Port zoning with ISL connection

[Clayton Walter]

I was hoping to get some input on proper port zoning with an ISL in place.

Here is my current setup:

EVA8000:
2 Brocade 4/32 FC Swicthes
-SW1 Domain ID 1
-SW2 Domain ID 2

EVA8100:
2 Brocade 4/32B FC Switches
-SW1 Domain ID 3
-SW2 Domain ID 4

Single ISL connection between EVA8000 SW1 P27 and EVA8100 SW1 P19

EVA8000 SW1 is principal

EVA8100 SW1 is subordinate to EVA8000 SW1

There is no ISL between EVA8000 SW2 and EVA8100 SW2

The ISL was put in place to allow us to replicate data between EVAs to support an earlier initiative...not for redundancy or trunking. Technically, the ISL is no longer needed as we are not cross connecting hosts from the EVA8000 fabric with the EVA8100 and vice versa. But I would like to keep this ISL connection in place in case future needs arise for replication.

When the ISL connection was first established, I had issues getting the two EVAs talking and in an attempt to get things working quickly I basically opened up the fabric. Now I would like to get the proper zones set up. I know what I need for all of my other ports...but I wanted to confirm my thinking on how the ISL ports should be zoned.

The way I envision the ISL zone is like this:

ISL_ZONE Members:
EVA8000 Controllers
1,0
1,1
1,2
1,3
EVA8100 Controllers
3,0
3,1
3,2
3,3
ISL Ports
1,27
3,19

If this zone is present in the fabric, then there would be no reason to have the standard port zones (for example port zone 27 which includes 1,0 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,27) for each ISL port, correct?

Thanks in advance!

Clayton

[Prokopets · Accepted solution]

Clayton, if zones are merged (you have single fabric on both ISL-ed switches) you don't need to put ISL-ports in zone - just EVAs.
As for me, it's better to use WWN-based zoning and in this case you just should put HSV-s WWNs in single zone, and that's all.

[Clayton Walter]

Ok, I think that answers my question. Thank you.