2010-01-12 08:12 PM
Our 2050 Setup per controller:
- FC to additional shelf
- FC to tape library
- 1G to CIFS
- 1G to iSCSI
- 2 available 10GbE ports (an expansion card)
So that's it.
We use 1 build in gig port for cifs access, one for iSCSI (for testing servers), which i want to move away from and use both ports for CIFS (2Gb per controller)
I will be implementing VMWare on blades and want to use NFS for datastores but still want to keep iSCSI for physical servers. I have 2 HP ProCurve 2910al 10Gb up 1Gb down switches that i will use. So i have 2 2 port 10Gb cards that i will uplink these switches.
So, can i use iSCSI and NFS on the same switch?
If so do i have to use 1 10Gb port on a card for NFS and another for iSCSI, or can i use both for both?
Then on a switch side, do i have to use separate VLANs and separate uplinks and switch ports per each protocol, or can both iSCSI and NFS use the same VLAN and then i will be able to use any port as either NFS or iSCSI?
BTW, These switches will not be used for anything else.
Thanks for reply.
Solved! SEE THE SOLUTION
2010-01-13 05:42 AM
Yes, you can use iSCSI and NFS over the same links, and I believe there is even a whitepaper *somewhere* on using iscsi and NFS over the same 10Gb links. I wouldn't recommend it over 1Gb links for a production environment, though.
2010-01-13 06:28 AM
This is my take on this:
Ideally storage-related IP traffic should be separated from non-storage IP traffic - so for me having 'general' LAN & CIFS separated from iSCSI & NFS (for ESX provisioning), but iSCSI & NFS using same paths is good enough.
Having said that, there is the TR-3785 document showing feasible approach with just a couple of switches (although pricey Cisco Nexus ones) & couple of 10GbE ports per ESX host:
2010-01-13 07:00 AM
Thanks for reply Radek
This is exactly what i want to do, these 2 HP switches will carry only NFS and iSCSI traffic, CIFS and LAN will go through our Cisco infrastructure.