| Author |
Message |
Richard Jones
Guest
|
 Posted:
Thu Dec 16, 2004 5:23 pm Post subject:
SAN Zoning schemas |
|
|
I am currently deploying a multi-node cluster (Windows 2003/EMC Symmetrix)
and would be interested to hear peoples opinions on the recommended zoning
schema. This is also a multi-cluster environment. Everything I've seen
from Microsoft strongly suggests placing all nodes in a cluster in the same
zone, and I understand the need for this. However my storage vendor is
suggesting a different approach. They are suggesting a 'single initiator
multiple target' zoning schema where each server (node) is in it's own zone
and LUN access is controlled at the storage controller. Theoretically I can
see that this will also work. Has anyone else used this approach on a
Windows Cluster? Does anyone know of any problems this approach may cause
for MSCS?
Thanks,
Rich |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:19 pm Post subject:
Re: SAN Zoning schemas |
|
|
Hmm, where did you read the 1 zone thing? We are running on different zones
with several different clusters, no issues. No problems what so ever.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
"Richard Jones" <richjones100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uPHs9G24EHA.1120@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | I am currently deploying a multi-node cluster (Windows 2003/EMC Symmetrix)
and would be interested to hear peoples opinions on the recommended zoning
schema. This is also a multi-cluster environment. Everything I've seen
from Microsoft strongly suggests placing all nodes in a cluster in the same
zone, and I understand the need for this. However my storage vendor is
suggesting a different approach. They are suggesting a 'single initiator
multiple target' zoning schema where each server (node) is in it's own zone
and LUN access is controlled at the storage controller. Theoretically I
can see that this will also work. Has anyone else used this approach on a
Windows Cluster? Does anyone know of any problems this approach may cause
for MSCS?
Thanks,
Rich
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Toner [MVP]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:48 pm Post subject:
Re: SAN Zoning schemas |
|
|
I have seen this written somewhere too, though I can't remember where.
I have always setup seperate zones for each node.
Regards,
John
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:O19EqQF5EHA.3368@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Hmm, where did you read the 1 zone thing? We are running on different
zones
with several different clusters, no issues. No problems what so ever.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
"Richard Jones" <richjones100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uPHs9G24EHA.1120@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
I am currently deploying a multi-node cluster (Windows 2003/EMC
Symmetrix)
and would be interested to hear peoples opinions on the recommended
zoning
schema. This is also a multi-cluster environment. Everything I've seen
from Microsoft strongly suggests placing all nodes in a cluster in the
same
zone, and I understand the need for this. However my storage vendor is
suggesting a different approach. They are suggesting a 'single initiator
multiple target' zoning schema where each server (node) is in it's own
zone
and LUN access is controlled at the storage controller. Theoretically I
can see that this will also work. Has anyone else used this approach on
a
Windows Cluster? Does anyone know of any problems this approach may
cause
for MSCS?
Thanks,
Rich
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kk
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Jan 04, 2005 6:52 am Post subject:
Re: SAN Zoning schemas |
|
|
Either can work if configured correctly. The important thing to
consider is to be sure that whatever you go with doesn't create any
single point of failure.
-kk
John Toner [MVP] wrote:
| Quote: | I have seen this written somewhere too, though I can't remember where.
I have always setup seperate zones for each node.
Regards,
John
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:O19EqQF5EHA.3368@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Hmm, where did you read the 1 zone thing? We are running on different
zones
with several different clusters, no issues. No problems what so ever.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
"Richard Jones" <richjones100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uPHs9G24EHA.1120@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
I am currently deploying a multi-node cluster (Windows 2003/EMC
Symmetrix)
and would be interested to hear peoples opinions on the recommended
zoning
schema. This is also a multi-cluster environment. Everything I've seen
from Microsoft strongly suggests placing all nodes in a cluster in the
same
zone, and I understand the need for this. However my storage vendor is
suggesting a different approach. They are suggesting a 'single initiator
multiple target' zoning schema where each server (node) is in it's own
zone
and LUN access is controlled at the storage controller. Theoretically I
can see that this will also work. Has anyone else used this approach on
a
Windows Cluster? Does anyone know of any problems this approach may
cause
for MSCS?
Thanks,
Rich
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in