HNY to you too Joe
Good you have some scope to look at some options.
I think the minimum RP for VM pack is 15, and I'm not sure of the licensing increments.
Having it centralized is a good point, as is the integration (the splitters are installed directly via VIB's).
A very appealing feature is that you can do VM level recovery as well as LUN/Datastore level. You get pretty much the same GUI orchestrations/testing functions etc as you do with SRM.
If I were doing a purchase and was looking solely to protect VMware VM's, RP for VM's would be my choice.
Drill your EMC rep to do you a good deal, as the Remote Protection pack is an expensive option (particularly when you consider maintenance) that you have paid for. Would be nice of them to work something out for a changeover.
At this point, would you say having the current version of RP worth keeping? From my understanding, we aren't looking to replicate any other type of LUNs except for VMWare LUNs.
No, you wouldn't have both RP and RP for VM's (if that's what you mean). You'll only have one or the other. (at least in the context of this discussion)
So here's the current status. Going to go with SRM and leverage Recoverpoint for the replication.
Question I have is do I have to setup a WAN interface on the vnx5400 for replication or is this done via SRM? If so, does that require the WAN connection to be on the ESX server it self?
If you are going with SRM and native RecoverPoint (physical appliances leveraging the RP SRA), then the replication mechanism will be done through the RPA's and RecoverPoint versus on the VNX itself. Each RPA will require a LAN and WAN connection and it is the WAN connection that will replicate the data between peer RPA's on the DR site. SRM will interact with RecoverPoint through the SRA by giving it the site mgmt. address of each RP cluster (Source and DR) and facilitate the failover/test mechanisms when invoked through SRM. There won't be any required WAN setup on the VNX or ESX servers using SRM with native RecoverPoint appliances.
Currently allocating a 10GB interface which will be trunkd for basic VM networks. Would allocating additional vlans on this interface for the vRPA be enough?
From a functionality perspective, different vlans should work as long as they are segmented per the requirements. From a performance perspective, you might want physical isolation on the interfaces, especially since you need isolation for the iSCSI and LAN/WAN networks. Here are the requirements for isolation in this guide on page 39/40: https://support.emc.com/docu9565_RecoverPoint_Installation_and_Deployment_Guide.pdf?
The current setup already has iscsi separated on its own 10GB interface via 2x multipaths so this may work.
I would hate to ask for additional 10GB card for 8-9 servers... ahhhhhhh