About lamav

lamav · ‎02-20-2012

Thank you, Padramas....I dont understand why Cisco uses such a primitive way of accomplishing a link between the FCoE comnstruct and its associated FC element. Mapping each new server manually??? no way!

lamav · ‎02-20-2012

toshi, send me a private message and ill answer with my email address....

lamav · ‎02-19-2012

Or you can go with the Arista 7120-T. It has 20 1/10G Base T interfaces plus 4 SFP+.

lamav · ‎02-19-2012

Hi, Lucien: The qos configuration has changed so the settings you see in 5.0.3 have disabled fcoe to be enabled by default, to allow more buffer for ethernet. What??

lamav · ‎02-19-2012

Hi, Toshi: Most of these chat boards have become quite boring. Troubleshooting OSPF LSA problems is old news. But I do pop my head in every now and then. Also, there are so many other companies out there doing exciting things in the data center. You have Dell, Brocade, Arista, Juniper, etc. So one runs the risk of developing a myopic view of the world of IT by lingering around this board for too long. If you want to use the new B22 FEX for the HP c7000 blade chassis, you certainly can. That means the Nexus will receive the FCoE traffic and leverage its FCF functionality; either separate the Ethernet and FC traffic there, or create a VE-port instantiation with another FCF for multihop deployments. Good luck fighting the SAN team with that one! Another aspect of using the HP B22 is the fact that the FEX is largely plug and play, so you dont have to manage the Flex Fabric switches. HTH

lamav · ‎02-19-2012

Have you bound the VSAN to the FCoE VLAN? example: vlan 1000 fcoe vsan 2 name FCoE_VLAN

lamav · ‎02-19-2012

They may be interoperable, but IOS is much more stable and consistent than NX-OS. I have been testing with a couple of Nexus 5020s in my lab, running 5.0.3 NX-OS and it is inconsistent. For example, after erasing the startup configuration and rebooting on several occasions, sometimes the default QoS configs would appear and sometimes some statements would be missing. There are other quirks, too. Cisco needs to focus on the NX-OS and clean it up.

lamav · ‎02-19-2012

Toshi, with HP's Flex Fabric, the external ports that connect to the Nexus switch are 10G Ethernet, not FCoE. They are standard dot1q interfaces, so the Nexus will not be doing anything with regard to FCoE. It won't even see the FCoE traffic. The benefit of using Flex Fabric is the same you get when using Dell's M8428-k FCoE blade. Instead of using a separate 10G Ethernet and 8G FC blade switch, along with separate Ethernet NICs and FC HBAs, you use a single Flex Fabric switch module and a CNA. What's the benefit of using a Nexus as the Top-of-rack as far as FCoE and Flex Fabric? None. You can use any 10G dot1q switch. HTH Victor

lamav · ‎02-15-2012

What is a vfc and why do we need to configure it? I find this extremely tedious. I have a Dell blade CNA connected to a Dell M8024-k FCoE transit module, which is then connected to a Cisco Nexus 5K. The Cisco 5K's FC port is in NPIV mode and is connected to a Brocade 300 switch. An FC target is connected to the B300. So, in configuring this set up, I see that, in the Cisco 5K, one has to map the CNA's Ethernet MAC-address to a vfc! Why do I have to do this mapping? You dont have to do this with Brocade. For example, in another lab setup, I have a Dell M8428-k FCF (FCoE) switch, which is a Brocade ODM, and there is no such mapping necessary. You bring up a CNA at will, the CNA executees a FIP FLOGI, gets an FPMA from the FC fabric switch, and a construct is seamlessly built between that CNA (or perhaps more correctly stated, the N-Port component of that CNA) and a LUN. NO MANUAL MAPPING is necessary. Can someone explain this Cisco vfc construct and why one has to engage in this laborious task of mapping every CNA to a vfc? Just trying to understand....perhaps I am missing something. Thank you

lamav · ‎02-15-2012

Cmon. Nobody from Cisco has any input on this???

lamav · ‎02-14-2012

What is a vfc and why do we need to configure it? I find this extremely tedious. I have a Dell blade CNA connected to a Dell M8024-k FCoE transit module, which is then connected to a Cisco Nexus 5K. The Cisco 5K's FC port is in NPIV mode and is connected to a Brocade 300 switch. An FC target is connected to the B300. So, in configuring this set up, I see that, in the Cisco 5K, one has to map the CNA's Ethernet MAC-address to a vfc! Why do I have to do this mapping? You dont have to do this with Brocade. For example, in another lab setup, I have a Dell M8428-k FCF (FCoE) switch, which is a Brocade ODM, and there is no such mapping necessary. You bring up a CNA at will, the CNA executees a FIP FLOGI, gets an FPMA from the FC fabric switch, and a construct is seamlessly built between that CNA (or perhaps more correctly stated, the N-Port component of that CNA) and a LUN. NO MANUAL MAPPING is necessary. Can someone explain this Cisco vfc construct and why one has to engage in this laborious task of mapping every CNA to a vfc? Just trying to understand....perhaps I am missing something. Thank you

lamav · ‎09-11-2011

Jon, you always make sense and you have been my technical advisor for years. So nothing to be sorry about. I respect your opinions - always.

lamav · ‎09-11-2011

Giuseppe: I agree. I'll take a stable routed network with L3 isolation any day over huge L2 networks with band aid technologies to make Ethernet work differently than it has been for the last 30 years. Moreover, the lingering issues that TRILL does not resolve is the flat character of MAC addresses and the fact that the Ethernet control plane is still tied to the data plane (MAC learning as a product of forwarding). While we're on the subject, I'm no big fan of FCoE either. I have a lot of clients who have Nexus deployed in their data centers, but none of them is using the FCoE functionality. The DCB standards have only recently been ratified and they are still developing and we discover shortcomings. Also, standards like BB5 and ETS leave a lot of room for vendor implementation, like the scheduling algorithm that ETS uses. There are a lot of moving parts, from the virtualized components of the server, to the CNA, to the ToR switch, etc....and without vendor interoperability, vertical integration will have to come at the price of proprietary vendor lock-in.

lamav · ‎09-09-2011

Jon, no worries. I wasn't getting defensive, just a bit flabbergasted at the inability to get you to understand what I meant. So, just to reiterate...I am saying that VxLAN technology, as it is proposed today, can allow you to run a routing protocol in the access layer, thereby removing the need for any L2 inter-switch links in the network or STP, while at the same time providing the "illusion," if you will, of a spanned L2 domain through tunneling. This will allow you to execute vmotions and do other virtualization-based tasks that require a L2 adjacency without having to contend with TRILL or any other band aid to make Ethernet more scalable or to provide full cross-sectional bandwidth. No L2 multi-path. Instead, rely on L3 ECMP from the access layer to the core. EDIT: So, wrt competing, if someone wants to build a scaled out layer 2 domain, then TRILL is it. If someone wants to design a cloud based on L3 isolation, then VxLAN is it. They provide different solutions to 2 different approaches. Where they do compete is in the approach a network architect will want to take.

lamav · ‎09-09-2011

I agree, Edison. In my present position, we have these discussions every day. Cloud computing, FCoE, DCB, TRILL, VCS, Q-Fabric, Open Flow SDN, VxLAN, server-storage-network virtualization, VN-LINK, VEPA, etc. I don't have all the answers or a full understanding of VxLAN right now - I'm not sure anyone does, but it sounds very promising. It may have some advantages over TRILL in terms of deployment and management. I did a deep-dive white board session on TRILL a few months back, and I have to say that it is one of the most complex and seemingly-arbitrary protocols I have ever seen. The future should be interesting

Date Registered	‎01-15-2005 05:09 AM
Date Last Visited	‎08-18-2017 03:53 AM
Total Messages Posted	2,418
Total Helpful Votes Received	1216

Nexus 5548 and vfc Interfaces - WHY?

Re: Please shed some light on Data Cent...

Entry point for 10G networking

Nexus 5548 5596 to replace Cat 3750 and...

Re: Please shed some light on Data Cent...

problem with fcoe (brocade cna & nexus ...

Nexus 5548 5596 to replace Cat 3750 and...

Re: Please shed some light on Data Cent...

Nexus 5548 and vfc Interfaces - WHY?

Nexus 5548 and vfc Interfaces - WHY?

Nexus 5548 and vfc Interfaces - WHY?

VxLAN is here - now what?

Re: VxLAN is here - now what?

Re: VxLAN is here - now what?

VxLAN is here - now what?