<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Could Xenserver configure iscsi multipath with NetAPP which have only one controller ? in Additional Virtualization Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/12003#M30</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Multipath &lt;STRONG&gt;does&lt;/STRONG&gt; give you increased bandwidth. And as opposed to link aggregation, this increased bandwidth is real, deterministic and does not depend on selecting “the right” IP address or praying to have correct MAC address for better distribution.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Multipathing is better than link aggregation in all cases when we deal with block access.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2012 05:22:18 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>aborzenkov</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-08-10T05:22:18Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Could Xenserver configure iscsi multipath with NetAPP which have only one controller ?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/11981#M26</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi everybody,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have been surveyed many document in Netapp and citrix, all the documents illustrate iscsi multipath configure with two controllers,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I tried to connect FAS 3140(only one controller) using iSCSI to XenServer 5.6 ,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;XenServer host&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;NIC 0 : 192.168.0.209 /24(management interface)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;NIC 1 : 192.168.3.209 /24&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;NIC 2 : 192.168.4.209 /24&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;FAS 3140 &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;e0M : 192.168.0.201 /24(management interface)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;e0a&amp;nbsp; : 192.168.3.201 /24&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;e0b&amp;nbsp; : 192.168.4.201 /24&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;use 3 switches to separate 3 subnet,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;set &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Target Host: 192.168.3.201,192.168.4.201&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; use CHAP: User:****** , Password:******&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Target IQN : *(192.168.3.201,192.168.4.201:3260)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;and Target LUN can be discovered&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;after Format the iSCSI SR&amp;nbsp; , error appeared ,&amp;nbsp; XenServer can't plugging PBD and SIZE=0B in iSCSI SR&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;because I have only one NetAPP controller ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 06:21:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/11981#M26</guid>
      <dc:creator>REFINEINMIAOLI</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T06:21:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Could Xenserver configure iscsi multipath with NetAPP which have only one controller ?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/11988#M27</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The host should see two paths anyways with one controller up and two NIC ports configured. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Multipathing at the host side does not require 2 controllers.&amp;nbsp; Have you tried setting up a bond instead of multipathing ? In your case, this is more appropriate.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2012 17:54:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/11988#M27</guid>
      <dc:creator>ranjank</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-08-09T17:54:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Could Xenserver configure iscsi multipath with NetAPP which have only one controller ?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/11993#M28</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank for your reply,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I had a environment using an Active-Passive bond on the same NetAPP stroage already.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I used 2 nic bonded in every xenserver ,and netapp used 4 interface trunked to a vif &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But I want to improve VM's performance, so I create another environment to test multipath.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Should I set&amp;nbsp; 2 interfaces on the FAS3140 in one&amp;nbsp; &lt;STRONG&gt;iSCSI Portal Groups &lt;/STRONG&gt;and give one &lt;STRONG&gt;Tag&lt;/STRONG&gt; for it?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2012 03:29:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/11993#M28</guid>
      <dc:creator>REFINEINMIAOLI</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-08-10T03:29:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Could Xenserver configure iscsi multipath with NetAPP which have only one controller ?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/11998#M29</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #454545; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;"I used 2 nic bonded in every xenserver ,and netapp used 4 interface trunked to a vif&lt;/SPAN&gt; "&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How many Xenservers you are using ? How netapp is using 4 interface ? Can you be little clear on your setup.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Multipath will give you redundancy and not the performance. You need to set the bond 'active-active' OR "link aggregate" to get more throughput.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2012 05:18:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/11998#M29</guid>
      <dc:creator>ranjank</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-08-10T05:18:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Could Xenserver configure iscsi multipath with NetAPP which have only one controller ?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/12003#M30</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Multipath &lt;STRONG&gt;does&lt;/STRONG&gt; give you increased bandwidth. And as opposed to link aggregation, this increased bandwidth is real, deterministic and does not depend on selecting “the right” IP address or praying to have correct MAC address for better distribution.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Multipathing is better than link aggregation in all cases when we deal with block access.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2012 05:22:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Additional-Virtualization-Discussions/Could-Xenserver-configure-iscsi-multipath-with-NetAPP-which-have-only-one/m-p/12003#M30</guid>
      <dc:creator>aborzenkov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-08-10T05:22:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

