10 Replies to this discussion

 
There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.
Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.
Send me notifications when other members reply.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy
  • Guests
    Yes
    10 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Michael Tidmarsh
    Guests, why do you think it's the better networking choice?
    30,585 pointsBadges:
    report
  • hustxiangge
    yes
    10 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Rich Castagna
    Have any of your companies actually implemented FCoE? If so--how?
    875 pointsBadges:
    report
  • sudheercs

    Hi Folks,


    I have read an article 10 years back that Fibre Channel is dying but did not! FC is well known for connection oriented and trusted as a reliable protocol.


    FCoE has got its edge now with the support of 8/10 bit encoding (before it supported onlyt 64/66) but there will be an overhead to do the encapsulation of FC frames to IP packets.


    Further discussion can be made once we find more posting on this subject ..

    10 pointsBadges:
    report
  • ScottBrocade
    Seriously? FCoE is an inferior choice for mission critical storage. While it serves a purpose for top-of-rack server I/O consolidation deployments (majority Cisco UCS), it is dead for end-to-end storage networking deployments. Customers continue to buy Fibre Channel because of reliability, performance, and scalability. FCoE is built on Ethernet which is inherently less reliable. 10GbE is not faster than 16GFC (40GbE for FCoE isn't being deployed). FC has proven scalability with deployments that scale in the tens of thousands of ports. FCoE high port density deployments are far and few between. Customers are voting with their wallets and picking Fibre Channel or iSCSI for their block-based storage, not FCoE. 
    20 pointsBadges:
    report
  • ScottBrocade
    And BTW, the industry standard name for 32/128 Gb Fibre Channel is Gen 6 (it's not just 32Gb) http://fibrechannel.org/library/2014/02/fibre-channel-industry-association-announces-development-of-industrys-fastest-storage-networking.html

    20 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Genderhayes
    It is a protocol that wraps Fibre channel flames In ethernet frames provides the server side  connection for a FCOE network
    7,485 pointsBadges:
    report
  • cowboycraig

    Many Cisco UCS systems connect to SAN. FC vs FCoE, that is the question. 

    Cisco UCS be design is CNA vi FCoE to FI, and can continue out FCoE or FC. On the UCS platform the FCoE from CNA to FI is transparent and seems to work well. Does throw off standard SNMP IOD's used for performance but that is no big deal as NetFlow is part os UCSM 2.2x. Will see if that breaks down the CNA traffic through FI. 

    So FC vs. FCoE? At around 2.1x Policy Based Zoning came along on UCS. Policy Based Zoning is something Brocade should have figured out long ago. My preference is connecting the FI's to FC SAN via FC (will spare the fine details on this and different options) and using Policy Based Zoning. Brocade fabrics work fine but can not benefit from Policy Based Zoning at the FI (blah). 

    FCoE in my opinion (putting on flame suit) is a solution created for a problem that does not exist. Deploying the QoS etc on Nexus 5k or 7k and extra complexity does not serve. Most network engineers would avoid the unneeded complexity and get some MDS switches. It is like "Redistribution" between OSPF and EIGRP, it looks great on paper but in the real world a skillfully placed static route usually works just fine. The extra complexity would make troubleshooting etc a nightmare. Since a SAN Device will have a set number of ports needed for FCoE or FC, don't see the reduced cabling. This is all from the Cisco UCS perspective. 

    I linked to this on my blog here: http://realworlducs.com/cisco-vp-were-still-into-fc-storage-but-fcoe-is-doing-fine/

    0 pointsBadges:
    report
  • ScotOwens
    cowboycraig,
       if you don't mind an alternate view.

    I looked at some plans for some new data center space today.  Up to maybe 75 racks.   IP and storage.
    I guarantee you if I could cut in half the number of cable/fiber runs and the number of networking/san devices and it could be with technology that was not "new" ... in a heartbeat ..
    Its what we do with UCS and have for many a year with no problems.
    10 pointsBadges:
    report

Forgot Password

No problem! Submit your e-mail address below. We'll send you an e-mail containing your password.

Your password has been sent to:

To follow this tag...

There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Thanks! We'll email you when relevant content is added and updated.

Following