Wired Intelligent Edge

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Hi! If I'm not mistaken, I recall I discussed about the absence of the "VSF sequenced software update" feature on the ArubaOS-CX immediately when Aruba disclosed the VSF feature availability on lower end ArubaOS-CX based switch series (in contrast with VSX feature which is available on higher ends ArubaOS-CX based switch series like Aruba 6400 and Aruba 8xxx), see specifically here and partly also here.

The point is that when you need an hitless software update procedure (and you need at the Core to ensure high availability not tolerating a downtime during a software update) the way to go will be (with some restriction on the VSF case deployed on Aruba 5400R zl2 Switch series):

• VSF on ArubaOS-Switch ONLY on Aruba 5400R zl2 Switch series
• VSX on ArubaOS-CX on Aruba 6400, Aruba 83xx and Aruba 8400 Switch series.

If you note in both the above scenarios the common thing is that involved switches are only two, a pair.

I suspect the "orchestration" process needs to deal with (or it limits the number of involved switches to) two members only.

OTOH other well known "hitless" orchestrated software updated procedures - like the ISSU on some IRF deployments (HPE Comware OS based ) - can deal with IRF made of more than two members (but OK...that is another approach with respect to VSX).

------------------------------
Davide Poletto
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

All these are core switches that are major overkill for smaller locations (5400/6400) and not even edge capable switches (8xxx miss crucial features for edge like 802.1X).

I'm happy that I can do upgrades on our core without issues, that being said considering that the CX6300 uses exactly the same firmware as the CX6400 (and probably almost identical hardware if we would open it up) I find it hard to understand why my CX6300 doesn't have VSX stack capability instead of VSF and if it has to be VSF why not hitless...

Putting a stack of 6400s on every floor is not practical or economical on most cases.

I guess I should hope that this feature is added in the future but not hold my breath.

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 02:32 PM
From: Davide Poletto
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hi! If I'm not mistaken, I recall I discussed about the absence of the "VSF sequenced software update" feature on the ArubaOS-CX immediately when Aruba disclosed the VSF feature availability on lower end ArubaOS-CX based switch series (in contrast with VSX feature which is available on higher ends ArubaOS-CX based switch series like Aruba 6400 and Aruba 8xxx), see specifically here and partly also here.

The point is that when you need an hitless software update procedure (and you need at the Core to ensure high availability not tolerating a downtime during a software update) the way to go will be (with some restriction on the VSF case deployed on Aruba 5400R zl2 Switch series):

• VSF on ArubaOS-Switch ONLY on Aruba 5400R zl2 Switch series
• VSX on ArubaOS-CX on Aruba 6400, Aruba 83xx and Aruba 8400 Switch series.

If you note in both the above scenarios the common thing is that involved switches are only two, a pair.

I suspect the "orchestration" process needs to deal with (or it limits the number of involved switches to) two members only.

OTOH other well known "hitless" orchestrated software updated procedures - like the ISSU on some IRF deployments (HPE Comware OS based ) - can deal with IRF made of more than two members (but OK...that is another approach with respect to VSX).

------------------------------
Davide Poletto

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Not to defend Aruba but just to clarify that, in my opinion, despite Aruba 6300M/F and Aruba 6400 use a common software architecture on their similar ASICs, the presence or the absence of specific software features on those platforms is "engineered" (an thus "marketed") on purpose...so the result is that the Aruba 6400 provides VSX while the Aruba 6300 provides VSF and this happen despite both switch series are running on a common ArubaOS-CX operating system layer and also despite the underlying hardware could be sufficiently similar - modularity apart - to paint the challenge VSF versus VSX more evident (keep in mind that VSX is a two member stack technology only so a real comparison should be between Aruba 5400R zl2 and Aruba 6400).

Add to that that VSF - with its "non hitless software update" characteristic (5400R zl2 apart) - was simply not engineered into switch series to be deployed as the network core (where Aruba 6400 and Aruba 8xxx series fit better), VSF is well deployable at the access/edge layer where the requirement of having an hitless software update procedure is less important (if not existent at all).

Aruba 2930M -> backplane stacking (Hardware stack, stack full reboot in case of update <- not hitless)
Aruba 2930F -> frontplane stacking (VSF, all VSF members perform concurrently full reboot in case of update <- not hitless)

------------------------------
Davide Poletto
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 02:58 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

All these are core switches that are major overkill for smaller locations (5400/6400) and not even edge capable switches (8xxx miss crucial features for edge like 802.1X).

I'm happy that I can do upgrades on our core without issues, that being said considering that the CX6300 uses exactly the same firmware as the CX6400 (and probably almost identical hardware if we would open it up) I find it hard to understand why my CX6300 doesn't have VSX stack capability instead of VSF and if it has to be VSF why not hitless...

Putting a stack of 6400s on every floor is not practical or economical on most cases.

I guess I should hope that this feature is added in the future but not hold my breath.

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 02:32 PM
From: Davide Poletto
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hi! If I'm not mistaken, I recall I discussed about the absence of the "VSF sequenced software update" feature on the ArubaOS-CX immediately when Aruba disclosed the VSF feature availability on lower end ArubaOS-CX based switch series (in contrast with VSX feature which is available on higher ends ArubaOS-CX based switch series like Aruba 6400 and Aruba 8xxx), see specifically here and partly also here.

The point is that when you need an hitless software update procedure (and you need at the Core to ensure high availability not tolerating a downtime during a software update) the way to go will be (with some restriction on the VSF case deployed on Aruba 5400R zl2 Switch series):

• VSF on ArubaOS-Switch ONLY on Aruba 5400R zl2 Switch series
• VSX on ArubaOS-CX on Aruba 6400, Aruba 83xx and Aruba 8400 Switch series.

If you note in both the above scenarios the common thing is that involved switches are only two, a pair.

I suspect the "orchestration" process needs to deal with (or it limits the number of involved switches to) two members only.

OTOH other well known "hitless" orchestrated software updated procedures - like the ISSU on some IRF deployments (HPE Comware OS based ) - can deal with IRF made of more than two members (but OK...that is another approach with respect to VSX).

------------------------------
Davide Poletto

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

The question is, do you know another brand where you could done a sequential stack upgrade with more than 2 switches ? I'm not sure this exist, even Cisco don't do that.. and Aruba CX Switches are fast to upgrade/reload .. the other day I take 3 hours to upgrade 13 Cisco catalyst 9300 stacks (4 at same Time !) because there are so long to copy files and upgrade xD


------------------------------
Laurent from Brest / France
Network Engineer
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Hi Laurent (we're going OT), you asked:

"The question is, do you know another brand where you could done a sequential stack upgrade with more than 2 switches ?"

Yes, I do.

If I'm not mistaken and if we avoid to differentiate switch series by switch positioning into the network topology (e.g. Edge-Access versus Distribution/ToR/Core <- so it will not be an issue to have high end switches where you don't expect to find them) then some HPE Comware operating system based switch series - such as the HPE FlexFabric - supporting IRF and ISSU provide what you asked (and, particularly, ISSU can be used in compatible upgrade mode considering some specific update paths you should follow <- release notes report them clearly).

You can have an 4 members IRF stack and you can perform an ISSU provided that all prerequisites about IRF best practices (including MAD), ISSU matrix and Peers multi-homed connectivity are met.

------------------------------
Davide Poletto
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 30, 2021 03:24 AM
From: Laurent Tygreat
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

The question is, do you know another brand where you could done a sequential stack upgrade with more than 2 switches ? I'm not sure this exist, even Cisco don't do that.. and Aruba CX Switches are fast to upgrade/reload .. the other day I take 3 hours to upgrade 13 Cisco catalyst 9300 stacks (4 at same Time !) because there are so long to copy files and upgrade xD

Moreover, a sequential upgrade like you say, would reboot each switch one by one taking 4 minutes each.. what's the benefit if the complete stack upgrade take also 4 minutes ?? No more disruption for users :D

------------------------------
Laurent from Brest / France
Network Engineer

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

The benefit of a sequential reboot would be that I actually split both security cameras and APs over the relevant switches (security cameras on 2 1G switches and APs on 2 5G-SR switches, stack is all 4 of these switches) and even made sure that adjacent APs would not be on the same switch thus a sequential reboot would in all likelihood allow most clients to switch to a different AP that is further away from them but still covers them while also leaving at least part of the security systems functioning while a full stack reboot causes all APs and all the security system to go down at the same time.

If this was an issue that had not been resolved yet in the past by engineers I would not be complaining but this is an issue that was solved and seems to be a totally artificial limit in this case (CX 6300 series switches) which is very disappointing and as said boot times on the newer switches are waaay longer then older "simpler" switches which makes the whole issue more annoying.

As for firmware copy times, I'm not sure why that is a function, that is not a downtime inducing operation.

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 30, 2021 03:24 AM
From: Laurent Tygreat
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

The question is, do you know another brand where you could done a sequential stack upgrade with more than 2 switches ? I'm not sure this exist, even Cisco don't do that.. and Aruba CX Switches are fast to upgrade/reload .. the other day I take 3 hours to upgrade 13 Cisco catalyst 9300 stacks (4 at same Time !) because there are so long to copy files and upgrade xD

Moreover, a sequential upgrade like you say, would reboot each switch one by one taking 4 minutes each.. what's the benefit if the complete stack upgrade take also 4 minutes ?? No more disruption for users :D

------------------------------
Laurent from Brest / France
Network Engineer

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Hi!

"The benefit of a sequential reboot would be that I actually split both security cameras and APs over the relevant switches (security cameras on 2 1G switches and APs on 2 5G-SR switches, stack is all 4 of these switches) and even made sure that adjacent APs would not be on the same switch thus a sequential reboot would in all likelihood allow most clients to switch to a different AP that is further away from them but still covers them while also leaving at least part of the security systems functioning while a full stack reboot causes all APs and all the security system to go down at the same time."

Yes, I mean what you're saying...given the actual restriction on VSF deployed on supporting Aruba CX switches at the edge...the only way to overcome the issue is to act at topology level (distribute APs and/or Security Cameras in a way if you are forced to perform maintenance on a VSF Stack - and this is causing the whole VSF Stack to reboot - then not all APs and/or not all Security Cameras go concurrently down and the portion of them than are able to stay up on an alternative VSF Stack not in maintenance should be able to sustain or ensure that services are consistent and not functionally impaired).

Otherwise the only alternative approach is to link APs and Security Cameras directly against a VSX Stack (but this is against what one would do thinking about "Edge devices").

"If this was an issue that had not been resolved yet in the past by engineers I would not be complaining but this is an issue that was solved and seems to be a totally artificial limit in this case (CX 6300 series switches) which is very disappointing and as said boot times on the newer switches are waaay longer then older "simpler" switches which makes the whole issue more annoying."

Has been resolved, as I wrote above, on IRF Stacks...but Comware is not ArubaOS-CX and HPE FlexFabric/FlexNetwork switch series aren't like Aruba CX Switch series...probably other vendors solved it too -> so you need to push it to Aruba!

"As for firmware copy times, I'm not sure why that is a function, that is not a downtime inducing operation."

I don't understand this one...are you referring to firmware copy duration between VSF Stack members in case of ArubaOS-CX (versus ArubaOS-Switch) or what else?

------------------------------
Davide Poletto
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 31, 2021 06:27 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

The benefit of a sequential reboot would be that I actually split both security cameras and APs over the relevant switches (security cameras on 2 1G switches and APs on 2 5G-SR switches, stack is all 4 of these switches) and even made sure that adjacent APs would not be on the same switch thus a sequential reboot would in all likelihood allow most clients to switch to a different AP that is further away from them but still covers them while also leaving at least part of the security systems functioning while a full stack reboot causes all APs and all the security system to go down at the same time.

If this was an issue that had not been resolved yet in the past by engineers I would not be complaining but this is an issue that was solved and seems to be a totally artificial limit in this case (CX 6300 series switches) which is very disappointing and as said boot times on the newer switches are waaay longer then older "simpler" switches which makes the whole issue more annoying.

As for firmware copy times, I'm not sure why that is a function, that is not a downtime inducing operation.

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 30, 2021 03:24 AM
From: Laurent Tygreat
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

The question is, do you know another brand where you could done a sequential stack upgrade with more than 2 switches ? I'm not sure this exist, even Cisco don't do that.. and Aruba CX Switches are fast to upgrade/reload .. the other day I take 3 hours to upgrade 13 Cisco catalyst 9300 stacks (4 at same Time !) because there are so long to copy files and upgrade xD

Moreover, a sequential upgrade like you say, would reboot each switch one by one taking 4 minutes each.. what's the benefit if the complete stack upgrade take also 4 minutes ?? No more disruption for users :D

------------------------------
Laurent from Brest / France
Network Engineer

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Hey Davide,

The firmware copy time remark was in reply to Laurent.

We can't architecturally redirect the APs/security cameras to the VSX stack since we did not wire the building that way and we would also end up with wire runs that exceed the Ethernet spec (different floors in the end).

What I could do (but **really** don't want to) is split the stack either into all it's 4 individual components while adding a second uplink to each switch (also requiring me to add more fibres between the communication cabinet and the server room) or alternatively split the stack into 2 dual-switch stacks, neither solution has me very happy.

As for your Comware note that is is so hard to stomach, HPE resolved this in their old products but couldn't bring it to their newest top of the line :(

Thanks!

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Aug 01, 2021 06:55 AM
From: Davide Poletto
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hi!

"The benefit of a sequential reboot would be that I actually split both security cameras and APs over the relevant switches (security cameras on 2 1G switches and APs on 2 5G-SR switches, stack is all 4 of these switches) and even made sure that adjacent APs would not be on the same switch thus a sequential reboot would in all likelihood allow most clients to switch to a different AP that is further away from them but still covers them while also leaving at least part of the security systems functioning while a full stack reboot causes all APs and all the security system to go down at the same time."

Yes, I mean what you're saying...given the actual restriction on VSF deployed on supporting Aruba CX switches at the edge...the only way to overcome the issue is to act at topology level (distribute APs and/or Security Cameras in a way if you are forced to perform maintenance on a VSF Stack - and this is causing the whole VSF Stack to reboot - then not all APs and/or not all Security Cameras go concurrently down and the portion of them than are able to stay up on an alternative VSF Stack not in maintenance should be able to sustain or ensure that services are consistent and not functionally impaired).

Otherwise the only alternative approach is to link APs and Security Cameras directly against a VSX Stack (but this is against what one would do thinking about "Edge devices").

"If this was an issue that had not been resolved yet in the past by engineers I would not be complaining but this is an issue that was solved and seems to be a totally artificial limit in this case (CX 6300 series switches) which is very disappointing and as said boot times on the newer switches are waaay longer then older "simpler" switches which makes the whole issue more annoying."

Has been resolved, as I wrote above, on IRF Stacks...but Comware is not ArubaOS-CX and HPE FlexFabric/FlexNetwork switch series aren't like Aruba CX Switch series...probably other vendors solved it too -> so you need to push it to Aruba!

"As for firmware copy times, I'm not sure why that is a function, that is not a downtime inducing operation."

I don't understand this one...are you referring to firmware copy duration between VSF Stack members in case of ArubaOS-CX (versus ArubaOS-Switch) or what else?

------------------------------
Davide Poletto

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 31, 2021 06:27 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

The benefit of a sequential reboot would be that I actually split both security cameras and APs over the relevant switches (security cameras on 2 1G switches and APs on 2 5G-SR switches, stack is all 4 of these switches) and even made sure that adjacent APs would not be on the same switch thus a sequential reboot would in all likelihood allow most clients to switch to a different AP that is further away from them but still covers them while also leaving at least part of the security systems functioning while a full stack reboot causes all APs and all the security system to go down at the same time.

If this was an issue that had not been resolved yet in the past by engineers I would not be complaining but this is an issue that was solved and seems to be a totally artificial limit in this case (CX 6300 series switches) which is very disappointing and as said boot times on the newer switches are waaay longer then older "simpler" switches which makes the whole issue more annoying.

As for firmware copy times, I'm not sure why that is a function, that is not a downtime inducing operation.

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 30, 2021 03:24 AM
From: Laurent Tygreat
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

The question is, do you know another brand where you could done a sequential stack upgrade with more than 2 switches ? I'm not sure this exist, even Cisco don't do that.. and Aruba CX Switches are fast to upgrade/reload .. the other day I take 3 hours to upgrade 13 Cisco catalyst 9300 stacks (4 at same Time !) because there are so long to copy files and upgrade xD

Moreover, a sequential upgrade like you say, would reboot each switch one by one taking 4 minutes each.. what's the benefit if the complete stack upgrade take also 4 minutes ?? No more disruption for users :D

------------------------------
Laurent from Brest / France
Network Engineer

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Hi, I agree with you about all your line of reasoning. A network redesign at the edge - done in a way or another - should not be a forced workaround to overcome feature/software restrictions characterizing the switches used at the edge (someone will tell that those exposed - where VSF is used at the edge - are just corner cases but IMHO those ones show up more frequently than one would think especially in medium to large networks [*]).

The only solution (but it is a redesign) is to physically distribute APs serving a particular zone (and/or Security Cameras) on different access devices (stacked or not they are) in order to be resilient against switch (or stack) maintenance, reboot or failure letting the connected APs/Cameras to continue to work (maybe halved in quantity but working)...but, as you already noted, this should planned at design level...once the network is operational it's difficult to rearrange things that way.

Just a note about Comware: it would be hard to digest, but just do not merely think that IRF capable devices (with/without ISSU capability built-in) - so much "demonized" in lieu of all the newer ones using other well pushed HW/SW architectures - are the "old" dead school, they are de-facto still "current" (especially into DC).

------------------------------
Davide Poletto
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Aug 02, 2021 02:51 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey Davide,

The firmware copy time remark was in reply to Laurent.

We can't architecturally redirect the APs/security cameras to the VSX stack since we did not wire the building that way and we would also end up with wire runs that exceed the Ethernet spec (different floors in the end).

What I could do (but **really** don't want to) is split the stack either into all it's 4 individual components while adding a second uplink to each switch (also requiring me to add more fibres between the communication cabinet and the server room) or alternatively split the stack into 2 dual-switch stacks, neither solution has me very happy.

As for your Comware note that is is so hard to stomach, HPE resolved this in their old products but couldn't bring it to their newest top of the line :(

Thanks!

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys

Original Message:
Sent: Aug 01, 2021 06:55 AM
From: Davide Poletto
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hi!

"The benefit of a sequential reboot would be that I actually split both security cameras and APs over the relevant switches (security cameras on 2 1G switches and APs on 2 5G-SR switches, stack is all 4 of these switches) and even made sure that adjacent APs would not be on the same switch thus a sequential reboot would in all likelihood allow most clients to switch to a different AP that is further away from them but still covers them while also leaving at least part of the security systems functioning while a full stack reboot causes all APs and all the security system to go down at the same time."

Yes, I mean what you're saying...given the actual restriction on VSF deployed on supporting Aruba CX switches at the edge...the only way to overcome the issue is to act at topology level (distribute APs and/or Security Cameras in a way if you are forced to perform maintenance on a VSF Stack - and this is causing the whole VSF Stack to reboot - then not all APs and/or not all Security Cameras go concurrently down and the portion of them than are able to stay up on an alternative VSF Stack not in maintenance should be able to sustain or ensure that services are consistent and not functionally impaired).

Otherwise the only alternative approach is to link APs and Security Cameras directly against a VSX Stack (but this is against what one would do thinking about "Edge devices").

"If this was an issue that had not been resolved yet in the past by engineers I would not be complaining but this is an issue that was solved and seems to be a totally artificial limit in this case (CX 6300 series switches) which is very disappointing and as said boot times on the newer switches are waaay longer then older "simpler" switches which makes the whole issue more annoying."

Has been resolved, as I wrote above, on IRF Stacks...but Comware is not ArubaOS-CX and HPE FlexFabric/FlexNetwork switch series aren't like Aruba CX Switch series...probably other vendors solved it too -> so you need to push it to Aruba!

"As for firmware copy times, I'm not sure why that is a function, that is not a downtime inducing operation."

I don't understand this one...are you referring to firmware copy duration between VSF Stack members in case of ArubaOS-CX (versus ArubaOS-Switch) or what else?

------------------------------
Davide Poletto

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 31, 2021 06:27 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

The benefit of a sequential reboot would be that I actually split both security cameras and APs over the relevant switches (security cameras on 2 1G switches and APs on 2 5G-SR switches, stack is all 4 of these switches) and even made sure that adjacent APs would not be on the same switch thus a sequential reboot would in all likelihood allow most clients to switch to a different AP that is further away from them but still covers them while also leaving at least part of the security systems functioning while a full stack reboot causes all APs and all the security system to go down at the same time.

If this was an issue that had not been resolved yet in the past by engineers I would not be complaining but this is an issue that was solved and seems to be a totally artificial limit in this case (CX 6300 series switches) which is very disappointing and as said boot times on the newer switches are waaay longer then older "simpler" switches which makes the whole issue more annoying.

As for firmware copy times, I'm not sure why that is a function, that is not a downtime inducing operation.

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 30, 2021 03:24 AM
From: Laurent Tygreat
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

The question is, do you know another brand where you could done a sequential stack upgrade with more than 2 switches ? I'm not sure this exist, even Cisco don't do that.. and Aruba CX Switches are fast to upgrade/reload .. the other day I take 3 hours to upgrade 13 Cisco catalyst 9300 stacks (4 at same Time !) because there are so long to copy files and upgrade xD

Moreover, a sequential upgrade like you say, would reboot each switch one by one taking 4 minutes each.. what's the benefit if the complete stack upgrade take also 4 minutes ?? No more disruption for users :D

------------------------------
Laurent from Brest / France
Network Engineer

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: E.S. Rosenberg
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Hi, This is Sahil from Aruba ERT TAC. 

I was just reading your article in 2023 :). We do have a hitless upgrade feature in Aruba CX VSF switches.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUHd9BVAD2s&t=1s

Improved network uptime with VSF Enhanced Software Upgrade (ESU) for Aruba CX 6300 switches. This removes the need to reboot a full VSF stack during a software upgrade. It uses existing redundant management and hot-patching functionality to keep members running and only requires the conductor to reboot at the end of the upgrade cycle. Note: Currently Aruba VSF ESU is supporting only Aruba CX 6300.

Thank You.

Sahil Raina

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: ER72
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 6/12/2023 9:21:00 AM
From: Sahil_123
Subject: RE: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hi, This is Sahil from Aruba ERT TAC. 

I was just reading your article in 2023 :). We do have a hitless upgrade feature in Aruba CX VSF switches.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUHd9BVAD2s&t=1s

Improved network uptime with VSF Enhanced Software Upgrade (ESU) for Aruba CX 6300 switches. This removes the need to reboot a full VSF stack during a software upgrade. It uses existing redundant management and hot-patching functionality to keep members running and only requires the conductor to reboot at the end of the upgrade cycle. Note: Currently Aruba VSF ESU is supporting only Aruba CX 6300.

Thank You.

Sahil Raina

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 29, 2021 01:06 PM
From: ER72
Subject: VSF Stacks and sequential upgrades

Hey everyone,

We have multiple VSF stacks based on different products (5406, 2930M and CX6300) until recently the 5406 were our only VSF stack and the positive sequential reboot experience was one of the reasons to go for VSF stacks in other locations where multiple switches were justified but not 5406 stacks.

So I was very nastily surprised when I discovered that neither the 2930M nor the CX6300 support a sequential reboot stack upgrade.

For the 2930M I can understand it to some extent after all it is a "simpler" device than the 5406 but in the CX6300 that just seems a complete failure, here we have a device with a much more advanced and feature rich OS (that is also easily more than 20 times the size of the 5406) but it doesn't do this seemingly basic thing for a stack.

So am I missing something? Is this a feature that we can expect in the future?

Thanks and sorry if this was a bit "ranty" I was very disappointed that the impact of our recent upgrade to CX 10.07 caused some real downtime for our users when I had expected to be able to do it without them feeling it more than some access points and Ethernet connections going down (while other APs would cover), especially since CX switches can easily take 4 minutes to reboot.
Here I thought I had planned our new infrastructure in such a way that I could basically upgrade everything practically unnoticed to my end users :(

------------------------------
Keeper of the Keys
------------------------------