Re: FCoE Deployment

[David <david () davidswafford com>]

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).  

David

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 
> 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