Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of EndTheFed
EndTheFedFlag for United States of America

asked on

What is Best Practice for choosing VLANs/Subnets to use for Virtualization with Zerto DR?

Hi Experts,

Our current environment is all physical servers (bare metal). We will soon be doing a P2V for all servers. After the P2V we will be using Zerto for DRaaS.
Our VLANs currently look like this:
v10 - 10.10.10.0/24 - Static IP devices (user accessible) servers, NAS, production machinery
v20 - 10.10.20.0/24 - DHCP Clients (user accessible) desktops, laptops
v30 - 10.10.30.0/24 - Management (not user accessible) switches, routers, WAP, server DRAC, etc

My question is, following best practices, where would you put the Hosts, and where would you put the VMs?
Would you create a new VLAN for the hosts, the VMs, or both? It would be great to see feedback from multiple people to get a consensus.
My original thought was to put VMs in v10, and the Hosts in v30.
What I'm unsure of is, would it be beneficial to have them completely separate for DR purposes when failing over to Zerto, meaning absolutely no other devices are on the same VLAN+subnet as the VMs?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Avatar of Richardson Porto
Richardson Porto
Flag of Brazil image

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
Avatar of EndTheFed

ASKER

That's what I'm hoping for. It makes sense until I think about the Zerto DR portion. Here's a more detailed outline of my concern:
In a situation where the building still has power, but the Hosts go down, we would want to failover to Zerto. We connect by VPN, the route for v10 - 10.10.10.0/24 is changed from local to the VPN tunnel connecting to the servers on the DR side. Clients are now able to reach the servers, however they lose access to everything else on v10 such as NAS's and production machinery. Unless there's a completely different subnet on the DR side and you change the IPs of all servers when failing over, I don't see how you could retain access to the local network.