ISE 1.2 VM file system recommendation

[bcho]

Hi,

According to http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/ise/1.2/installation_guide/ise_vmware.html#wp1056074, tabl 4-1 discusses storage requirement for ISE 1.2 in VM environment.  It recommends VMFS.

What are the implications when using NFS instead?  Is this just a recommendation or an actual requirement?

At the moment, we use Netapp array which uses NFS for all vApps.  It will be difficult to justify a creation an additional FC HBA just for this one vApp.  Please explain.

TIA,

Byung

[Kevin P Sheahan]

That same document that you've referenced explicitly recommends against the use of NFS for storage.

I vaguely remember an ISE implementation that couldn't even get off the ground due to NFS storage. The ISO would not complete boot and therefore setup wouldn't even run.

ISE is a wonderful technology, I would work to justify the creation of an additional FC HBA.

Kind Regards,

Kevin

**Please remember to rate helpful posts as well as mark the question as 'answered' once your issue is resolved. This will help others to find your solution faster.

[Saurav Lodh]

If you refer to

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/ise/1.2/installation_guide/ise_vmware.html

It says :

Storage

•File System—VMFS We recommend that you use VMFS for storage. Other storage protocols are not tested and might result in some file system errors. •Internal Storage—SCSI/SAS •External Storage—iSCSI/SAN We do not recommend the use of NFS storage.

[Ravi Singh]

ISE VM versions are not installing. After  initial section to choose boot option (number 1 is selected for keyboard  and mouse), vmlinuz is loaded, initrd.img is loaded, then two more  lines of dots are showing on the VM console screen, with "ready" at the  end, and nothing is happening.

I was waiting for over an hour for  the next step (first with 1.1.2 and then with 1.1.1), and in the ISE  hardware installation guide is clearly written "20 minutes". When used  memory and processor were checked for the VM, the lines were flat on 0%.  The ESX host hardware spec was approved in Cisco ISE HLD. The only  difference is that the customer is using NFS file system not VMFS, but  nowhere in the installation guide is written that the image cannot be  installed on NFS.

This is the issue with file system. As in installation guide vmfs3 is being used.

[kaaftab]

For understanding the difference between both, there is an article

                     http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1185021

                     http://storagetexan.com/2010/03/25/the-debate-why-nfs-vs-block-access-for-osapplications/ 

also there is not much difference as if you existing environment is NFS so you should use it .(It will save cost)