If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
DWDM w/FCP->IP converters.
We are starting to plan out our DWDM core, one of the major apps driving
this will be our HDS 9980 and our net design group is thinking about using FCP-IP converters with 10GigabitE backbone for our brocade switches which will be located at different datacenters, one of the issues they brough up which sounds valid is that we only had 32 channels/lambda and it would be very wastefull to provide all these channels and we should look into doing ISL trunking on the brocade switches and they will do the protocol encapsulation and send it all over IP i'm still fairly new to the SAN world, can anyone give me pros and cons to their proposal ? Our DWDM core isnt dedicated for the HDS please keep that in the back of your mind. [D1] [D2] [b] =[b] =[b]=[b] \\ // [b]=[b] [D3] D = Datacenter B = Brocade So my question is if we use ISL trunking on the brocade switches will it still require additional lambda channels ? -- Rodrick R. Brown - Sr. Unix Systems Admin rbrown[(at)]rodrickbrown.com rbrown[(at)]nyc.gov |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Rodrick Brown" wrote in
: We are starting to plan out our DWDM core, one of the major apps driving this will be our HDS 9980 and our net design group is thinking about using FCP-IP converters with 10GigabitE backbone for our brocade switches which will be located at different datacenters, one of the issues they brough up which sounds valid is that we only had 32 channels/lambda and it would be very wastefull to provide all these channels and we should look into doing ISL trunking on the brocade switches and they will do the protocol encapsulation and send it all over IP i'm still fairly new to the SAN world, can anyone give me pros and cons to their proposal ? So my question is if we use ISL trunking on the brocade switches will it still require additional lambda channels ? If you use ISLs, you need a seperate channel for each link, two or more links to an ISL. I would probably steer clear of FC over IP solutions from a complexity and performance point of view - every time you encapsulate something, it'll cost you precious milliseconds of latency on your storage systems. On the up side, it'll save you money for the DWDM gear, but i don't know if that will be cheaper when you go and buy the FC-over-IP gear... -- /Jesper Monsted |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Jesper Monsted wrote in
4.163: If you use ISLs, you need a seperate channel for each link, two or more links to an ISL. That would be two or more links to a trunk (which most people should be using for redundancy). Damn that whisky... -- /Jesper Monsted |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Jesper Monsted writes:
If you use ISLs, you need a seperate channel for each link, two or more links to an ISL. I would probably steer clear of FC over IP solutions from a complexity and performance point of view - every time you encapsulate something, it'll cost you precious milliseconds of latency on your storage systems. On the up side, it'll save you money for the DWDM gear, but i don't know if that will be cheaper when you go and buy the FC-over-IP gear... I worked on a project last summer which originally was going to use two diversely routed DWDM links for networking and FC links. The budget was cut and so we ended up with a pair of GigaMAN links (plugged into gigabit switches we had/needed anyway) and four San Valley FCIP switches. Very simple design, gigabit on one side, FC on the other. Configuration is dead simple, took me about 10 minutes to learn from the San Valley reps who flew in to help us get up and running. Also supports throttling to less than 100% of the gigabit link if you want to share it with other IP traffic. The cost of the FCIP switches is quickly dwarfed when you look at even a year's worth of paying for DWDM or high speed MAN links, unless you already own the fiber in the ground and you aren't assuming its depreciation expense. Whether DWDM or high speed MAN makes more sense depends more on how much total bandwidth you need and your local telecomm options than anything else. BTW, the latency that the FCIP conversion adds, at least in the San Valley SL700 I'm familiar with, is in the low hundreds of microseconds. The latency of the link itself will usually from couple times that to a couple dozen times that depending on how far it has to go and the path it actually takes. I've seen a 50km link travel 300km through a half dozen exchanges, you need to get this information from the telco up front before you sign anything -- Douglas Siebert "I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day" -- Frank Sinatra |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SATA converters on DVD Drives | Newsreader | General | 1 | September 29th 04 03:05 AM |
SATA to IDE converters for SATA HD | Sprout | General | 3 | April 2nd 04 02:15 AM |
Abit NF7-S ATA to SATA converters how easy are they to get working ? | We Live For The One We Die For The One | Abit Motherboards | 0 | February 28th 04 05:19 PM |
Abit NF7-S ATA to SATA converters how easy are they to get working ? | We Live For The One We Die For The One | Abit Motherboards | 1 | February 28th 04 03:32 AM |
A7N8X Deluxe & IDE to SATA Converters | cal | Asus Motherboards | 4 | July 1st 03 11:30 AM |