----------------------------

Original Description

The inverse of this is currently documented, but we are much more likely to suggest that a customer should convert an arbiter to a secondary, and so far the process for doing so is mostly taken from Google groups / stack overflow, where it varies between one of the following methods:

• keep the existing arbiter, add a new secondary, then remove the arbiter
• shut down the arbiter, update its configuration, add it as a secondary

It would be useful to document both, with a note that the right choice depends upon the level of risk the user is willing to incur.
----------------------------

Description

Scope of changes (files that need work and how much)

Impact to other docs outside of this product

MVP (work and date?)

Resources (e.g. Scope Docs, Invision)