The last few generations of HP ProLiant systems have featured an option to share the ILO functionality with the first network interface. I'm in a situation where per-port costs on the switch I'm using the a co-lo facility are fairly high. I can save a port per server by not using the dedicated ILO interface. Is there any disadvantage to doing so? I've run with it on a few systems, and it works, but I'm sure there's a reason it's not the standard. I'd appreciate any insight.
HP ProLiant – Disadvantages of Shared ILO Port
hphp-proliantilo
Related Topic
- Remote RIB iLO on Proliant via RIBCL
- HP ILO 3 – Fixing XML Syntax Errors with Hponcfg Utility
- HP ProLiant DL360 G7 Hangs at ‘Power and Thermal Calibration’ – Troubleshooting
- DL380 G4 dead after erasing NVRAM
- How to View HP ProLiant Server IML Log from Within ESXi
- In hponcfg for iLO config, what’s the difference between “YES” and “LOM” for “SHARED_NETWORK_PORT”
- HP Proliant DL80 Gen9 cannot connect to iLO
Best Answer
I believe that you need to weigh up the pro's and cons of the sharing the hardware.
Sharing the NIC would allow you to save a little bit of money on your colo costs which is a good thing, however by going down a shared ILO route you should consider:
At the end of the day I can't give concrete advice, its just a decision you need to make based on your business needs and available funds.