<?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: iSCSI Portsets - Adding Interfaces.. disruptive?? in ONTAP Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/iSCSI-Portsets-Adding-Interfaces-disruptive/m-p/135199#M29662</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Greg,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Adding additional LIFs to a portset will not be disruptive. The igroup is already bound to the&amp;nbsp;portset, the hosts are just waiting for you to open those LIFs on the other nodes so they can access the LUNs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This will however add additional paths to the&amp;nbsp;LUNs on the current nodes 1&amp;amp;2 - so need to ensure Selective LUN mapping (SLM ) is configured to ensure only the local nodes hosting the LUNs are available, or that the additional&amp;nbsp;paths do not exceed any maximums for the OS type - see SAN Configuration Guide.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Cheers,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Grant.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:34:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>sgrant</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-10-12T14:34:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>iSCSI Portsets - Adding Interfaces.. disruptive??</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/iSCSI-Portsets-Adding-Interfaces-disruptive/m-p/135198#M29661</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I noticed that my portset "PG_iscsi" only has my interfaces for nodes 1-2 of a 4-node cluster.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Would adding the interfaces for nodes 3 and 4 cause any disruption or would this be similar to adding WWPNs to an igroup?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The problem is that some of my hosts cannot "see" the LUNs as they are on nodes 3 and 4.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ontap 9.1P6&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;GN&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 14:29:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/iSCSI-Portsets-Adding-Interfaces-disruptive/m-p/135198#M29661</guid>
      <dc:creator>GregNOAA</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-04T14:29:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: iSCSI Portsets - Adding Interfaces.. disruptive??</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/iSCSI-Portsets-Adding-Interfaces-disruptive/m-p/135199#M29662</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Greg,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Adding additional LIFs to a portset will not be disruptive. The igroup is already bound to the&amp;nbsp;portset, the hosts are just waiting for you to open those LIFs on the other nodes so they can access the LUNs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This will however add additional paths to the&amp;nbsp;LUNs on the current nodes 1&amp;amp;2 - so need to ensure Selective LUN mapping (SLM ) is configured to ensure only the local nodes hosting the LUNs are available, or that the additional&amp;nbsp;paths do not exceed any maximums for the OS type - see SAN Configuration Guide.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Cheers,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Grant.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:34:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/iSCSI-Portsets-Adding-Interfaces-disruptive/m-p/135199#M29662</guid>
      <dc:creator>sgrant</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-10-12T14:34:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

