I have a vSphere design I am intending on submitted for the Toronto VCDX. Part of my deliverables for the project includes an SRM design. So within my vSphere design I have included the relevant components, in regard to resource pools, placeholder LUNs etc. Also my implementation plan includes references to setting up SRM. However I haven't yet completed the SRM design itself, or any install & config guides for SRM as it is still all in progress.
A) Need to submit the SRM design with the vSphere design for my VCDX. (Not 100% certain I will have the SRM design completed by then)
B) Submit the design as is, without the SRM documentation. (I am more than comfortable answering any SRM related questions that may come up)
C) Remove the SRM components from the design I submit for my VCDX
First, I am going to say that this is my opinion and may not reflect the opinions of the potential members of your review board.
Your submitted design must be complete. So, I would think that, if you have SRM, you will need to include the SRM design docs. I would hope that this would get flagged or accepted durng the submission of the design, but they have a lot of pressure to go through all of the documentation of the submissions.
Since SRM considerations create design decisions, you may still want to mention that the overall design must include SRM considerations for the future. That would allow you to go with option B if you can't get all of the documents completed by the time you need to submit it.
So, in a weird way, I am saying YES to all three options, in the order you posted them:
Try to get the SRM piece completed. If you cannot, try for option B, it will more clearly explain some of the decisions you made in the vSphere design. If the design submission gets rejected, go for option C.
Hoefully, someone else chimes in here, but don't expect any "official" answers from someone on the VCDX certification crew.
Best of luck to you!
IMHO the install and configuration guide or SRM could be out of the scope of VCDX application.
But if you plan to use SRM you must include LUN design, architectural schema and design, and at least the failover and failback procedure (IMHO to high level, because it's not an SRM design, but a vSphere design).
Another approach could be design the architercture for future implementation of SRM (and you can also write that could be a future enhanced), and actually simple define a manual procedure for failback and failover.
I have basically the exact same question except that my design includes vCloud Director 1.5 and all associated parts. Can we get an official response on whether the additional parts will be ignored, or are considered fair game for both the design and defense? I'd like to know in order to focus my efforts obviously.
I am facing the same challenge - it is my understanding that the design needs to be complete and IMO that means if SRM is a part of the design that is should be included in the design documentaton - but the final authority would be Brian Rice but I thin he will be somewhat nebulous in his reply because one of the goals of vcdx is to evaluate a candidiates ability to prepare and present a complete design-
I think if you include it in your design it's going to be fair game in the defense, so you shouldn't widen the scope to solutions you're not comfortable being cross examined on. The object is to demonstrate your knowledge, which can include breadth too, but you run the risk that someone on the panel will be able to go deep...
I'm fine defending it. It would actually be harder to pull it out of the design than to leave it in and defend it. I really just want an official response to ensure I'm not wasting time also making sure that I have operational procedures etc for that part if only the vSphere side is going to be considered.
Sent from my iPhone, please excuse typos and brevity.
admittedly this is not SRM but I had asked the question about using a vSphere 5 in the design and this is the answer I got from Brian Rice:
"Another caveat: When you bring vSphere n+1 into a VCDX version “n” application, you will be required to display full mastery of all the n+1 features used."
I interpret this to include any other VMware products used in the design.
Sorry to be late to the party! But the information people have been supplying in this thread has been pointed in the right direction. In fact, I can generalize Andre's comment:
But if you plan to use SRM you must include LUN design, architectural schema and design, and at least the failover and failback procedure.
In general: if you bring a VMware product in (be it SRM, vCloud Director, vSphere 5, or whatever), be prepared to go all the way with it. If you include SRM in your design, the reviewers and panelists will assume you're serious about it, and will analyze it (and your mastery of it) with the same rigor that they'll bring to the rest of the design.
If you are accepted to defend, the panelists will not accept "Sorry, somebody else did this part of the design" as an answer.
My design(s) included SRM, my advice is to include all the desgin, install, test, and operational procedures for it and any other product you put in your design as it will come up during your defense. If you mention it but don't include it in your docs your application could be rejected since it wouldn't be complete.
Thanks for all the comments, and the official word from Brian.
I have decided to go down the road of including SRM in my design and as such I am updating my supporting documentation to include it. Its adds a bit of workload but I think it will be benefical come defence time!
1 week left to go before cutoff! Looking forward to it.