> 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@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/