Proxmox VE stretched cluster with NetApp MetroCluster over Fibre Channel

["Iván Méndez Cairós" <imendez@integratyc.com>]

Hello,
We are evaluating the replacement of an existing VMware vSphere infrastructure with Proxmox VE and would like to confirm the feasibility and support considerations of the proposed architecture.
The current environment is distributed across two data centers and uses a NetApp MetroCluster storage system. The new design would consist of:

  *   One Proxmox VE cluster distributed across both data centers.
  *   Approximately 12 Proxmox nodes per site.
  *   NetApp MetroCluster providing synchronously replicated shared storage.
  *   Fibre Channel connectivity between the Proxmox hosts and NetApp.
  *   Two independent FC fabrics based on Brocade G720 switches.
  *   Dual-port FC HBAs in each Proxmox host.
  *   Linux multipath/ALUA configured on every host.
  *   Shared LVM storage on top of the FC LUNs.
  *   Proxmox HA enabled for the virtual machines.
  *   Redundant Corosync links between both sites, with latency below 5 ms.
  *   A QDevice located in a third failure domain.
NetApp documentation explicitly lists MetroCluster support for Proxmox VE using SAN protocols, including Fibre Channel:
https://docs.netapp.com/us-en/netapp-solutions-virtualization/proxmox/proxmox-ontap-architecture.html#solution-architecture
However, we would like to confirm the following points from the Proxmox side:

  1.  Is a stretched Proxmox VE cluster using shared FC storage provided by NetApp MetroCluster considered a supported and recommended configuration?
  2.  Is shared LVM over a multipath FC device the appropriate storage configuration for this design?
  3.  Are there any specific multipath, ALUA or LVM configuration requirements for NetApp ONTAP/MetroCluster?
  4.  During a MetroCluster switchover, SAN I/O may be temporarily interrupted. Are there any Proxmox, multipath or HA timeout parameters that should be adjusted to tolerate this process and prevent unnecessary fencing or VM failures?
  5.  In the event of a complete site failure, would Proxmox HA be able to restart the affected VMs on the surviving site once the MetroCluster switchover has completed and the FC LUNs are accessible again?
  6.  Is the proposed QDevice design sufficient to preserve quorum if communication between the two data centers is lost?
  7.  Are there any known reference architectures, deployment guides or production experiences involving Proxmox VE and NetApp MetroCluster over Fibre Channel?
We understand that the exact server, HBA, switch, ONTAP and firmware versions must also be validated through the corresponding vendor interoperability matrices.
Any recommendations or experiences with a similar architecture would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Iván Méndez