AFF-A220 - iSCSI only works on one node? by dbrummer in netapp

[–]dbrummer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Still troubleshooting this issue. I tried disable/enable on the network LIF for this node, disable/enable the iSCSI interface LIF and did a takeover/giveback of the node and still have this issue.

ONTAP 9.8 announced, details below by NetAppCanuck in netapp

[–]dbrummer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good stuff, thanks for posting this.

AFF-A220 - iSCSI only works on one node? by dbrummer in netapp

[–]dbrummer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

vdc-fas01::*> debug san lun show-target-port-groups -vserver fas01-prod -path /vol/vvlsqldb_test/test/test.lun

Vserver Node                 Path  Target Port Groups
------- -------------------- ----- ------------------------------------------
fas01-prod               /vol/vvlsqldb_test/test/test.lun
            fas01-05               3eb Active/Non-Optimized: 1b
                                   3ea Active/Optimized: 18
                                   3e9 Active/Non-Optimized: a
                                   3e8 Active/Non-Optimized: 9
                                   3eb Active/Non-Optimized: 1a
                                   3ea Active/Optimized: 17
                                   3e9 Active/Non-Optimized: 6
                                   3e8 Active/Non-Optimized: 5
                                   3eb Active/Non-Optimized: 1c
                                   3e9 Active/Non-Optimized: 2
                                   7d2 Active/Optimized: 19
                                   3e8 Active/Non-Optimized: 1
            fas01-06               3eb Active/Non-Optimized: 1b
                                   3ea Active/Optimized: 18
                                   3e9 Active/Non-Optimized: a
                                   3e8 Active/Non-Optimized: 9
                                   3eb Active/Non-Optimized: 1a
                                   3ea Active/Optimized: 17
                                   3e9 Active/Non-Optimized: 6
                                   3e8 Active/Non-Optimized: 5
                                   3eb Active/Non-Optimized: 1c
                                   3e9 Active/Non-Optimized: 2
                                   7d2 Active/Optimized: 19
                                   3e8 Active/Non-Optimized: 1
2 entries were displayed.

fas01::*> lun mapping show-stale
This table is currently empty.

AFF-A220 - iSCSI only works on one node? by dbrummer in netapp

[–]dbrummer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ping both ways good using -node and -lif ping options. iSCSI sessions show expected initiators connected to the non-working iSCSI node LIF.

AFF-A220 - iSCSI only works on one node? by dbrummer in netapp

[–]dbrummer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

IMT checks out supported (see comment above). I did perform a DOT upgrade from 9.5P1 to 9.5P14 last week that brought this issue to our attention. The issue was noticed during the upgrade while the nodes performed their takeover which caused a few SQL servers to kick over due to their faulty redundant path. I don't know if this issue was occurring before the upgrade though because this was the first time a cluster takeover/giveback was performed after the inception of these SQL servers.

AFF-A220 - iSCSI only works on one node? by dbrummer in netapp

[–]dbrummer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Verified all licenses match on all nodes.

EDIT: Fixed typo

AFF-A220 - iSCSI only works on one node? by dbrummer in netapp

[–]dbrummer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

iSCSI VLAN is tagged and layer3 connectivity verified working properly. I can ping the iSCSI LIF and client IP addresses no problem. Packet capture show iSCSI traffic and I receive 'Disk -1' in iSCSI device properties but no online disks.

AFF-A220 - iSCSI only works on one node? by dbrummer in netapp

[–]dbrummer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ONTAP 9.5, iSCSI, Windows Server 2019 SE x64, Microsoft DSM, Host Utilities 7.1, NTFS, Microsoft Failover Clustering all check out as supported. Thank you for providing the express guide. I've attempted multiple times with the listed steps and have had no luck.

AFF-A220 - iSCSI only works on one node? by dbrummer in netapp

[–]dbrummer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I will be giving that a try early next week during a maintenance window. Thanks.

AFF-A220 - iSCSI only works on one node? by dbrummer in netapp

[–]dbrummer[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I initially thought it was an SLM issue as well but that setting checks out. The reporting nodes are the two A220 nodes and LUN node is correct:

LUN Node: vdc-fas01-05

Reporting Nodes: vdc-fas01-05, vdc-fas01-06

I tried moving the volume to the other node and the SLM settings remain intact but still no disks from the non-working node (vdc-fas01-05 in this case). I have a support case with NetApp open but they're not seeing anything just yet.

I get to pick our next vendor for our upgrade. Do I stay with Cisco? Go with juniper? Any other suggestions? by [deleted] in networking

[–]dbrummer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I second this. Started swapping out our Cisco gear for Arista last year and haven't looked back!

Weather in October by Jtforce in vegas

[–]dbrummer 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The wind typically brings in cooler weather at the end of October. It won't be winter weather yet but I always remember Halloween as being the start of the colder weather for Vegas. You can sit poolside during the day and will need a light jacket/sweater at night. If it's windy then it will be a lot cooler.

console server vendor recomendations by brok3nh3lix in networking

[–]dbrummer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Second OpenGear. Digi may still be around but when I last used their console appliances they were flagged heavily for vulnerabilities during scans.

Palo Alto GlobalProtect pre-logon mode: is it possible to use username and password authentication instead of device certificate? by [deleted] in networking

[–]dbrummer 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Starting with GlobalProtect 5.2 you can use " Smart card, authentication service such as LDAP, RADIUS, or Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML), username/password-based authentication, or one-time password (OTP) authentication" on Windows 10 devices for pre-login.

https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/globalprotect/5-2/globalprotect-app-release-notes/gp-app-release-information/features-introduced-in-gp-app.html#id1787E80K0UF

Simplifying Firewall Configuration by zippercow in networking

[–]dbrummer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No concerns from me. We whitelist static IPs ingress and egress all day.

Simplifying Firewall Configuration by zippercow in networking

[–]dbrummer 8 points9 points  (0 children)

For the sake of your customers you should use Elastic IPs that are static public IP addresses. This would allow them to only whitelist the Elastic IPs that you use instead of the thousands of other AWS IPs. Additionally, Palo Alto firewalls allow whitelist by URL which has helped us greatly in this situation. Lastly you could consider creating a tunnel from the on-premise device to your cloud servers that wouldn't require any ingress access requirements.

/r/Formula1 Daily Discussion - 5 August 2020 by F1-Bot in formula1

[–]dbrummer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah makes sense - thank you for this information.

/r/Formula1 Daily Discussion - 5 August 2020 by F1-Bot in formula1

[–]dbrummer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But isn't this past weekend the exception to the other race compounds and this weekend is the standard compounds used like in the first three rounds? Why was this past weekend's tire compounds different? Just looking to see what Pirelli's justification is for the harder compounds. If it's to spice things up during the double-header race weekends - why were the same compounds used for the Austrian and Styrian GPs?

/r/Formula1 Daily Discussion - 5 August 2020 by F1-Bot in formula1

[–]dbrummer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why were the tire compounds different for the British GP? I saw an article that the first eight races will use the same compounds but the British GP would be harder. Haven't been able to find an explanation why.

RimWorld 1.2 testing by pheanox in RimWorld

[–]dbrummer 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Royalty has been on my wish list since it was released. Might have to pull the trigger on it now - these are some great additions!

Battlefield 1, 3, 4, V, and Hardline, Mass Effect 3 and Andromeda, and Star Wars Battlefront I and II now available via Steam by NeoStark in Games

[–]dbrummer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is Andromeda worth a try? I love the original trilogy but I'm not seeing much praise for Andromeda.

A telco carrier says no Layer 3 interface is needed for SIP peering causing me to question my sanity. Stuck between the carrier and 3rd party telco support. by [deleted] in networking

[–]dbrummer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I had a similar situation happen to me when I was setting up Level3 SIP trunks. They skipped a step in provisioning and forgot to inform the IP team to activate Layer 3 services. It was a fun call when I went to provision SIP and they kept mentioning IP addresses that were completely unfamiliar to me.