Got it

Dorado3000 V3 iSCSI storage and HyperMetro

Created: Jun 1, 2020 07:02:33Latest reply: Sep 3, 2021 09:31:21 612 13 0 0 0
  Rewarded HiCoins: 0 (problem resolved)

Hi!

I'm involved in a proyect with 2 Dorado3000 V3 for serving LUNs vía iSCSI to VMWARE for VMs and one LUN in HyperMetro between 2 Datacenters.

Focusing in one datacenter, the networking department has configured 4 * 25GB ethernet ports on their switches, supposedly two 25G links per controller and they have proposed to me use them for iSCSI service and HyperMetro replication, each service separate in one VLAN and al ports in LACP.

For me this scenario is new, I have always configure this with dedicated ports.


I have several doubts of concept and I would appreciate if someone can answer:

*    Does iSCSI can configure as port bindig and support logical port? (if I configure IP on LP it's look like iSCSI doesn't work)

*    Can I share the ports for iSCSI and HyperMetro Service?


I don't know if my plan is correct but if we have 4 * 25G Ports, 2 per controller. For example Port A of each controller are for iSCSI and port B of each controlle are for HyperMetro service. But without LACP. Can it be a valid scenario?

Thanks

Featured Answers
yiyrich
Created Jun 1, 2020 07:39:59

It's a good proposal use LACP to run data serivce in one VLAN and run replicate service in another VLAN. The LACP provide bandwidth and link redundency. The VLAN is for isolation tunnel for different service to provide safety and share the good bandwidth on LACP.

if you have enough ethernet ports you can use port binding to provide good bandwidth and link redundency to provide data service and replicate service. 2 ports as a LACP for data service. Another 2 ports as another LACP for replicate service. you can share the ports with VLAN ID for iSCSI and HyperMetro service

if you have only two port in each controller. you can use one for iscsi service.Another ethernet port for hypermetro service. Only no redundency and can't share big bandwidth when you use two ethernet ports as a LACP.
View more
  • x
  • convention:

falarcon
falarcon Created Jun 1, 2020 17:17:53 (0) (0)
Thanks Yiyrich.
I understand my scenario possibilities with 2 ports in each controller, one port for each service.
If I get 2 more network ports per controller I could configure one LACP between two ports for Hypermetro service, but for iSCSI I still have the same doubts.
If I create LACP on switches and port bounding with 2 ports of each controller, so the only possibility I have is to configure the IPs in logical port Tab of ports, but iSCSI is not supported. Am I wrong about something?
Th 
nochhie
nochhie Created Dec 20, 2021 06:28:07 (0) (0)
good  
All Answers

hi, wait for a minute please.

View more
  • x
  • convention:

hi , friend . Logical port doesn't support iscsi , and it's working for file system share (NFS,CIFS) . you can share the port for iscsi and HyperMetro service , they can share the same port , however, this method is not recommended because data replication occupies bandwidth and may affect service experience.
View more
  • x
  • convention:

nochhie
nochhie Created Dec 20, 2021 06:28:14 (0) (0)
good  
It's a good proposal use LACP to run data serivce in one VLAN and run replicate service in another VLAN. The LACP provide bandwidth and link redundency. The VLAN is for isolation tunnel for different service to provide safety and share the good bandwidth on LACP.

if you have enough ethernet ports you can use port binding to provide good bandwidth and link redundency to provide data service and replicate service. 2 ports as a LACP for data service. Another 2 ports as another LACP for replicate service. you can share the ports with VLAN ID for iSCSI and HyperMetro service

if you have only two port in each controller. you can use one for iscsi service.Another ethernet port for hypermetro service. Only no redundency and can't share big bandwidth when you use two ethernet ports as a LACP.
View more
  • x
  • convention:

falarcon
falarcon Created Jun 1, 2020 17:17:53 (0) (0)
Thanks Yiyrich.
I understand my scenario possibilities with 2 ports in each controller, one port for each service.
If I get 2 more network ports per controller I could configure one LACP between two ports for Hypermetro service, but for iSCSI I still have the same doubts.
If I create LACP on switches and port bounding with 2 ports of each controller, so the only possibility I have is to configure the IPs in logical port Tab of ports, but iSCSI is not supported. Am I wrong about something?
Th 
nochhie
nochhie Created Dec 20, 2021 06:28:07 (0) (0)
good  

Yep, yiyrich is right. VLAN is for isolation tunnel for different service to provide safety, and in my case - safety is number one. I really think that nothing else matter if there would be gaps in safety.


View more
  • x
  • convention:

good post
View more
  • x
  • convention:

good
View more
  • x
  • convention:

:)
View more
  • x
  • convention:

Nice
View more
  • x
  • convention:

good
View more
  • x
  • convention:

12
Back to list

Comment

You need to log in to comment to the post Login | Register
Comment

Notice: To protect the legitimate rights and interests of you, the community, and third parties, do not release content that may bring legal risks to all parties, including but are not limited to the following:
  • Politically sensitive content
  • Content concerning pornography, gambling, and drug abuse
  • Content that may disclose or infringe upon others ' commercial secrets, intellectual properties, including trade marks, copyrights, and patents, and personal privacy
Do not share your account and password with others. All operations performed using your account will be regarded as your own actions and all consequences arising therefrom will be borne by you. For details, see " User Agreement."

My Followers

Login and enjoy all the member benefits

Login

Block
Are you sure to block this user?
Users on your blacklist cannot comment on your post,cannot mention you, cannot send you private messages.
Reminder
Please bind your phone number to obtain invitation bonus.