Skip to ContentSkip to Footer
Start of content
- Community Home
- >
- Storage
- >
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- >
- HPE EVA Storage
- >
- Requesting sanity-check on plan for MSA2000 consol...
HPE EVA Storage
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
-
- Forums
-
- Advancing Life & Work
- Advantage EX
- Alliances
- Around the Storage Block
- HPE Ezmeral: Uncut
- OEM Solutions
- Servers & Systems: The Right Compute
- Tech Insights
- The Cloud Experience Everywhere
- HPE Blog, Austria, Germany & Switzerland
- Blog HPE, France
- HPE Blog, Italy
- HPE Blog, Japan
- HPE Blog, Middle East
- HPE Blog, Russia
- HPE Blog, Saudi Arabia
- HPE Blog, South Africa
- HPE Blog, UK & Ireland
-
Blogs
- Advancing Life & Work
- Advantage EX
- Alliances
- Around the Storage Block
- HPE Blog, Latin America
- HPE Blog, Middle East
- HPE Blog, Saudi Arabia
- HPE Blog, South Africa
- HPE Blog, UK & Ireland
- HPE Ezmeral: Uncut
- OEM Solutions
- Servers & Systems: The Right Compute
- Tech Insights
- The Cloud Experience Everywhere
-
Information
- Community
- Welcome
- Getting Started
- FAQ
- Ranking Overview
- Rules of Participation
- Tips and Tricks
- Resources
- Announcements
- Email us
- Feedback
- Information Libraries
- Integrated Systems
- Networking
- Servers
- Storage
- Other HPE Sites
- Support Center
- Aruba Airheads Community
- Enterprise.nxt
- HPE Dev Community
- Cloud28+ Community
- Marketplace
-
Forums
-
Blogs
-
Information
-
English
Topic Options
- 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
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-18-2010 08:01 AM
05-18-2010 08:01 AM
Requesting sanity-check on plan for MSA2000 consolidation
Hi all, would appreciate casting of expert eyes over my plans to move a number of direct-attach MSA2012fc units & their servers to a dual-switch fabric (using 2 x 8/40 base switches).
Having previously created an EVA/cClass switch-connected environment the only thing I'm really not 100% clear on is the whole active/active redundant paths side of things with the MSA2012fc.
What I mean is, best practice dictates that I should have single-initiator - single-target zoning (which I'm happy with) so that says to me that I should zone a swith to allow port 1 of a host to talk to port 0 on MSA controller A and port 1 on MSA controller B.
Conversely port 2 of a host should talk to port 1 on MSA controller A and port 0 on MSA controller B.
All told, hosts will ultimately be a mix of EXS4 and Win2k3/Win2k8 clusters and LUNS obviously mapped to only allow comms with the relevant ESX or Windows clusters.
To that end, I've come up with the following logical zoning commands. Do they look about right to the gathered experts? (Obviously fake WWPNs for now).
Note that I got the WWPNs of the MSA using the "show port-wwn" CLI command as I couldn't find them any other way, only being able to find controller-specific WWNs.
----------------------------
(First on Switch 1)
#First create Server Port Aliases:
aliCreate “Server1_P1”, “00:01:02:03:03:05:06:07”
aliCreate “Server2_P1”, “10:11:12:13:13:15:16:17”
#Then create Storage Port Aliases:
aliCreate “MSA1_CA_P0”, “C0:C1:C2:C3:C3:C5:C6:C7”
aliCreate “MSA1_CB_P1”, “FA:FB:FC:FD:FE:FF:FG:FH”
#Then Create Zones containing/grouping aliases:
zoneCreate “Server1_MSA1_Pri”, “Server1_P1; MSA1_CA_P0; MSA1_CB_P1”
zoneCreate “Server2_MSA1_Pri”, “Server2_P1; MSA1_CA_P0; MSA1_CB_P1”
(Now on Switch 2)
aliCreate “Server1_P2”, “0A:0B:0C:0D:0E:0F:0G:0H”
aliCreate “Server2_P2”, “1A:1B:1C:1D:1E:1F:1G:1H”
aliCreate “MSA1_CA_P1”, “DA:DB:DC:DD:DE:DF:DG:DH”
aliCreate “MSA1_CB_P0”, “E0:E1:E2:E3:E3:E5:E6:E7”
zoneCreate “Server1_MSA1_Sec”, “Server1_P2; MSA1_CA_P1; MSA1_CB_P0”
zoneCreate “Server2_MSA1_Sec”, “Server2_P2; MSA1_CA_P1; MSA1_CB_P0”
----------------------------
Does my logic look sound?
Having previously created an EVA/cClass switch-connected environment the only thing I'm really not 100% clear on is the whole active/active redundant paths side of things with the MSA2012fc.
What I mean is, best practice dictates that I should have single-initiator - single-target zoning (which I'm happy with) so that says to me that I should zone a swith to allow port 1 of a host to talk to port 0 on MSA controller A and port 1 on MSA controller B.
Conversely port 2 of a host should talk to port 1 on MSA controller A and port 0 on MSA controller B.
All told, hosts will ultimately be a mix of EXS4 and Win2k3/Win2k8 clusters and LUNS obviously mapped to only allow comms with the relevant ESX or Windows clusters.
To that end, I've come up with the following logical zoning commands. Do they look about right to the gathered experts? (Obviously fake WWPNs for now).
Note that I got the WWPNs of the MSA using the "show port-wwn" CLI command as I couldn't find them any other way, only being able to find controller-specific WWNs.
----------------------------
(First on Switch 1)
#First create Server Port Aliases:
aliCreate “Server1_P1”, “00:01:02:03:03:05:06:07”
aliCreate “Server2_P1”, “10:11:12:13:13:15:16:17”
#Then create Storage Port Aliases:
aliCreate “MSA1_CA_P0”, “C0:C1:C2:C3:C3:C5:C6:C7”
aliCreate “MSA1_CB_P1”, “FA:FB:FC:FD:FE:FF:FG:FH”
#Then Create Zones containing/grouping aliases:
zoneCreate “Server1_MSA1_Pri”, “Server1_P1; MSA1_CA_P0; MSA1_CB_P1”
zoneCreate “Server2_MSA1_Pri”, “Server2_P1; MSA1_CA_P0; MSA1_CB_P1”
(Now on Switch 2)
aliCreate “Server1_P2”, “0A:0B:0C:0D:0E:0F:0G:0H”
aliCreate “Server2_P2”, “1A:1B:1C:1D:1E:1F:1G:1H”
aliCreate “MSA1_CA_P1”, “DA:DB:DC:DD:DE:DF:DG:DH”
aliCreate “MSA1_CB_P0”, “E0:E1:E2:E3:E3:E5:E6:E7”
zoneCreate “Server1_MSA1_Sec”, “Server1_P2; MSA1_CA_P1; MSA1_CB_P0”
zoneCreate “Server2_MSA1_Sec”, “Server2_P2; MSA1_CA_P1; MSA1_CB_P0”
----------------------------
Does my logic look sound?
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
End of content
United States
Hewlett Packard Enterprise International
Communities
- Communities
- HPE Blogs and Forum
© Copyright 2021 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP