Update procedure

[David W. Hankins]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 02:39:00PM +1100, Glenn Satchell wrote:
> It is probably only necessary to wait a few minutes until the secondary
> server has synchronised with the primary before updating the primary.
> The reason for this is that different versions are not guaranteed to
> inter-operate as far as failover goes.

The only failover incompatibility is between 3.0.x and 3.1.x.

3.1.0->3.1.2 is fine.  You may run indefinitely in this manner if
you prefer (but I would not recommend it, 3.1.2's bugfixes are
very worthwhile to adopt).


Note that the failover changes in 3.1.x were to track the latest
published failover draft (I think it was -12).  In that version
of the draft (as compared to -07 when it seems we picked up failover)
the binary failover message code numbers were alphabetized and
in so doing reordered.  So the wire formats were no longer
compatible.

There should never be another incompatibility issue.

-- 
David W. Hankins	"If you don't do it right the first time,
Software Engineer		     you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.		-- Jack T. Hankins
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/attachments/20090324/e0f7e7a0/attachment.bin>