Hi everyone,

I a few weeks I will be setting up a new (8-node) SVC cluster with DS8950F as back-end storage, customer already has a similar setting in production, and zoning-wise, it only has two zones in total, one per fabric, that includes all the back-end storage ports and all the SVC (storage dedicated) ports, what makes a total of 24 aliases per zone, 16 initiators and 8 targets (x2 fabrics) all together:

For the new infra, I am wondering if it wouldn't be more advisable to make 16 zones per fabric, each one including only one SVC port (initiator) and all the DS8k ports (targets). Either case, SVC using those ports for intracluster traffic will not be an issue, because I will be using dedicated intracluster ports and aplying a local fc port mask to allow those ports only... what is your input on this matter?

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------
Sergio Pardos
------------------------------

Hello Sergio,

Have a look at Redbook: IBM System Storage SAN Volume Controller Best Practices and Performance Guidelines 

Some statements in this book:

Note: Use Smart and Peer zoning for the host zoning only. Use traditional zoning for intracluster, back-end, and intercluster zoning.

and

Chapter 2.4.4

Create one zone per IBM Spectrum Virtualize system node per fabric. IBM Spectrum Virtualize must access the same storage ports on all nodes. Otherwise, the DS8900F operation status is set to Degraded on the IBM Spectrum Virtualize system.

Sample:

Hope this helps.

Hi Sergio,

For simplicity, I think it is OK to stick to 1 zone instead of creating 16 separate ones. 

Like you said, potential SAN traffic between P3 or P4 of SVC nodes cannot occur because you are using local (and eventually remote also) portmask which means that  P3 and P4 can do host/storage traffic only.

Kind regards,