cost reduction with ip storage - speichernetze

Ulf Troppens

Cost Reduction with IP Storage

Fibre ChannelSAN

Fibre ChannelSAN

FibreChannel

iSCSIGateway

iSCSI/TCP/IPSAN

iSCSI/TCP/IPSAN

iSCSI/TCP/IPSAN

2/36Rev 1.0

Ulf Troppens, Rainer Erkens:„Speichernetze“, dpunkt.Verlag 2003

© 2003 Ulf Troppenswww.speichernetze.com

Agenda

What is IP Storage?Why IP Storage?Customers are usingIP storage today!Is IP Storage suitable forhigh-end SANs?Conclusion

3/36Rev 1.0



Agenda


4/36Rev 1.0



Key Concept "Storage Network"

Detach the storage from the host and substitute the direct connection with a new networkHandle storage and servers as separate entitiesMove from a server centric IT-architecture to a storage centric IT-architecture

LAN

Server

Anwender

Server

Server

Anwender

Anwender

Anwender

Disk

Speichernetz

LAN

Disk

Anwender

Disk

Anwender

Anwender

Anwender

Disk Disk Disk

Server

Server

Server

5/36Rev 1.0



Storage Networks in the I/O Path

Application

Device Driver

Database

NetworkFilesystem

File-basedStorage Network

NetworkFilesystem

LocalFilesystem

Volume Manager

Block-basedStorage Network

NFSCIFSHTTPDAFS

SCSIFibre Channel FCPiSCSI

6/36Rev 1.0



Techniques for Storage Networks

Transmission TechnicsFibre Channel (FC-0, FC-1, FC-2)Fast EthernetGigabitEthernetSCSI CableInifiniBand

Gateway and Tunneling protocolsIP over Fibre Channel (IPFC)Fibre Channel over IP (FCIP)

Transport protocolsFibre Channel (FC-2, FC-3)TCP/IPUDP/IPVirtual Interface Architecture (VIA) /Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA)

Block-basedSCSIFibre Channel (FCP)Internet SCSI (iSCSI)Internet FCP (iFCP)

File-basedNFSCIFSHTTPDAFS

RAM-basedRemote Direct MemoryAccess (RDMA)

7/36Rev 1.0



Fibre Channel FCP

Fibre ChannelSwitch

Disk DiskDiskDisk

Server

Cabling: Fibre ChannelProtocol: SCSI

8/36Rev 1.0



Internet SCSI (iSCSI)

EthernetSwitch

Disk DiskDiskDisk

Server

Cabling: TCP/IP/EthernetProtocol: SCSI

9/36Rev 1.0



Fibre Channel over IP (FCIP)

Fibre ChannelSAN

Fibre ChannelSANIP Backbone

NL-PortNL-Port

NL-Port

NL-Port NL-Port

NL-Port NL-Port

NL-Port

NL-PortNL-Port

FCIP FCIP

10/36Rev 1.0



Internet FCP (iFCP)Metronet FCP (mFCP)

IP BackboneIP SANFL-PortiFCP

FL-PortiFCP

FL-PortiFCP

FL-PortiFCP

FL-PortiFCP

NL-Port

NL-PortNL-Port

NL-PortNL-Port

IP SANFL-PortiFCP

FL-PortiFCP

FL-PortiFCP

FL-PortiFCP

FL-PortiFCP

NL-Port

NL-Port NL-Port

NL-Port NL-Port

11/36Rev 1.0



Internet Storage Name Service (iSNS)

... is just a name service

... used by iSCSI and iFCP/mFCPNote: FCIP does not need a name service!

12/36Rev 1.0



Comparison

IP / EthernetIP / EthernetIP / EthernetiSCSI

IP / EthernetIP / EthernetFibre Channel

iFCP

IP / EthernetFibre Channel

Fibre Channel

FCIP

Fibre Channel

Fibre Channel

Fibre Channel

Fibre Channel FCP

Transport(Wire)

Fabric Services(Routing)

Storage / Server(HBA)

13/36Rev 1.0



Agenda


14/36Rev 1.0



Why IP Storage?

Technically, Fibre Channel is better than IPFibre Channel has an integrated protocol stackFibre Channel is well established in production environments

IP Storage (iSCSI, FCIP, iFCP/mFCP)IP Storage is in the early marketIP Storage has an higher protocol overhead

BUTTCP/IP/Ethernet has utterly wiped out other protocols IP Storage will be sufficient (most likely)IP Storage will be cheaper (most likely)

15/36Rev 1.0



TCP/IP/Ethernet has utterly wiped out other protocols

Data is already IPLAN (NFS, CIFS, application specific protocols, ... )Internet (HTTP, FTP, ... )MAN (Pilots with Gigabit Ethernet)

File level storage is IPNFS, CIFS, FTP, HTTP (see above)

Block level storage starts using IPFCIP, iSCSI

Voice starts moving to IP (VoIP)New office buildings !!Cisco IBM Agreement

Gigabit Ethernet switch for the desktop

Everything will be TCP/IP/Ethernet !!!

16/36Rev 1.0



IP Storage will be cheaper than Fibre Channel

One single IP based network is easier to managethan three

Only IP skills requiredOnly one physical network in office buildingsMore flexible assignment of bandwidth

IP Storage components will be cheaper thanFC components

IP market volume >> Fibre Channel market volumeeconomy of scale is better for IP components(mass production)

More competitionCisco "meets" Brocade, Inrange, and McDataEthernet NIC vendors "meet" Emulex, JNI and QLogic

17/36Rev 1.0



Why IP Storage?

BUTTCP/IP/Ethernet has utterly wiped out other protocols ➼IP Storage will be sufficient (most likely) ???IP Storage will be cheaper (most likely) ➼

18/36Rev 1.0



Agenda


19/36Rev 1.0



Case Study 1: Automated Tape Duplication

Goal: Automate tape duplication for desaster protectionTwo locations (10km distance)Gigabit Ethernet connection used during office hours

Idle over night

Gigabit Ethernet(Distance 10km)

20/36Rev 1.0




Goal: Automate tape duplication for desaster protectionTwo locations (10km distance)Gigabit Ethernet connection used during office hours

Idle over nightTape applications

iSeries (AS/400)No iSCSI drivers available !

Legato Networker running on Sun Solaris


iSeriesBRMS

SunLegato

Networker???

21/36Rev 1.0





iSeriesBRMS

SunLegato

Networker

2109-F16

3584 LTO

FCIP Gateway

iSeriesBRMS

SunLegato

Networker

2109-F16

3584 LTO

FCIP Gateway

22/36Rev 1.0




Legato Networker:Remote tape access using application specific protocol


iSeriesBRMS

SunLegato

Networker

2109-F16

3584 LTO

FCIP Gateway

iSeriesBRMS

SunLegato

Networker

2109-F16

3584 LTO

FCIP Gateway

23/36Rev 1.0




Legato Networker:Remote tape access using application specific protocoliSeries: Remote tape access using FCIP

30-40 MByte/s sequential write on LTO Generation 1 drive


iSeriesBRMS

SunLegato

Networker

2109-F16

3584 LTO

FCIP Gateway

iSeriesBRMS

SunLegato

Networker

2109-F16

3584 LTO

FCIP Gateway

24/36Rev 1.0




iSeriesBRMS

SunLegato

Networker

2109-F16

3584 LTO

FCIP Gateway

iSeriesBRMS

SunLegato

Networker

2109-F16

3584 LTO

FCIP Gateway


Legato Networker:Remote tape access using application specific protocoliSeries: Remote tape access using FCIP

30-40 MByte/s sequential write on LTO Generation 1 driveFuture: Encrypt WAN IP traffic using standard IP components

25/36Rev 1.0



Case Study 2: Booting via iSCSI

Boot servers from external Fibre Channel DisksubsystemiSCSI Disksubsystems are not (yet) very common

Save internal Fibre Channel HBAMay be cost saving if one Gigabit Ethernet NIC is sufficient for all traffic

Use external disks instead of internal diskLower TCO

Server Server Server Server ServeriSCSI Gateway

Disksubsystem

26/36Rev 1.0



Case Study 3: Microsoft Exchange

Requires a lot of storage but limited bandwidthMinimal CPU utilisation differences between iSCSI software and drivers and Fibre Channel HBAsiSCSI meets the performance requirements for many applications

Source: Cisco SystemsSource: Cisco

27/36Rev 1.0



Why IP Storage?

BUTTCP/IP/Ethernet has utterly wiped out other protocols ➼IP Storage will be sufficient (most likely) ➼ ?IP Storage will be cheaper (most likely) ➼

28/36Rev 1.0



Agenda


29/36Rev 1.0



Classification of I/O Requirements

N/ASome applications(e.g., centraldatabases)

Very high performance

Remote backupReplicationAsynchronous

MirroringData Movers

Most applicationsBooting servers

Average performance

High latency (remote)

Low latency (local)

30/36Rev 1.0



Classification of I/O Requirements

-?Very high performance

➼➼Average performance

High latency (remote)

Low latency (local)

31/36Rev 1.0



Technical requirements for very high local performance

Still open:FC protocol is still lighter than iSCSILatency in server >> Latency in SANFuture: Socked Direct Protocol (SDP)Future: iSCSI RDMA extensionMust be measured in real environments

Very low latency for fast application response time

TCP/IP Offload Engines (TOEs)iSCSI HBAsFuture: Socked Direct Protocol (SDP)Future: iSCSI RDMA extension

Low CPU load for I/O

Dedicated Networks for IP Storage10 GBit/s IP SANs in 2H03Trunking

Very high throughput

IP Storage

32/36Rev 1.0



Why IP Storage?

BUTTCP/IP/Ethernet has utterly wiped out other protocols ➼IP Storage will be sufficient (most likely) ➼ (?)IP Storage will be cheaper (most likely) ➼

33/36Rev 1.0



Agenda


34/36Rev 1.0



Why IP Storage?

Technically, Fibre Channel is better than IPFibre Channel has an integrated protocol stackFibre Channel is well established in production environments

IP Storage (iSCSI, FCIP, iFCP/mFCP)IP Storage is in the early marketIP Storage has an higher protocol overhead

BUTTCP/IP/Ethernet has utterly wiped out other protocols ➼IP Storage will be sufficient (most likely) ➼ (?)IP Storage will be cheaper (most likely) ➼

35/36Rev 1.0



Conclusion

FCIP is a key technology for connecting remote Fibre Channel SANsMany FCIP products are becoming available in 1H03

iSCSI is in the early market todayInteroperability is still an issue

iSCSI will meet the performance needs for most applicationsIt is still open whether iSCSI is sufficient forvery high performance requirementsFibre Channel is the best option for most local SANs todayiSCSI can be a nice add-on for already establishedFibre Channel SANsiSCSI may replace Fibre Channel in the long term

36/36Rev 1.0



Quellenangabe

Inhalte und Abbildungen der Präsentation

Speichernetze –Grundlagen und Einsatz von Fibre Channel SAN, NAS, iSCSI und InfiniBand

Ulf Troppens, Rainer Erkens

1. Auflage 2003dpunkt.verlag, HeidelbergISBN 3-89864-135-X

Weiterführende Linkswww.speichernetze.com

cost reduction with ip storage - speichernetze

Documents