Is it worth upsampling with dBpoweramp

I am re-ripping my redbook collection.  So is it worth it to upsample the collection to 24/192?
Am currently streaming to a Bluesound powernode 2i and a node 2i.  2 systems.
I am rebuilding the main rig.  The MF TriVista 24/192 will hopefully be put back in service fed by a node 2i.
So what are your thoughts?
If you are ripping, I prefer to keep the original unmodified format. Up-sampled playback is a different question. 
I am of the opinion why waste storage space saving a file that has no output after 44.1 
Post removed 
Post removed 
@mapman  You are not being very helpful.  Care to elaborate on your statement?  I prefer to be educated to determine if I am way off base.
@audio2design It will be the TriVista listed in the original post.  It is capable of 24/192. 
It will take longer to rip, use up more storage, and add overhead in general to store and stream extra data. Even if you want that, do at stream time don’t store all that extra information that can be created anytime if desired or needed.

Personally I would not bother or give it a second thought. All the information available is in the rip at original resolution if done right to lossless flac. I use dbpoweramp also to rip and it is very reliable at producing high quality rips relatively quickly. Thousands of ripped CDs in my library. 

@mapman  thank you.  I have about 1k cds ripped in FLAC.  But the hard drives are no more.  :(  This time I will be ripping to my main storage server that is backed up in the cloud (Crashplan Pro).  So since my TriVista upscales on the fly and only accept 24/96 it is kinda a moot point.  WAVE it is.  I was happy with FLAC files.  Just not sure where things are headed.  So I am going to stick with a 16/44.1 rip in WAVE.  My Crashplan is unlimited data so that is not an issue.

Thank you again for your input.  I am getting back in the game after 10 years away.  A lot has changed.