Fibre Channel (SAN)

Reply
New Contributor
Posts: 4
Registered: ‎02-21-2012

SAN migration - ISL or not?

Hello!

I have to decommission old equipment in favour of a new one.

Old equipment consists of: IBM SAN DS4800, 2 IBM FC switch (brocade FOS 6.1.x) with various FC devices attached (including an IBM Bladecenter H, single hosts, tape autoloader, etc).

New equipment consists of: DELL PV MD3620f, 1 DELL Blade with 10 blades, 2 M5424 FC switch blade modules (FOS 6.3.x)

New and Old equipment are already BOTH in production , are in the same room, but not FC-connected right now.

To online-migrate some of the data from old systems (both hosts and SAN) to new ones I thought of 2 roads:

A) Make the NEW blade servers see the OLD SAN by connecting the M5424 switches to the IBM FC switches creating what I think is an ISL (E_port ?). Then migrate the data (vmware vmotion then svmotion).

B) Make the OLD single servers see the NEW SAN by connecting the old FC HBAs to the M5424 switches external ports, provide proper zoning and masking and do the migration (actually: vmware svmotion then vmotion).

My questions here are for road "A", because it would be simpler in our scenario and would allow for future migrations of other equipment, not just for vmware stuff.

But, from what I have read in this forum, I understood that configuring an ISL is a DISRUPTIVE action (not counting that it does require a license?)

The  OLD and NEW FC switches have different domain ids.

What happens if I try connect the 2 switches together ?

Are there any other ways to accomplish this, considering that I do not care about performance, I am just seeking a way to make the new sets of blade servers see the old storage to "pick up" the data.

Thank you for any suggestion!!

DavideDG.

External Moderator
Posts: 4,973
Registered: ‎02-23-2004

Re: SAN migration - ISL or not?

--->>> But, from what I have read in this forum, I understood that configuring an ISL is a DISRUPTIVE action (not counting that it does require a license?)

Some user here in the community in the past create a big confusion about ISL License.

Any such license is not available.

However, correct is in order to ISL to another switch in the Fabric, both switch must have Fabric License.

BTW, ISL is not DISRUPTIVE

--->>> Old equipment consists of: IBM SAN DS4800, 2 IBM FC switch (brocade FOS 6.1.x) with various FC devices attached (including an IBM Bladecenter H, single hosts, tape autoloader, etc).

"2 IBM FC Switch"

can you post switch model here ? if you are unsure, see this Wiki for details.

with licenseshow command can list installed license on old switches in order to verify if a Fabric License is installed or no

TechHelp24
New Contributor
Posts: 4
Registered: ‎02-21-2012

Re: SAN migration - ISL or not?

Dear Support,

thank you for your quick reply and for initial clarification about licenses and ISL.

I will gather more information tomorrow morning and will report back.

Thank you meanwhile.

Davide DG.

New Contributor
Posts: 4
Registered: ‎02-21-2012

Re: SAN migration - ISL or not?

Here is some more info...I've hidden some parts as I don't know if it's safe to make them public available:

#########################################################################################

IBM SWITCHES

#########################################################################################

SWITCH_1:admin> switchshow
switchName:     SWITCH_1
switchType:     34.0
switchState:    Online
switchMode:     Native
switchRole:     Principal
switchDomain:   1
switchId:       fffc01
switchWwn:      ----(hidden)

zoning:         ON (C_SAN_A)
switchBeacon:   OFF

SWITCH_1:admin> licenseshow
R-------x:
Unknown1 license
S-------s:
Unknown2 license
S-------X:
First Ports on Demand license - additional 4 port upgrade license
S-------L:
Second Ports on Demand license - additional 4 port upgrade license

SWITCH_1:admin> version
Kernel:     2.6.14.2
Fabric OS:  v6.1.0c
Made on:    Fri Jun 13 16:26:17 2008
Flash:      Mon Aug 18 20:15:51 2008
BootProm:   4.6.6

#########################################################################################

DELL SWITCHES :

#########################################################################################

M5424-01:admin> switchshow
switchName:     M5424-01
switchType:     75.0
switchState:    Online
switchMode:     Native
switchRole:     Principal
switchDomain:   11
switchId:       fffc0b
zoning:         ON (ZC_20110916)
switchBeacon:   OFF

M5424-01:admin> licenseshow
b------K:
    Fabric license
S------L:
    Ports on Demand license - additional 12 port upgrade license
m-----N:
    Enhanced Group Management license
3------P:
    8 Gig FC license

M5424-01:admin> version
Kernel:     2.6.14.2
Fabric OS:  v6.3.2
Made on:    Tue Jun 15 19:46:40 2010
Flash:      Mon Jul 4 21:52:08 2011
BootProm:   1.0.9
##################################################################################

Thank you.

Davide DG.

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

Re: SAN migration - ISL or not?

Just looking at the zoning you've got a challenge already.

Both Configs are named differently with causes a merge conflict.

Both switches should have an identical zoning config (this includes naming of all members, order of members and content of members), or one switch to be cleared of its config.

External Moderator
Posts: 4,973
Registered: ‎02-23-2004

Re: SAN migration - ISL or not?

Davide,

you cannot Migrate the config via ISL with this License, because the old Brocade 200 don't have Fabric License.

Alternative is to obtain a Temporary 45 day E_Port ( Fabric ) License for this Old Switch.

Ask here you reseller.

TechHelp24
New Contributor
Posts: 4
Registered: ‎02-21-2012

Re: SAN migration - ISL or not?

Thank you for the answer! We're going down road "B" then.

Davide.

Join the Community

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