâ s in the case the one or the other fails. Theoretically, you can have a zone with 2 initiators and 1 target (ManagementServer1/ManagementServer2/EVA1) to accomplish this after allâ ¦ you do not normally present storage to your management servers.

If you ARE presenting storage to your management servers, then I would stick to you gut feelings (1 initiator/1 target).


Steven

[Steven Clementi]

Referring back to the document here:

The statement it makes, if interpreted correctly, simply is stating that your local and remote management servers need to be zoned so that they can manage the 2 EVA's in the case the one or the other fails. Theoretically, you can have a zone with 2 initiators and 1 target (ManagementServer1/ManagementServer2/EVA1) to accomplish this after all... you do not normally present storage to your management servers.

[Uwe Zessin]

Usually, you do not put multiple initiators in a single zone to prevent them from logging in to each other. I strictly isolate the management servers from each others and the remaining servers.