Which statement about FCoE is true?

Question

Options

• AFCoE is not supported on any Nexus 2000 Series Fabric Extenders.
• BNot a single FCoE VLAN can map to multiple VSANs.
• CInter-switch FCoE links can be configured to carry multiple VSANs.
• DFCoE does not support NPV/NPIV mode.

• A
  10% (5)
• B
  14% (7)
• C
  73% (37)
• D
  4% (2)

Explanation

C is correct because FCoE inter-switch links (ISLs), implemented as VE_Port connections, support VSAN trunking - a single physical link can carry traffic for multiple VSANs simultaneously, each mapped to its own dedicated FCoE VLAN, just like traditional FC trunked E_Ports.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A is false - certain Nexus 2000 FEX models do support FCoE (particularly in pass-through configurations with a Nexus 5000/5500 parent switch), so the absolute "not any" is incorrect.
• B is false - while the standard FCoE rule enforces a one-to-one VLAN-to-VSAN mapping (one FCoE VLAN → one VSAN), the inverse is not a blanket prohibition; multiple FCoE VLANs across an ISL can collectively serve multiple VSANs, making the statement misleading and wrong in context.
• D is false - FCoE fully supports both NPV (N-Port Virtualization) and NPIV (N-Port ID Virtualization), allowing FCoE-capable switches to operate in NPV mode toward an upstream FC/FCoE fabric.

Memory tip: Think of FCoE ISLs like a highway with multiple lanes - each lane (FCoE VLAN) carries its own VSAN traffic, but the highway itself (the ISL) moves all of them. "Inter-switch = multi-VSAN capable" is the key takeaway for option C.

No community discussion yet for this question.