[c-nsp] Cisco ASR99xx 64-bit upgrade 6.3.1 to 6.3.2

[arulgobinath emmanuel]

Hi  Erik,
The process is well documented in the following file
(ASR9K-x64-docs-6.3.2.tar) . Its in the image download section. But as of i
know you need a bridge SMU from 6.3.1 to 6.3.2 . Not sure 6.3.1 bridge SMU
(CSCvf01652)  publically available better reach out account team or open a
case.  This smu has two component one for Admin and other for XR. Unless
you apply both it doesn't allow to upgrade. Good luck with upgrade :).


Best Regards,
Gobinath.

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 10:35 PM, <adamv0025 at netconsultings.com> wrote:

> > Tom Hill
> > Sent: Friday, April 13, 2018 1:46 PM
> >
> > On 12/04/18 18:06, Gert Doering wrote:
> > > yum update
> > >
> > > ... now *that* would be nice...
> >
> > I thought you could do that...
> >
> >  https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/assets/global/DK/seminarer/pdfs/XR60.pdf
> >  (pgs. 30 & 31)
> >
> Page 26 of the same doc:
> IOS XR  packages  are  installed  with  "install  update/upgrade".
> Install  commands  are  a  wrapper  around  YUM  to  provide  multiarch
> support.
> -so there's your yum update
>
> But from the initial discussions on this from a few years back I thought
> I'd
> be able to spin up container on new version and then just switch to new one
> in an instance, or failback quickly if needed, preferably 0 packet loss in
> the process (maybe I'm mistaken ncs6k with asr9k).
> Makes me wonder what's going on under the hood on asr9ks ncs5ks actually
> -i.e. how does the picture look like at each LC (I guess we'll need to wait
> till this "modular" architecture arrives to LCs as well?)
> In this sense, to me the router chassis is like a small DC with compute
> nodes (in form of RPs and LCs) all connected via Ethernet network -it would
> be nice to have control over which containers and what versions run on each
> compute node.
> And regarding the 0 packet loss,
> I'm wondering whether the NPU microcode version is independent of the (I
> guess Admin Plane) version (or whether it's still monolithic)
>
> Also wondering when we'll be able to take RPs out of the chassis that is
> spin up the Control container(s) (and third party containers) on COTS HW
> and
> let these talk to LCs.
> As unfortunately these chassis-based systems can become full with just
> couple of LCs in them just because the RP can't cope with the high number
> of
> VRFs, prefixes and BGP sessions.
>
> adam
>
> netconsultings.com
> ::carrier-class solutions for the telecommunications industry::
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>