[j-nsp] MX VC ISSU

[Scott Harvanek]

Yea, it's just that fear of being stuck on a specific version of Junos 
without being able to cleanly upgrade without a significant interruption.

Scott H.
Login Inc.

On 4/24/14, 4:22 PM, Morgan McLean wrote:
> Just make the VC and do the dance later :), you know you want to! I'm 
> converting two customers to MX VC over the next couple weeks.
>
> Thanks,
> Morgan
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Scott Harvanek 
> <scott.harvanek at login.com <mailto:scott.harvanek at login.com>> wrote:
>
>     Morgan,
>
>     Yea, we've successfully done this in the lab with the MXs and
>     breaking the VC.  I guess it's better than nothing.  The VC setup
>     on the MXs and NSR/Graceful failover is pretty awesome and I don't
>     want to abandon VC just because of this and at the same time don't
>     want to wait to deploy this cluster until 14.X is stable and ISSU
>     is available.
>
>     Ugh, decisions.
>
>     Scott H.
>
>     On 4/24/14, 3:42 PM, Morgan McLean wrote:
>>     People get into these kind of situations on the SRX's as well.
>>     I've done things where I upgrade one of the SRX's and bring it
>>     back, however the cluster isn't happy because the version is
>>     mismatched. However, when I pull the remaining working SRX out of
>>     the cluster, the other one takes back over because it has no
>>     choice. You can't fail it over manually, but in a downtime
>>     situation it will still take over.
>>
>>     Similarly, as a hack, until ISSU is available couldn't you admin
>>     down all ports on MX-A, upgrade its software, reboot it,
>>     disconnect the VC ports causing a split brain setup, it will come
>>     up thinking its master since the other member is lost, and then
>>     enable its ports. At the same time you would have to admin down
>>     all the ports on MX-B, so that you can upgrade the software and
>>     zeroize and set VC ports it so that it slaves config info
>>     initially from MX-A and rejoins the VC?
>>
>>     Its a hack, and it will probably cause a blip of downtime but at
>>     least you'll have one working MX at all times basically. Ideally
>>     you'd only have to do that dance once, assuming ISSU works as
>>     expected (I've heard a lot of horror stories).
>>
>>     Thanks,
>>     Morgan
>>
>>
>>     On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Scott Harvanek
>>     <scott.harvanek at login.com <mailto:scott.harvanek at login.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Okay so then here's the million dollar question.  Has anyone
>>         attempted a ISSU on a MX VC?
>>
>>         I've got some 480s in the lab in pre-deployment state and the
>>         question is, go VC and suffer a complete outage when a
>>         upgrade is due or leave them non-VC.  I'm not comfortable
>>         running 14.1 out of the gate but I also like the redundancy
>>         of the VC.
>>
>>         Scott H.
>>
>>
>>         On 4/23/14, 10:40 AM, JP Velders wrote:
>>
>>                 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 18:45:33 -0400
>>                 From: Scott Harvanek <scott.harvanek at login.com
>>                 <mailto:scott.harvanek at login.com>>
>>                 Subject: [j-nsp] MX VC ISSU
>>                 Does anyone know if ISSU will ever be supported on a
>>                 MX virtual-chassis?
>>
>>             I believe it's on the roadmap and supposed to become
>>             available in 14.1.
>>
>>             Kind regards,
>>             JP Velders
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>         <mailto:juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>
>>         https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
>>
>
>