mailing list archives
Re: FCoE Deployment
From: David <david () davidswafford com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:10:32 -0500
our reason btw was to cut down on cabling/switch costs, it starts to add up when you consider how many blades get eated
by 1gb copper. going to DL580s amd a few hp chassis. A chassis used to eat nearly 64 copper 1gb and 32 fiber channel
connections. on FCoE/CNAs, we're literally talking 4 x 10gb cables (16 blades).
Sent from an email server.
On Feb 22, 2012, at 4:10 PM, Pierce Lynch <p.lynch () netappliant com> wrote:
FCoE was until very recently the only way to do centralized block storage
to the Cisco UCS server blades, so I'd imagine it's quite widely adopted.
That said, we don't run FCoE outside of the UCS <black box> - its uplinks
to the SAN are just regular FC.
Agreed, very much the only implementation I have come across FCoE installations for is Cisco UCS chassis. Personally,
it's not something that I have seen regularly adopted as of yet outside proprietary hardware configurations such as
Certainly also keen to understand as to any other use cases and deployments others have implemented using full-blown