• No replies
6 Posts

Pinned topic port- vs wwpn zoning for NPIV host attachment

‏2013-01-30T14:30:27Z |
Hello all,

We are discussing host attachments of our storage clients in a Brocade dual fabric SAN.

Hosts are IBM Power w/8gb FC ports w/Virtual FC (NPIV).
Existing storage system ports are wwpn zoned to the individual virtual (NPIV) ports.
Additional storage systems will be acquired.

Topic is: which Zoning flavour to choose.

Some recommend wwpn zoning (single initiator zones) which would mean zoning each new NPIV port to the storage ports.
Anyway, port Zoning to me seems much more manageable (fewer zones, initial zoning only, effortless provisioning of NPIV attached LPARs afterwards).

Q: Does port zoning (of the N-ports carrying the virtual/NPIV ports) introduce any disadvantages here?

We also have come across the recommendation to "not mix wwpn and port zoning".

Q: So, at what level is it recommended to not mix the 2 zoning flavours?
a) not in the same Zone? easily accomplished.
b) not on the same N-Port? would require separate ports on the IBM power systems to attach the new storage systems via port zoning.
Thanks for your input.