[cisco-voip] Partition Rollback: UCM 7.1(5b) Unrestricted to UCM 7.1(5a) Restricted?

[Scott Voll]

Wes--

Thank you and please do:

This is a case of administrator-be-ware.  We've raised the need for clearer
prompts/indicators when upgrading restricted-unrestricted as there is no
reversion without losing all changes made on the unrestricted version.

Scott

On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:

>  Hi Matthew,
>
> Inline, ws.
>
>
> Matthew Linsemier wrote:
>
> The confusion started with the naming convention of “Restricted” and
> “Unrestricted” coupled with the new licensing model from Cisco.  The upgrade
> from “Restricted” 7.1(5a) to “Unrestricted” 7.1(5b) worked on the Publisher
> and in the end on the Subscriber.  There was an error message on the first
> boot of the Subscriber saying that the databases were out on sync.  A cold
> reboot of the Subscriber a second time resolved the issue.
>
> ws: Database out of sync on install is likely separate issue.  There are a
> few known reasons for that.  I'm going to focus on restricted vs.
> unrestricted here as it's really the new topic at hand.
>
>
> I have no issues with getting to the UCM OS management page and “swapping”
> the partition of both the Publisher and the Subcriber back to the
> “Restricted” partition both at the same time and taking all of the phones
> out of service for that time.  I just worry that if it fails that I would
> have to rebuild my entire UCM cluster and then restore the data.  The TAC
> engineer even told me that you couldn’t restore data from an “Unrestricted”
> version back onto a “Restricted” version.  If I knew ahead of time that I
> can simply switch back to the currently working “Unrestricted” partition, I
> don’t mind being a guinea pig, but I definitely don’t want to spend the
> weekend with TAC on the phone trying to get my phones up and running,
> rebuilding everything from scratch.
>
> Wes or Ryan, the TAC case we opened was SR 615372523. I’m don’t mind
> getting answers from Cisco that “you cant do it” but I would like to know
> technically why it wont work.
>
> ws: It's more a legal reason than technical reason.  Lawyers say we cannot
> facilitate move from unrestricted to restricted. I'm taking that at face
> value as CM keeps me too busy to work on a law degree.  We have to allow
> restricted -> unrestricted as restricted was the only option before.  This
> is a case of administrator-be-ware.  We've raised the need for clearer
> prompts/indicators when upgrading restricted->unrestricted as there is no
> reversion without losing all changes made on the unrestricted version.
>
>
> I suspect that there will be a lot of others wondering how they get from
> “Unrestricted” to “Restricted” version.  I know that there aren’t any
> migration paths (as stated in the documents), but if you cant even backup
> the data and restore it on a fresh install of a “Restricted” version of UCM,
> that seems like an issue.
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
> On 9/28/10 1:57 PM, "Ryan Ratliff" <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
>
>  For starters I don't think you can upgrade from restricted to
> unrestricted.
>
> Assuming you mean 7.1(5a) unrestricted and 7.1(5b) restricted...
>
> How did you try switching, using the CLI or the recovery disk?  I think
> I've seen on this alias that the CLI won't let you switch back and I don't
> know if this is intended or not.
>
> I have seen bugs related to subscriber upgrades failing when the pub has
> been upgraded from restricted to unrestricted (CSCti72527).
>
> I have also seen TAC SRs where they were able to switch back with no
> problem.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Sep 28, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Matthew Linsemier wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I have received conflicting information from both TAC as well as other
> resources on the Internet to find out if you can roll back your UCM version
> from a “Unrestricted” version to a “Restricted” version?  The scenario goes
> as follows:
>
> An upgrade was performed on a UCM server from a 7.1(5a) “Restricted”
> licenses to 7.1(5b) “Unrestricted”.  No other upgrades have been performed
> since this so basically it looks like this on the UCM publisher and
> subscriber:
>
> Active Partition: UCM 7.1(5b) “Unrestricted”
> Alternate Partition: UCM 7.1(5a) “Restricted”
>
> My question is, can I swap the partitions back to the original restricted
> versions of UCM and then apply the UCM 7.1(5b) restricted OS upgrade which
> is what we want to have on the UCM cluster.  TAC originally said yes this is
> not an issue, but then came back and said no you couldn’t do it.  When I
> started asking questions like “What if my upgrade had failed, does that mean
> that I would have had to rebuild UCM and wouldn’t be able to go back to the
> previous partition?” and I didn’t really get a strait answer.
>
> To me it seems that I should be able to recover to a previous “Restricted”
> license on both Publisher and the Subscriber and everything should work as
> before, then I just put the proper “Restricted” upgrade on the UCM servers.
>  Isn’t this what the separate partitions are for?  Even so, if I tried
> swapping back and it didn’t work, couldn’t I just go back to the current
> “Unrestricted” working partition.
>
> Can anyone give any insight on this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT
> This communication and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be
> protected by one or more legal privileges. It is intended solely for the use
> of the addressee identified above. If you are not the intended recipient,
> any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of this communication is
> UNAUTHORIZED. Neither this information block, the typed name of the sender,
> nor anything else in this message is intended to constitute an electronic
> signature unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this
> message. If you have received this communication in error, please
> immediately contact me and delete this communication from your computer.
> Thank you.
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT
> This communication and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be
> protected by one or more legal privileges. It is intended solely for the use
> of the addressee identified above. If you are not the intended recipient,
> any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of this communication is
> UNAUTHORIZED. Neither this information block, the typed name of the sender,
> nor anything else in this message is intended to constitute an electronic
> signature unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this
> message. If you have received this communication in error, please
> immediately contact me and delete this communication from your computer.
> Thank you.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing listcisco-voip at puck.nether.nethttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/1b7a99c5/attachment.html>