Standard_ITParticipantApril 28, 2019 at 2:35 pm #616617
When I started this project, I felt it would be a very simple project.
We have a Hyperv Host running multiple virtual machines. Our SQL Server is one of those virtual machines.
That SQL Server is having some issues, which we believe to be due to network connection. On the server, we have two extra Ethernet ports, which I wanted to use for this project.
Setup a simple 1 to 1 network for my Server and NAS device so they could speak without sharing their ethernet bandwidth.
I have 1 server, running Hyper-V. Let’s Call this HYPERVSERVER.
This HYPERVSERVER has multiple Virtual Machines running on it. Multiple NAS Devices connect via iSCSI initiator. These connections, are connected through the HOST Ethernet Pipe.
HYPERVSERVER has 4 Ethernet ports. Here is how they are delegated.
I have setup NIC Teaming for each port.
NIC Team for HOST machine. 192.168.2.X – Static IP Address on Main network
NIC Team for Virtual Machines – The Virtual SWITCH – DHCP on the 192.168.2.x Network
NIC Team for the SQL Virtual Machine – THE Virtual SWITCH – DHCP on the 192.168.2.x Network
NIC Team for – DIRECT CONNECTION to SQL Server Data on NAS Device. 172.16.100.201
On the NAS Device – it has multiple NICs.
192.168.2.x – static on main network – and works okay. We see our issue happen about 3-8 times per week. Sometimes 2+per day when its getting hit hard.
Now I thought I would simply be able to setup those two ethernets on the 172 network, with a similar subnet mask. I thought about doing 255.255.255.252 – but once it didn’t work, I reverted to use 255.255.255.0 as the subnet mask.
I expected these to ping and communicate flawlessly. Then we would have that SQL Server on its own ethernet, and also give the virtual machine its own virtual switch.
For some reason – we cant connect to the 172 network.
We have not been able to ping it at all.
There have been 2 times, where I could connect via browser via the 172 ip address.
The iscsi Initiator has not worked successfully yet.
The connection didn’t seem as fast as the 172 network, and on top of that, it was only for a minute. I feel like there was some extra communication and confusion in the NIC
After a minute it would lose connection and not be able to connect.
I feel like there has to be some routing table or something simple that will make this work.
I am hoping there is just something I am not seeing or thinking of.
All opinions and advise is appreciated!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.