- CheckMates
- :
- Products
- :
- General Topics
- :
- Upgrade VSLS R80.10 to R80.20
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page
Are you a member of CheckMates?
×- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Upgrade VSLS R80.10 to R80.20
Is it supported to upgrade R80.10 VSX VSLS cluster to R80.20 VSX VSLS cluster, including MDS or Smart Center, upgrade?
I checked "Installation and Upgrade R80.20 Guide" page 334 and it looks supported for "VSX Cluster".
Could you please confirm that for VSLS?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
VSLS and ClusterXL HA are the 2 clustering methods of a VSX cluster, so by using the terms VSX cluster you include VSLS.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Thank you, I just needed a confirmation that there are no different processes to apply for VSLS specifically.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Referring to documentation:
https://sc1.checkpoint.com/documents/Best_Practices/Cluster_Connectivity_Upgrade/html_frameset.htm
As far as I know, no transparent upgrade can be done on a VSLS VSX cluster. The requirement here is running HA. Correct me if I'm wrong.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
@Vincent_Croes You are wrong. Look into Connectivity Upgrade of a VSX Cluster in the document above. It is relevant for all cases, VSLS or HA
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
There are prerequisites in doing a CU. See screenshot above. Explains why the procedure mentions members M2 and M3 being in standby seeing that my production members have more then 1 state running on a single member.
What am I missing?
