SRM 5.1.1 in Production

[asrarguna]

Dear All, I am implementing SRM 5.1.1 into production and I have some doubts/ questions in my mind. I would really appreciate if somebody can clarify these for me... Please?

Site A (Protected):

1. vCenter 5.1 VM
2. SSO VM
3. vCenter DB & SRM DB VM
4. SRM VM

Site B (Recovery):

1. vCenter 5.1 VM
2. SRM VM

Questions:

1. Should I create another DB and SSO server for vCenter at site B? Or it can use the ones at site A? If it uses SIte A DB and SSO, will SRM work when we do planned DR or during disaster?
2. Should vCenter be in linked mode or Separate at each site?
3. If we have 3^rd Site (Say Site C) which is also a recovery site. Can we configure SRM in such a way that Site A VMs (Protected Site VMs) and failover to both Recovery Sites? ALso Do I need 3rd vCenter, SSO, DB at 3rd Site?

Many Thanks,

AG

[weinstein5]

A) Yes you will need DB and SSO instance - remember SRM is for DR so it is a safe assumption the the primary site is gone -

B) You will need a seperate vCenter in each site -

C) The above two answers do apply to the 3rd site -

[mal_michael]

Hi,

A. As weinstein5 said

B. Can be either in LInked Mode or Separate. Linked Mode requires SSO in mult-isite mode. Good article on SSO with SRM: http://blogs.vmware.com/vsphere/2013/02/linked-mode-with-sso-for-srm.html

C. This is not possible. SRM support only one-to-one and many-to-one scenarios. You can replicate the data to the third site via storage array, but the recovery process will be manual.

Michael.

[asrarguna]

Thank You weinstein5 and Michael for sharing the information. However I am confused with the answer C. I have got 1 positive and 1 negative reply for 3rd question C. Is there any documentation saying this scenario is not possible (1 to Many)?

Thanks- AG

[mal_michael · Accepted solution]

Believe me it is not possible.

I haven't seen this statement in the official documentation.

Michael.

[stainboy]

What you can do is to have 2 protected sites failing over to 1 recovery site. OR using storage replication, have a protected site failover to another site that has replication in place to a third site. Neither will cover what you are looking for.