> It seems to me that upgrading/transitioning might need a separate > section, if not document, because of the unique situation involved. > Example, I had a couple of scenarios in mind when thinking of > upgrade/transition versus migration.
I agree that the scenarios you describe seem important to cover, and probably belong in their own section. > a. Only one system is involved. It has an existing zone configuration > (using hme0). That system is then upgraded with Solaris that supports > vanity naming. Because it is an upgrade, the link's vanity name will > remain hme0. After upgrading, what does the admin do with zone > reconfiguration, if any, as far as the network link is concerned, given > that there is no name change that actually occurred? > > b. Two systems are involved. One, without vanity naming support, has an > existing zone configuration using hme0. The second system with a ce0 > nic, has a freshly installed OS with vanity naming support, and > therefore its link is automatically named net0. An admin wishes to > migrate the zone to this new system. In normal circumstances, we'd use > dladm rename-link to rename net0 to the link that the zone was > originally configured to use. However, it would not apply here, since > that would mean renaming net0 to hme0 and would counter our intention of > weaning link names from their hardware-based names. What does the admin > do in this case? Would the only option be a complete revamp of zone > configuration in the second system? -- meem
