Windows Vista Forums

iSCSI and switch high availibility
  1. #1


    Piotr Guest

    iSCSI and switch high availibility

    Hi
    Could you advice me if this configuration will work?
    I want to use 4xDL380 G5 (as Hyper-V hosts and clustering) with 2xNIC on
    each (working in team) for iSCSI network. Servers are connected to two
    switches DELL PowerConnect 2724. Every NIC from team plugged to different
    switch. I’m going to use DELL MD3000i with two controllers (4 ports)
    connected to the some switches. Everything to eliminate single point of
    failure (NICs and Switches).
    I wonder if these switches will work correctly. I found examples of similar
    configuration on DELL webpage but with PowerConnect 5000 which is 10 times
    more expensive. I don’t want to spend money for something which is not
    useful.
    Could you tell me if it will work? Maybe some additional advices about this
    configuration? Is any better solution?
    And just in case (I know we can’t use teaming for Hyper-V) maybe someone
    found solution for high availability for public Hyper-V network similar like
    for iSCSI network?
    Best Regards




      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  2. #2


    Charlie Russel - MVP Guest

    Re: iSCSI and switch high availibility

    Teaming is probably not a good idea around Hyper-V at this point. Last I
    heard here, it was creating issues.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

    "Piotr" <Piotr@xxxxxx> wrote in message
    news:03587C5D-C800-4CBF-B522-7A9EECCFDE17@xxxxxx

    > Hi
    > Could you advice me if this configuration will work?
    > I want to use 4xDL380 G5 (as Hyper-V hosts and clustering) with 2xNIC on
    > each (working in team) for iSCSI network. Servers are connected to two
    > switches DELL PowerConnect 2724. Every NIC from team plugged to different
    > switch. I’m going to use DELL MD3000i with two controllers (4 ports)
    > connected to the some switches. Everything to eliminate single point of
    > failure (NICs and Switches).
    > I wonder if these switches will work correctly. I found examples of
    > similar
    > configuration on DELL webpage but with PowerConnect 5000 which is 10 times
    > more expensive. I don’t want to spend money for something which is not
    > useful.
    > Could you tell me if it will work? Maybe some additional advices about
    > this
    > configuration? Is any better solution?
    > And just in case (I know we can’t use teaming for Hyper-V) maybe someone
    > found solution for high availability for public Hyper-V network similar
    > like
    > for iSCSI network?
    > Best Regards
    >

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  3. #3


    Piotr Guest

    Re: iSCSI and switch high availibility

    Many thanks for your reply.

    I noticed that teaming cause some problems with Hyper-V (I wasn’t able to
    find another solution to provide high availability for Hyper-V network – any
    ideas? I wonder especially about switch).
    However I’m going to use teaming for iSCSI network. Do you think it will
    cause problems as well?


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > Teaming is probably not a good idea around Hyper-V at this point. Last I
    > heard here, it was creating issues.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    > "Piotr" <Piotr@xxxxxx> wrote in message
    > news:03587C5D-C800-4CBF-B522-7A9EECCFDE17@xxxxxx

    > > Hi
    > > Could you advice me if this configuration will work?
    > > I want to use 4xDL380 G5 (as Hyper-V hosts and clustering) with 2xNIC on
    > > each (working in team) for iSCSI network. Servers are connected to two
    > > switches DELL PowerConnect 2724. Every NIC from team plugged to different
    > > switch. I’m going to use DELL MD3000i with two controllers (4 ports)
    > > connected to the some switches. Everything to eliminate single point of
    > > failure (NICs and Switches).
    > > I wonder if these switches will work correctly. I found examples of
    > > similar
    > > configuration on DELL webpage but with PowerConnect 5000 which is 10 times
    > > more expensive. I don’t want to spend money for something which is not
    > > useful.
    > > Could you tell me if it will work? Maybe some additional advices about
    > > this
    > > configuration? Is any better solution?
    > > And just in case (I know we can’t use teaming for Hyper-V) maybe someone
    > > found solution for high availability for public Hyper-V network similar
    > > like
    > > for iSCSI network?
    > > Best Regards
    > >
    >
    >

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  4. #4


    Edwin vMierlo [MVP] Guest

    Re: iSCSI and switch high availibility

    Teaming for iSCSI is not supported

    Multiple NIC's and having MPIO in combination with the iSCSI initiator using
    multiple paths is supported
    see iSCSI product documentation for information.



    rgds,
    Edwin.



    "Piotr" <Piotr@xxxxxx> wrote in message
    news:03587C5D-C800-4CBF-B522-7A9EECCFDE17@xxxxxx

    > Hi
    > Could you advice me if this configuration will work?
    > I want to use 4xDL380 G5 (as Hyper-V hosts and clustering) with 2xNIC on
    > each (working in team) for iSCSI network. Servers are connected to two
    > switches DELL PowerConnect 2724. Every NIC from team plugged to different
    > switch. I'm going to use DELL MD3000i with two controllers (4 ports)
    > connected to the some switches. Everything to eliminate single point of
    > failure (NICs and Switches).
    > I wonder if these switches will work correctly. I found examples of
    similar

    > configuration on DELL webpage but with PowerConnect 5000 which is 10 times
    > more expensive. I don't want to spend money for something which is not
    > useful.
    > Could you tell me if it will work? Maybe some additional advices about
    this

    > configuration? Is any better solution?
    > And just in case (I know we can't use teaming for Hyper-V) maybe someone
    > found solution for high availability for public Hyper-V network similar
    like

    > for iSCSI network?
    > Best Regards
    >


      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  5. #5


    Piotr Guest

    Re: iSCSI and switch high availibility

    Many thanks for your reply

    So MPIO will provide iSCSI network redundancy. Heart Beat network is also
    not support in NIC teaming. But in this case I can use two NIC in different
    subnets.
    But what about Hyper-V? How I can provide fail over for guests? Any idea?

    Best Regards


      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  6. #6


    Antonio Soto Guest

    Re: iSCSI and switch high availibility

    Hi Piotr,

    My understanding is that you should use Clustering for HA in resources.
    Perhaps this link could help you
    http://blogs.msdn.com/clustering/arc...1/8628515.aspx

    Regards!
    Antonio Soto

    "Piotr" <Piotr@xxxxxx> wrote in message
    news:21BAAA42-3247-4C8E-99F5-6A56FD2C4CCA@xxxxxx

    > Many thanks for your reply
    >
    > So MPIO will provide iSCSI network redundancy. Heart Beat network is also
    > not support in NIC teaming. But in this case I can use two NIC in
    > different
    > subnets.
    > But what about Hyper-V? How I can provide fail over for guests? Any idea?
    >
    > Best Regards
    >

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  7. #7


    Piotr Guest

    RE: iSCSI and switch high availibility

    Many thanks for yours help. Now I just knnow there is no way to provide
    authomatic failover for Hyper-V guests NICs. It is not good news for me but I
    have clarity.
    Thanks again and have a good weekend.

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

iSCSI and switch high availibility problems?

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Third NIC in SBS2003 for iSCSI Andy Roxburgh SBS Server 4 23 Dec 2009
Iscsi hegde PowerShell 0 11 Aug 2009
ISCSI SAN / fiber san IT Staff Virtual Server 3 08 Oct 2008
PowerShell and iSCSI BJ Stigall PowerShell 0 20 Sep 2008
Can you help with this iSCSI error? Julian Vista General 2 21 Apr 2008