I want to create 3 cifs shares independently managed under the same volume, is it possible? Each share points to a different subfolder under a single volume.? is it possible I already tried to create cifs shares but it is not solving my purpose of creating different subfolders, its replicating in all shares, if I add or create any folder or file in any share.  share1 creation command (same junction path.) ---cifs share create -vserver vserver_name -share-name Share2 -path /junctionpath_1 -share-properties oplocks,browsable,showsnapshot,access-based-enumeration,show-previous-versions -file-umask 022 -dir-umask 022 -comments "xxxxx" share1 creation command (same junction path.) ---cifs share create -vserver vserver_name -share-name Share2 -path /junctionpath_1 -share-properties oplocks,browsable,showsnapshot,access-based-enumeration,show-previous-versions -file-umask 022 -dir-umask 022 -comments "xxxxx" share1 creation command (same junction path.) ---cifs share create -vserver vserver_name -share-name Share3 -path /junctionpath_1 -share-properties oplocks,browsable,showsnapshot,access-based-enumeration,show-previous-versions -file-umask 022 -dir-umask 022 -comments "xxxxx" ... View more

Goodmorning all, My FAS3220 is EOL and will be scrapped, what is the easiest way to delete all the data in a way that it cannot be recovered ? Hope to hear from you.   Rein ... View more

I'm at my wits end regarding this issue. We need to update the DQP file for our machine, however, the only way to do that is via uploading through the FTP server and we've been completely unable to do so. Is there something I need to toggle on the FAS filer side in order to make it work? I've already opened up a case with Netapp but they haven't been able to help in that regard unfortunately ... View more

Hi, I have a couple of new A400 systems. After upgrading them to Ontap 9.13.1.P1 I noticed that the health was degraded on the link aggregation port and the member ports.   There are an KB about this, Native vlan ports show degraded after upgrade to ONTAP 9.13.1 - NetApp Knowledge Base   But I don't understand how to solve it, should I create a "native vlan" in the Cisco switches config for the lacp Etherchannel? I seems to just be a cosmetic problem, I can ignore the health status (net port modify -node <node> -port <port> -ignore-health-status true)   This is the status today for one of a new cluster (not in production).  Should the ifgrp ports (a0a, e0e, e0f) be in a broadcast domain?    cl05::> network port ifgrp show -node cl05-01 Port Distribution Active Node IfGrp Function MAC Address Ports Ports -------- ---------- ------------ ----------------- ------- ------------------- cl05-01 a0a ip xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx full e0e, e0f   cl05::> network port show -node cl05-01 Node: cl05-01 Speed(Mbps) Health Port IPspace Broadcast Domain Link MTU Admin/Oper Status --------- ------------ ---------------- ---- ---- ----------- -------- a0a Default - up 1500 -/- degraded a0a-10 Default vlan-10 up 1500 -/- healthy a0a-12 Default vlan-12 up 1500 -/- healthy a0a-18 Default vlan-18 up 1500 -/- healthy a0a-1905 Default vlan-1905 up 1500 -/- healthy a0a-20 Default vlan-20 up 1500 -/- healthy a0a-51 Default Default up 1500 -/- healthy e0M Default Default up 1500 auto/1000 healthy e0e Default - up 1500 auto/10000 degraded e0f Default - up 1500 auto/10000 degraded e0g Default - down 1500 auto/- - e0h Default - down 1500 auto/- - e3a Cluster Cluster up 9000 auto/100000 healthy e3b Cluster Cluster up 9000 auto/100000 healthy 14 entries were displayed. cl05::> cl05::> network port reachability show -node cl05-01 Node Port Expected Reachability Reachability Status --------- -------- ------------------------------------ --------------------- cl05-01 a0a - no-reachability a0a-10 Default:vlan-10 ok a0a-12 Default:vlan-12 ok a0a-18 Default:vlan-18 ok a0a-1905 Default:vlan-1905 ok a0a-20 Default:vlan-20 ok a0a-51 Default:Default ok e0M Default:Default ok e0e - no-reachability e0f - no-reachability e0g - no-reachability e0h - no-reachability e3a Cluster:Cluster ok e3b Cluster:Cluster ok ... View more

The AD object shows windows for few Netapp objects in AD , is this a issue from AD side or is it from the Netapp  ... View more