howto uplink switches keeping fabrics seperated

[Anonymous]

hi guys,

i am stuck in a problem bringing up an isl

here is the scenario:

we have an existing hp c-class bladecenter with 2 brocade 4/12 fc interconnects. by historical reasons the 2 switches work as seperated fabrics. they connect esx-servers running on blades to storage connected by the external links. both switches run in switch-mode (not access gateway) and hold their own zoneconfig.

as our environment is growing we decided to buy some new standalone-servers and 2 brocade 300 san switches.

now i want to connect the new switches to these in the bladecenter to make the storage visible to the new servers.

i want to avoid a merge of the fabrics as it is extremely difficult to schedule downtime for the whole system. following the advice of a buddy, i thought it would be a good idea to disable "e-port" on the isl-ports of the switches to avoid auto-fabridmerge and then to configure zones containing the appropriate server/storage- and isl-ports.

well, it turns out, that plan does not work, the islports show up as g-ports now and no connectivity comes up.

i have been searching the internet for ages and found tons of documents about merging fabrics, but nothing that would help me out.

i would appreciate any help about how to connect switches and configure cross-switch-zoning the right way without beeing forced to do a fabric-merge or how to merge zones without interruption of connectivity (i read that merging always brings down connectivity for a few seconds while recreating the zone-db)

thanks for your time and help in advance

regards

martin

[Antonio Bongiorno T…]

If you want to "uplink" BTW, correct definition is ISL = Inter Switch Link, and don't want to merge the Fabric, such is possible only with IR = Intergrated Routing or FCR = Fibre Channel Routing Capable Swithes.

Brocade 300 is not IR capable.

[Anonymous]

thnaks for your reply.

well, not good... what would be the right way, to bring that stuff to work? is there any chance to avoid merging?

i also thought about creating 2 fabrics, each consisting of one bladesw and one standalone-sw. but then i am concerned of loosing the cfg, because the bladeswitches hold a big zone-db, but the older firmware (on these models the latest supported sw is 6.2.2.f, the newer standalonswitches are on 7.0.0.c). i read the switch with the newer firmware should be selected as principal.

i read so many docs about zonemerging the last days that i really feel confused about all that stuff...

[Antonio Bongiorno T…]

--->>> is there any chance to avoid merging?

no sorry, any such is unkown to me. However, depend you Budget, a Used Brocade 7500 would be a great option.

ebay.com

--->>>  i read the switch with the newer firmware should be selected as principal.

"should be" but must not, is another story.

I have some situation by diverse Customer, and the config is mantained by old Switch.

[Antonio Bongiorno T…]

martin,

from you initial post

--->>>i would appreciate .../.....or how to merge zones without interruption of connectivity

Q 1:

what is the reason you want to ISL both Brocade 300 ?

config merge is very simple, and no disruptive.

Q 2:

the Bladecenter should be continued to have access to the Storage ?

--->>>we decided to buy some new standalone-servers

you can figure out NEW separate Zone in Brocade 300 for all those new Server, and present from the same Storage a own ( not shared ) LUN.

[Anonymous]

Hello Martin,

> i also thought about creating 2 fabrics, each consisting of one bladesw and one standalone-sw.

that's the way I would do it.

> but then i am concerned of loosing the cfg, because the bladeswitches hold a big zone-db, but the older firmware

You can only merge a switch with an empty (or same) zone-db into a fabric. The switch will then get the zone-db from the fabric, independent of the firmware version.

But you should have a look if the two versions are compatible.

HTH,

Christoph

[Anonymous]

hi,

thanks for your replies.

presenting seperated luns to tghe new servers is not possible, as it is an esxcluster and all servers need access to the same luns.

i read, that merging IS disruptive, as the zonedb is brought down and up. if this is not true, that would be a great help. can you confirm, that merging an empty switch to a switch with a config will niot interrupt hostaccess for e few seconds?

anyway, i think the idea with 2 fabitcs seems the best way. i can take one bladeswitch offline (disable hostports, as multipathing is correctly configured on the hosts), do a merge with one standalone-brocade, check everything and then enable the ports again. then doing the same with the other switches. (firmware releases are checked according to hp guidlines)

just wondering, if i will then ever find time and way to merge them all together to one fabric...

btw, another question: why are those blade-interconnects not delivered with an internal isl?? is there any way to merge them except connecting them by a cable through the external ports?

[Anonymous]

FYI, the 300 is actually routing capable, but you must purchase a Integrated Routing license for the switch.

[Antonio Bongiorno T…]

I've just reviewed UDP-108 Brocade Course.

Integrated Routing License for Brocade 300 is not Supported.

[Anonymous]

Yes, I'm sorry, you are correct.  I went back and read the FAQ and they do not in fact mention the 300 when talking about IRL.  My sales person/engineer lead me to believe that the new switches all had the routing capability.  Thank you for correcting me.  IRL will work on the 5100 on up.