Confirm Hyper-V Failover Cluster 7400-4 Node Zoning with all 6 ports.

[Brendon-T]

Hello

I am just here to confirm the zoning we are doing with our Hypervisors in our cluster. I have read the Best Practices guide as well as several other forums and blogs and this is the conclusion I have drawn from it. Please let me know if I should adjust, change, etc.  I will use an 8 server Hyper-V Failover Cluster as an example, each with 2 HBAs for Host and Hyper-V VMs. (Should I add another 2 to dedicate to Hyper-V VM traffic?)

ServerAPort1 - 0:1:1, 1:1:1

ServerAPort2 - 2:1:2, 3:1:2

ServerBPort1 - 2:1:1, 3:1:1

ServerBPort2 - 0:1:2, 1:1:2

ServerCPort1 - 0:2:1, 1:2:1

ServerCPort2 - 2:2:2, 3:2:2

ServerDPort1 - 2:2:1, 3:2:1

ServerDPort2 - 0:2:2:, 1:2:2

ServerEPort1 - 0:2:3, 1:2:3

ServerEPort1 - 2:2:4, 3:2:4

ServerFPort1 - 2:2:3, 3:2:3

ServerFPort1 - 0:2:4, 1:2:4

ServerGPort1 - 0:1:1, 1:1:1

ServerGPort2 - 2:1:2, 3:1:2

ServerHPort1 - 2:1:1, 3:1:1

ServerHPort2 - 0:1:2, 1:1:2

Assuming we have all ports configured on all 4 nodes. We currently don't but are planning to, at which point I would just keep going through the sets as seen on ServerG and ServerH. I have read that Hypervisors should see all 4 nodes and any other server should just need 2, which is how I was planning the Hyper-V VMs. Thoughts? This is using Single-Single Zoning as well. 

[Sheldon Smith]

That looks fine. However, unless there are a lot more servers that you didn't mention, you might want to keep the 0-3:2:3-4 ports in reserve. Give you flexibility to use things like Remote Copy and/or Peer Motion in the future.

Note: While I work for HP, all of my comments (whether noted or not), are my own and are not any official representation of the company.
----------
If my post was useful, click on my KUDOS! "White Star" !