currently 2.2(3d) - which recommended upgrade path to choose?

[pvanlone1]

Needing to decide - we want/need a simple/clean upgrade experience that can occur in one pass, so that we can install new B200M4 blades and upgrade ESXi hosts to vSphere 6 u2

The download tool seems to recommend 3 possibilities:

2.2(3j)

2.2(6f)

3.1(1e)

What version should we go to? How do we choose which is the correct (i.e simplest, most stable) for a small environment like ours (2 chassis, adding 6 new servers to get us to 9 total)?

[Walter Dey]

2.2(6f) or 3.1(1e)

With 3.1 you have to consult the list of supported hardware (release notes of 3.1).

I would propose the following:

Open a TAC case, and post "show tech"

Problem Subcategory: UCS-B Upgrade
Problem Type: Configuration Assistance
Software Version: 2.2.3d
Problem Details: Firmware Upgrade 2.2.(3d) to 2.2.(6e) please check for any bugs and caveats

Good luck

Walter.

[pvanlone1]

thnx - is 3.1 a "big" upgrade? I presume that's why the qualifier concerning it?

Why not 2.2(3j)?

[Walter Dey]

I would abandon 2.2.3 as quickly as possible, although the 2.2.3j is quite a recent release.

Be aware, that with 2.2.4 and newer releases, many new and useful software features were introduced, e.g.

Release 2.2(4b) adds support for the following:

• Server Pack—This feature allows you to support new server platforms ^* on existing infrastructure without requiring a complete firmware upgrade. In this model, new B/C server bundles enabling the new servers will be supported on the previous infrastructure A bundle. For example, Release 2.2(5) B/C server bundles are supported with Release 2.2(4) infrastructure A bundle as highlighted in Table 2 . New features introduced in the B/C bundles may only become available after upgrading the A bundle to the respective version.

The Server Pack feature provides the additional flexibility of adding new server platforms to active UCS domains without incurring the operational overhead of upgrading firmware across the whole domain

3.1 is just a merger of 2.2.6 and 3.1 (UCS mini); therefore I consider 2.2.6 and 3.1 essentially almost identical (with the exception, that latter doesn't support gen 1 hardware).

[johnd0e88]

Great suggestions, as always!

Awesome bug list site I've found: http://ucsnerd.com - worth checking out (no, not mine/spam)

[Sean Wishart · Accepted solution]

Cisco TAC will direct UCS customer's to their account team if assistance is required with planning for or 'bug scrubbing' prior to a firmware upgrade.  We rely on the account team to provide direction based on their intimate understanding of our customer's current UCS implementation and technology road map.  In some cases Cisco Advance Services is also engaged to assist with this process.