| United States-English |
|
|
|
![]() |
Patch Management User Guide for HP-UX 11.x Systems > Chapter 4 Patch Management OverviewPatch Management and Software Change Management Strategies |
|
Patch management is a complex topic. Because of the complexity, there is not one right way to perform patch management. If you ask 10 patching experts to describe their approach to patch management, you will likely get 10 different answers. You must determine which approach to patch management works best in your situation based on your particular environment and your constraints. This section discusses software change management and recommendations, as well as the three basic patch management strategies among others:
You may find that one of these strategies is a good fit for your organization. In most cases, a customized combination works well. For example, you could select a reactive patching strategy for most patching, but proactively patch your most update-sensitive areas. Security patch strategies often do not fit within the proactive or reactive strategies. In these cases, you need to follow a different strategy. Again, there is more than one path to creating an acceptable patch management strategy. For your convenience, HP has created six Patch Usage Model flow charts that illustrate the high level steps you would follow for six basic patch management strategies. These Patch Usage Models can be found in Appendix A. This section outlines a set of patch management strategies based on use and tolerance for down time. There is always a risk that software patches that have been successfully tested in a controlled environment will cause problems when applied to a new configuration. For this reason, it is important to limit the number of changes made to a target system. The first step in defining your strategy is to determine what level of software change management you want to implement. HP has developed three strategies for dealing with software change management in mission critical environments. These strategies are based on operational requirements. The same concepts apply just as well to non-mission critical environments. The following are three strategies for software change management. These strategies are described in Table 4-1: “Operational Factor and Patch Management Strategy Matrix”:
Table 4-1 Operational Factor and Patch Management Strategy Matrix
The process of selecting an appropriate software change management strategy seeks to align behavior with the key business objectives of the systems involved. The goals of evaluating an operation and choosing an appropriate strategy include:
There are four operational factors that should determine your appropriate strategy:
The following are recommendations for software change management that correspond to each software change strategy. They cover the following five areas:
Table 4-2: “Recommendations Based on Strategy” offers recommendations to help you implement your chosen software change management strategy. Consider using DRD for all three strategies listed in Table 4-2to reduce downtime, perform maintenance during regular business hours, and provide an efficient way to back out changes if necessary. See Chapter 10 for more details. Table 4-2 Recommendations Based on Strategy
Regardless of the type of patching strategy you choose to implement, you should include a policy detailing when it is appropriate to select patches for each HP patch rating. Based on rating alone, it is always appropriate to select a patch rating of 3, but under what circumstances will you allow patches rated 2 or 1 to be installed? For more information about HP patch ratings, see “HP-UX Patch Ratings”. Users with multiple systems generally find that, regardless of the type of patching strategy they choose to implement, patch management is best accomplished by managing patches in centralized software depots. You should maintain one depot for each set of similarly configured systems. You then use these depots as your patch source for all patch installations. In this way, you can maintain the same patch level on all the systems with less overall effort. Using depots also minimizes reboots when you install new patches. You should be able to install the entire content of a single depot with only a single reboot. For more information about these SD-UX software depots, see Chapter 8: “Using Software Depots for Patch Management”. The goal of a proactive patching strategy is problem prevention. Many patches that provide defect fixes are released long before you need them on your system. The crux of proactive patching is identifying these patches and applying them in a safe manner. By definition, your starting point for proactive patching should be a system you believe to be functioning normally. Most proactive patching can be scheduled and carefully controlled. This is one of the benefits of this approach. See Chapter 9: “Using HP-UX Software Assistant for Patch Management” and see Chapter 10: “Using Dynamic Root Disk for Patch Management”. As compared with the reactive patching strategy (see the following section), proactive patching generally creates more system change and requires regularly scheduled patch installation maintenance windows. Although the system down time associated with patch installation is a disadvantage of proactive patching, HP highly recommends proactive patching as the strategy of choice. The following benefits can be achieved by implementing a proactive patch management strategy:
Because proactive patching involves installation of patches before a problem occurs, this strategy allows more time to complete sufficient testing than does reactive patching. For a flow chart of the high-level steps suggested for proactive patching, see Appendix A. Although patching is not a one-size-fits-all process, the following generic recommended strategy embodies many of our customers' best practices:
The following details apply to acquiring the latest QPK and HWE patch bundles:
Use the ITRC Patch Database to acquire any patches that you have not yet obtained. Compare the entire list of patches that you identified specifically for an environment with the content of the patch bundles.
The following details apply to patches with warnings, and security patches.
HP provides the HP-UX Software Assistant (SWA) tool which you can access using the ITRC. Many HP-UX users find this tool to be especially well suited to acquiring patches for proactive patching. The SWA tool incorporates key functionality from Security Patch Check (SecPatchCk bundle name), ITRC patch assessment, and more. SWA can perform a number of checks including published security issues, installed patches with warnings, and missing patches with critical fixes. Once an analysis has been performed, you can use SWA to download any recommended patches or patch bundles and create a depot ready for installation For information, see Chapter 9: “Using HP-UX Software Assistant for Patch Management”. Reactive patching involves installing patches to restore system functionality after a problem occurs. The goal of reactive patching is to fix the problem as quickly as possible and with as little user disruption as possible. Because reactive patching is so disruptive, typically only the most critical problems: panics, failures, and corruption are reactively patched. Your action depends on the software change management strategy you use. When you use a restrictive strategy (see “Recommendations for Software Change Management ”), the fewer critical problems you will need to reactively fix. More granular changes are generally safer. While proactive patching usually involves the installation of many patches at one time, reactive patching involves installing only the patches believed to be necessary. Another difference between these two approaches is that reactive patching is likely to be performed under greater pressure and urgency than proactive patching. Even customers who typically use a proactive patch strategy may at times find it necessary to patch reactively. The following are benefits of reactive patching:
Reactive patching has some important disadvantages as compared with proactive patching. The process of identifying a problem fix can be made more difficult as your system falls further behind the most recent patch levels available. In addition, the required patch will likely contain much more new content than if you had performed frequent proactive updates. You might also find it difficult to perform adequate testing in reactive patching situations, and this could lead to the introduction of additional problems. The easiest way to identify your required patch is to call the HP Response Center. This works only if you have the appropriate support contract. Alternatively, you can carefully research the problem using resources such as the ITRC. The ITRC's self-solve tools, such as the search technical knowledge base link, can help with that query. For more information, see Chapter 6: “Using the IT Resource Center”. Next, using the ITRC Patch Database, you must identify the patches needed to resolve the problem. For reactive patch management, patch acquisition and installation should be strictly limited to the smallest set of patches believed to provide a solution to a current system problem. Do not use the unplanned down time as an opportunity to make unrelated changes. This is especially true for mission-critical systems. Once you know what patches are needed to solve the problem, you must determine when to patch your system. In making this decision, you should consider the following factors:
Follow these steps to patch your system reactively:
If you have multiple, similarly configured systems and you need to patch one of them reactively, consider patching the remaining systems as soon as it is reasonably possible. This is because it is likely that your other systems will suffer the same problems at some future point. Additionally, there are benefits to maintain the same patch level on similar systems. Security patching requires both urgency and a need to be proactive. It does not fit neatly into the proactive or reactive patching strategies. At times, you might need to apply security patches proactively prior to the next scheduled patch installation maintenance window. When you use the ITRC to acquire patches, it is safe practice to obtain patches listed as recommended. Because of the urgency associated with security fixes, there are many instances when a security patch is too new to have this rating. However, many customers give a new security fix priority over an older patch recommended by the ITRC. Because most patches that fix a security problem fix only a single problem, this practice is not as risky as it may seem. You can use the SWA Tool to identify security patches for installation. This tool also identifies patches that have associated warnings. For more information about SWA, see Chapter 9: “Using HP-UX Software Assistant for Patch Management”. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||