Fibre Channel (SAN)

Reply
New Contributor
Posts: 2
Registered: ‎09-07-2011

proposed equipment fully compliable with Brocade 5300

Hi all,

I'm not familiar with brocade equipment but I'm trying to answer a question being asked of me, if anyone could look at the below and help me I would appreciate it

this is the email I have received

I would of thought though that your customer has their own technical team who  will configure, install and manage the switch. Here is what I can do for you,  which is substantially better than 2 standalone switches running  4gps:
CISCO  MDS9506/MDS9509 Solution, comprising of:
1 x DS-C9506  Chassis
2 x DS-CAC-3000W  power supplies
2 x DS-X9530-SF2-K9  - 2nd Generation supervisor engines
1 x DS-X9148 - 48  port 4gps Fabric Switch module
1 x DS-X9124 - 24  port 4gps Fabric Switch module
72 x  DS-SFP-FC4G-SW's - 4gps Short Wave transceivers.
This leaves a  further 2 slots to add more switching modules, give redundancy on power, and  processing, while providing required ports for your  customer:
the response is below 
1)Is the proposed equipment fully compatible with out brocade 5300?
2)Is the kit licensed for ISL (E-port)?
3)Is the kit licensed for what Brocade call 'open trunking' - allows more than one ISL to act as one link?
Please have a look and any help would be excellent
Many thanks

New Contributor
Posts: 2
Registered: ‎09-07-2011

Re: proposed equipment fully compliable with Brocade 5300

should say

1)Is the proposed equipment fully compatible with our brocade 5300?

Regular Contributor
Posts: 201
Registered: ‎11-24-2009

Re: proposed equipment fully compliable with Brocade 5300

Hi darrenj,

With Brocade infrastructure already in place, I would strongly recommend not to mix Brocade and Cisco in the same environment. It's not worth it.

In essense, they offer you a 5-years old platform with (72) 4G badly oversubscribed ports that would require 3000W to power and 7 rack units to mount. What you have today is a modern platform with (80) 8G non-oversubscribed ports that require 300W (yes, that's ten times less) and 2 rack units to mount.

Cisco's line cards are up to 4:1 oversubscribed (although Cisco will sell you 'host-optimized' and 'storage-optimized' fairytale which illustrates why LAN guys shouldn't build SAN switches). Brocade 5300 has no oversubscription (meaning all 80 ports can run 8Gbps full speed).

This equipment is definitely NOT compatible with your Brocade SAN. While Cisco does offer 'compatibility' mode to interoperate with Brocade equipment, this is not supported in the latest Brocade Fabric OS versions and has limited functionality. Don't go for it unless absolutely unavoidable.

In summary, you don't need that MDS because you're already running a modern enterprise-class 8G platform which is way more efficient than MDS9506 proposed.

If SAN needs to be expanded, I'd rather ask that guy to offer something similar from Brocade. Depending on your requirements, another 5300 or perhaps a DCX-4S would fit.

Hope this helps,

Linar

Valued Contributor
Posts: 931
Registered: ‎12-30-2009

Re: proposed equipment fully compliable with Brocade 5300

Or better yet, if budget allows for it, a DCX 8510-4 which enables you to run @ 16Gbps speed.

Frequent Contributor
Posts: 90
Registered: ‎12-26-2010

Re: proposed equipment fully compliable with Brocade 5300

when you say 4:1 oversubscription does that mean only 25% of ports can run in full speed/gbps?

Valued Contributor
Posts: 931
Registered: ‎12-30-2009

Re: proposed equipment fully compliable with Brocade 5300

Oversubscrition of 4:1, in terms of bandwith, means for every 4 userports there is 1 backend port to route traffic to other userports.

Of a 4G platform this results in 16G of traffic havine only 4G off bandwith to reach other ports.

Depending on the architecture Cisco uses it may be possible the platform understand blade and asic locality.

Regular Contributor
Posts: 201
Registered: ‎11-24-2009

Re: proposed equipment fully compliable with Brocade 5300

Looking at the line cards being proposed:

24-port card has 6 ports per group, 48-port card has 12 ports per group. Each group has 12.8 Gbps bandwidth. Thus in fully populated 48-port card every twelve 4G ports share 12.8 Gbps instead of full 48 Gbps one would expect. This is rougly 48:12 or 4:1 oversubscription.

Again, Cisco will tell you the story about "dedicating bandwidth to ISLs and storage ports, running host ports in shared-bandwidth" which is now a textbook example of how to present poor technology limitations as "competitive advantage".

Contrary to the post above, these cards do not utilize blade or ASIC locality -- all traffic is routed through Supervisor-2 cards.

Not to mention that these cards were introduced in 2006. . .  Does it make sense to invest in five-years-old technology?

Hope this helps,

Linar

Join the Community

Get quick and easy access to valuable resource designed to help you manage your Brocade Network.