Comments on: NetApp iGroup Strategies for VMware ESX

By: Brandon

Brandon — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 19:02:59 +0000

Rich and Yasir, I’m in EXACTLY the same situation. I have setup individual iGroups for each ESX host and when I present a LUN using the NetApp I make sure to map it to each IGroup(ESX host).

Now, I need to have an RDM connected to a VM but can I create another iGroup as type “Windows” (instead of VM) but still use the same WWN as the other ESX iGroups?

I guess the only way to know is to test it, but my environment is EXTREMELY new and we are running short on time before our migration.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

By: Yasir

Yasir — Thu, 30 Dec 2010 06:08:04 +0000

Rich, I think i saw same question from you on now site. I
am stuck with the same problem, did you find an answer for this? If
so can you please share. Thanks Y

By: Richard Gray

Richard Gray — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:46:24 +0000

Hi Scott,

What should one do when using RDMs on a NetApp Filer presented to ESX?
Consider, I have a VMFS LUN and an RDM LUN, both need to be presented to my ESX hosts. NetApp advises that my VMFS LUN be setup as a VMware ‘type’ and as the RDM is native to the guest OS it should be configured as needed, for me it’ll be a Windows ‘type’.
When it comes to the iGroup it NEEDS to match the LUN type it is being mapped against. This is fine I will create 2 iGroups (esx_vmfs & esx_rdm) – 1 for each ‘type’….BUT, I can not have my ESX HBA WWNs added to more than 1 iGroup if it is of a differnent ‘type’!!!

Im stuck as to what to do for the best.

Do I create both LUNs as either Windows or VMware or go a bit complicated and use iSCSI for my VMFS LUN (I’m only using this VMFS LUN to store the RDM mapping files – everything else is NFS). But I dont see that as the answer becuase ‘what if’ my VMFS LUNs were used by VMs etc. Also I really didnt want to use all 3 protocols in my enivronment!!

Are these LUN types and iGroup types really that crucial?
Would appreciate any thoughts you have on this

Also David, surely suggesting only the ESX hosts that have a running MCSC VM have the LUNs exposed to them, will that not actually limit HA/DRS quite considerably.

Rich.

By: Ben Hale

Ben Hale — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 04:21:02 +0000

When mapping a Windows machine to see the ESX LUNs for vRanger, using VCB..they recommend making the LUNs read only to the Windows machine. How do you do that in the NetApp filer?

By: David Maldonado

David Maldonado — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 19:44:32 +0000

One good reason for going with multiple igroups is if you are hosting VMs in a MSCS cluster and using RDM LUNs; AND only certain ESX hosts in the cluster have participating MSCS guest VMs. According to KB article 1009287 (http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=1009287); “For ESX machines that are exposed to the LUNs used by Microsoft Clustering and no virtual machine on these hosts are involved in MSCS, VMware recommends that you do not expose the LUNs used by MSCS to ESX hosts that are not part of the Cluster configuration. “

By: John

John — Wed, 20 May 2009 17:38:43 +0000

Thank you very much, I had this question/concern for a while.

By: slowe

slowe — Tue, 19 May 2009 14:33:40 +0000

John,

You’ll want to create a separate igroup (type Windows) for the VCB proxy server, and place the VCB proxy in that igroup. Then map the LUNs (using the same LUN IDs as for the ESX/ESXi hosts!) and you should be OK. Hope this helps!

By: John

John — Tue, 19 May 2009 13:16:21 +0000

How about when you want a windows host to access the VMware LUNs for VCB(VMware Consolidated Backup)? Should the initiator group os type for the Windows host be Windows or VMware?

By: Steve Fraser

Steve Fraser — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 16:51:57 +0000

Understood. I had mistakenly been under the assumption we were dealing with iSCSI. Of course zoning is done at the fabric level. Using Fiber Channel where you can set up SI/ST zoning, I believe it would be best to choose the strategy that works best for your environment and Administrators (which is most likely going to be having separate iGroups for individual ESX clusters as Rich suggested). However on iSCSI I would still be wary of presenting all the LUNs from the same iGroup, because you lose the ability to set up proper zoning as iSCSI works on the TCP/IP protocol for switching and routing, instead of FCP.

By: slowe

slowe — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 16:09:15 +0000

Steve, you are correct–single initiator zoning (or even single initiator/single target zoning) is a best practice. However, NetApp igroups are independent of zoning; they are a way of managing LUN presentation, not initiator/target visibility. So, it would be very possible to use a SI or SI/ST zoning method but still place all the initiators into a single igroup so that they can see a LUN.

Zoning works at the fabric level, while NetApp igroups work at the storage array level. They are two different things.

I hope this makes sense to you. Thanks for reading!