FCoE Deployment

David david at davidswafford.com
Wed Feb 22 23:10:32 UTC 2012

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 at 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 UCS deployments.
> Certainly also keen to understand as to any other use cases and deployments others have implemented using full-blown FCoE.
> Kind regards,
> Pierce Lynch

More information about the NANOG mailing list