- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- >
- HPE EVA Storage
- >
- Growing SAN Ecosystem - Is there a Need for Separa...
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-30-2009 08:22 AM
тАО03-30-2009 08:22 AM
We have EVAs, XP and HDS.
Is it a good idea to have separate zones for each of these arrays?
Something Like:
SERVERA_XP_ZONE:
XP_FRONT_ENDS, SERVERA_HBAS
SERVERA_HDS_ZONE:
HDS_FRONT_ENDS, SERVERA_HBAS
SERVERA_EVA_ZONE:
EVA_FRONT_EnDS, SERVERA_HBAS
instead of:
SERVERA_DISK_ZONE
SERVRA_HBAS, XP_FRONT_ENDS, EVA_FRONT_ENDS, HDS_FRONT_ENDS
Any thoughts? I've not been reading best practices lately. And there's a possibily more flavours of SAN storage arrays are forthcoming.
Thanks in advance for your inputs/thoughts.
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-30-2009 08:46 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-30-2009 08:57 AM
тАО03-30-2009 08:57 AM
Re: Growing SAN Ecosystem - Is there a Need for Separate Zones for each Flavour of SAN Array?
Take a look at the SAN Design Reference Guide for the current best practices:
http://bizsupport1.austin.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/c00403562/c00403562.pdf
Generally you should haves zones consisting of a single initiator (HBA) and the relevant destinations (storage ports).
Mixing storage units in one zone, could cause you problems.
Cheers,
Rob
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-30-2009 09:22 AM
тАО03-30-2009 09:22 AM
Re: Growing SAN Ecosystem - Is there a Need for Separate Zones for each Flavour of SAN Array?
From Growth prospective, it will be easier for tiered storage and will be best during consolidation and virtualization.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-30-2009 10:49 AM
тАО03-30-2009 10:49 AM
Re: Growing SAN Ecosystem - Is there a Need for Separate Zones for each Flavour of SAN Array?
It will prevent 'cross-chatting' and hosts who have no business on a particular array will not appear in its 'WWPN' table.
You will be able to do fine-grained access management.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-30-2009 03:29 PM
тАО03-30-2009 03:29 PM
Re: Growing SAN Ecosystem - Is there a Need for Separate Zones for each Flavour of SAN Array?
I am happy to be guided but I would have thought that the following would make sense in your case:
Case 1 (If SERVERA only requires access to the XP array):
SERVERA_DISK_ZONE:
XP_WWPN/WWNN; SERVERA_FCA_WWNN/WWPN
Case 2 (If SERVERA requires access to the XP, EVA & HDS arrays):
SERVERA_DISK_ZONE:
XP_WWPN/WWNN; EVA_WWPN/WWNN; HDS_WWPN/WWNN; SERVERA_FCA_WWNN/WWPN
Ofcourse, you would then have a separate zone entry for SAN attached tape devices if you require them.
In case 2, yes WWPNs of the host in question would appear on the XP, EVA & HDS arrays but thats what you need otherwise you wouldnt have zoned the host such that it sees all three arrays.
In case 2, multiple targets exist in the same zone with a single initiator - so to my understanding it adheres to the zoning best practies from Brocade & HP. Any other thoughts?
Regards,
Saket.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-30-2009 04:04 PM
тАО03-30-2009 04:04 PM
Re: Growing SAN Ecosystem - Is there a Need for Separate Zones for each Flavour of SAN Array?
Our Servers need to see XP, EVA, HDS and other SAN Arrays. Are you saying that with Case 2 in your response that it is okay and best practice to have XP, EVA and HDS FrontEnd Ports zoned with my Server's HBA? And is it still considered Best Practice?
I thought the other responders thought otherwise that I should have separate zones for each flavour array?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-30-2009 09:53 PM
тАО03-30-2009 09:53 PM
Re: Growing SAN Ecosystem - Is there a Need for Separate Zones for each Flavour of SAN Array?
"To configure different HP storage system types for coexistence in a common SAN, without common access from the same server, define a separate zone for each storage system family."
Cheers,
Rob
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-30-2009 10:16 PM
тАО03-30-2009 10:16 PM
Re: Growing SAN Ecosystem - Is there a Need for Separate Zones for each Flavour of SAN Array?
For Backup Devices do a Hardzoning.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-31-2009 12:02 AM
тАО03-31-2009 12:02 AM
Re: Growing SAN Ecosystem - Is there a Need for Separate Zones for each Flavour of SAN Array?
Many switches can do a so-called 'Hardzoning', even when the zone definitions are made with WWNs:
FCSW01:admin> portzoneshow
PORT: 0 (0) F-Port Enforcement: HARD WWN defaultHard: 0 IFID: 0x43020000
PORT: 1 (1) F-Port Enforcement: HARD WWN defaultHard: 0 IFID: 0x43020001
(This fabric uses only WWNs for zoning)