WoL - Use Inband or OOB?

[robin99]

Hi all,

My client is using UCSM 2.2 and we want to enable WoL functionality. I understand we can now use OOB or inband mgmt IP attached to the service profile. From network perspective I would prefer using inband when possible due to network redundancy. Has anyone implemented WoL and able to share experience on this and if there is any drawback with inband WoL method compared to OOB?

thanks,

Robin

[Walter Dey]

In band is 1G only and shared. OOB is dedicated and 10G !

The two OOB management interface addresses that can be configured in Cisco UCS Manager blade and rack servers are:

• An OOB IPv4 address assigned to the physical server via the global ext-mgmt pool
• An OOB IPv4 address derived from a service profile associated with the physical server

In addition, up to four inband management interface addresses can be configured:

• An inband IPv4 address assigned to the physical server
• An inband IPv4 address derived from a service profile associated with the physical server
• An inband IPv6 address assigned to the physical server
• An inband IPv6 address derived from a service profile associated with the physical server

Multiple inband management IP addresses for each server support additional CIMC sessions. When you configure both OOB and inband addresses, users can choose from a list of those addresses in the KVM Console dialog box when they launch KVM from a server, SSH to SoL, a service profile, the KVM Launch Manager, or from the Cisco UCS Manager GUI web URL.

CIMC inband access supports the following services:

• KVM Console

• SSH to CIMC for SoL

• vMedia for ISO, virtual CD/DVD, removable disk, and floppy

[robin99]

Hi Walter, thanks for your response but I am still confuse. The blade servers (B200M3 and B200M4)are using 10G adapter links. In this scenario, do you mean I cannot use inband and has to use OOB port on UCS Fabric Interconnect for WoL to function?

[Walter Dey]

Robin

Yes of course; you can use both options inband and OOB.

Maybe I don't understand your question; don't hesitate to ask further questions; and describe what you actually want to achieve.

Btw. I don't believe that B-Series Server support WoL (in BIOS).

Thanks Walter.

[robin99]

Thanks for your response again. Really sad B series does not support WoL. One more question: my client has mixed B and C series under single wire management. Would WoL work in this setup? The C series servers are connected via Nexus 2232PP and upstream ports connected to UCS FI.

[Walter Dey]

The C-Series server (see http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/servers-unified-computing/ucs-c-series-rack-servers/datasheet-listing.html)

do have a WoL interface:

The 1-Gb Base-T Ethernet LAN ports support the wake-on-LAN (WoL)standard.

I don't think that the blade B-Series have one !

Walter.

[robin99]

the C series servers under single wire management is ONLY using 2 x10G link to N2232PP and using VIC1225. I think the dedicated CIMC port is locked down by UCSM in this mode so really just 10G unified link from UCS C servers. I could not find this WoL capability in cisco doc so is this a confirmation that I cannot use WoL at all in my situation?

[Walter Dey · Accepted solution]

The specifications of the C-Series found under

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/servers-unified-computing/ucs-c-series-rack-servers/datasheet-listing.html)

clearly document WoL.

If C-Series is integrated and managed by UCSM, there are other means to talk to CIMC, e.g. UCSM (GUI), XML, IPMI,Powershell, which replaces WoL; therefore WoL for standalone C-Series.

[robin99]

thanks Walter, I think I am going to use IPMI.

[Sakshi Saxena]

Hi Walter,

My customer is asking for WoL on UCS 2.1 release with only B-series servers. Just want to know if the following will be enough for this feature?

- Management IP pool configured under the service profile.

Do we need to create IPMI users and SoL policy too?