It seems reasonable, and no worse than the situation now, with mis-matched versions. I don't see why the host software would have anything to do with VC, seems like it should just be handling VM operations, and doing hardware-passthrough...
> On Sep 6, 2018, at 12:01 PM, Chuck Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Logically, why couldn't you isolate one member at a time, do the upgrade, > then rejoin it to the VC? > > On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 11:12:59AM -0500, Louis Kowolowski wrote: >> I currently have a 6 node VC of qfx5100. All are running 14.1X53-D43.7 and >> host software 13.2X51-D38. In discussions with JTAC, they claim that >> upgrading the host software to match the VM, it requires a reboot of *all* >> nodes in the VC at the same time. >> >> Has anybody else had to deal with this? Are there any work-arounds? Taking >> the whole thing down is extremely awkward. Can we do a rolling upgrade >> (manually, I know ISSU/NSSU doesn't handle this) and stay operational? We >> are working on a plan to re-architect this into 2x 3 node VC and MC-LAG them >> together, but it would be nice to be able to fix this more short-term. -- Louis Kowolowski [email protected] Cryptomonkeys: http://www.cryptomonkeys.com/ Making life more interesting for people since 1977 _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
