Tag: VMware (Page 2 of 3)

vSphere 5 Licensing Thoughts

July 18, 2011 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

VMware added over 130 new features to the next version of their flagship hypervisor, vSphere 5. Due to be released in Q3 of 2011, vSphere 5 will see the next step in the evolution of virtualization, enabling a number of new technologies and providing a solid infrastructure for cloud computing. Along with improved features, VMware is also introducing a new licensing model meant to prepare vSphere for the future.

Processors are changing. VMware has acknowledged that the current emphasis on licensing by processor, with restrictions on the number of cores, will not match up to where CPU capabilities are going. With vSphere 4, CPU licenses had core limitations that varied between either 6 cores or 12 cores, based on edition.

Processors with 8 and 12 cores are becoming more common, and will soon be the standard. To accomodate this, VMware has removed all limitations based on processor cores from its vSphere 5 licensing model. However, as new servers with two twelve core processors and high memory capacities become more common, VMware has placed a new emphasis on memory in its licensing model. To be specific, virtual memory is allocated to a running virtual machine.

Let’s first break down the licensing models for vSphere 4 and vSphere 5, then review a few possible scenarios:

vSphere 4
Edition	Price
Standard	$795
Advanced	$2,245
Enterprise	$2,875
Enterprise Plus	$3,495

vSphere 5
Edition	Price
Standard	$995
Enterprise	$2,875
Enterprise Plus	$3,495

Scenario One – 4 Moderate Servers:
CPU Per Server = 2 x 6-Core CPU
RAM Per Server = 96GB

CPU in Pool = 8
RAM in Pool = 384GB
vRAM Licensed in Pool = 384GB

In this scenario, nothing will change. The only potential impact would be if you heavily oversubscribed memory and actually had more than 384GB of vRAM assigned to running VMs simultaneously. Though not recommend, this could be done. In that case, one additional license would be added to the pool; the additional CPU would not be assigned to a server, but the additional vRAM would be consumed from the pool.

Scenario Two – 4 Larger Servers:
CPU Per Server = 2 x 6-core CPU
RAM Per Server = 128GB

CPU in Pool = 8
RAM in Pool = 512GB
vRAM Licensed in Pool = 384GB

In this scenario, migrating to the vSphere 5 licensing model would likely not have an immediate impact unless more than 75% of physical RAM was currently committed to running VMs. Once 384GB of vRAM is allocated, an additional license will be required. The CPU of the new license will not be used, but the licensed vRAM pool will grow to 432GB. If the environment grows beyond 432GB of allocated vRAM, then add another license and grow the vRAM pool to 480GB.

Scenario Three – 4 Very Large Servers:
CPU Per Server = 2 x 8-Core
RAM Per Server = 192GB

CPU in Pool = 8
RAM in Pool = 768GB
vRAM Licensed in Pool = 384GB

This scenario is most likely going to impacted. Historically, this is a rare configuration that is general only used in a few special cases. Often, the CPU in this scenario will max out long before the RAM is consumed. In this scenario, additional licenses will have to be purchased for the purpose of adding additional RAM to the vRAM pool. The amount of additional licenses will be driven by overall consumption, and not tied directly to any one server.

Scenario Four – 2 Very Large Servers (migrating from 4 large servers)
CPU Per Server = 2 x 12-Core
RAM Per Server = 192GB

CPU in Pool = 4
RAM in Pool = 384GB
vRAM Licensed in Pool = 192GB

This is a hardware refresh scenario resulting from migrating from the 4 Moderate Servers shown in Scenario one in order to leverage higher CPU core densities and higher RAM capacities of the newer servers. Though there are only 4 CPUs in this configuration, you already owned 8 CPU licenses from scenario one. Those additional licenses would bring the vRAM pool up to 384GB, matching the physical RAM in the pool. You would be going from scenario one with 48 CPU cores and 384GB RAM, to scenario four with 48 CPU cores and 384GB RAM. This scenario cuts 4 physical servers down to 2 and 8 CPU sockets down to 4, but does not change overall CPU or memory capacities. Likewise, licensing requirements would be unchanged.

Scenario Five – 4 Moderate Servers:
CPU Per Server = 2 x 6-Core CPU
RAM Per Server = 96GB

CPU in Pool = 8
RAM in Pool = 384GB
vRAM Licensed in Pool = 384GB

In this scenario, the servers are dedicated for a disaster recovery role. Their resources are generally unused. By connecting the vCenter server in this environment to your production vCenter server (as linked vCenter servers), you not only gain better visibility for administration but you will also bring an additional 384GB of vRAM into your production pool for allocation. In a linked configuration, all vCenter servers will pool their licenses into one aggregate pool.

Summary:

There are now two factors to consider in determining license needs. First, determine licensing needs based on physical CPU count. Then assess the total vRAM allocation across all VMs within your environment (which may span multiple locations if using linked vCenter servers). Your license count will need to be sized to cover both of those numbers.

One option to consider is leveraging unused vRAM capacity from environments that may traditionally not consume high levels of vRAM. These could include environments hosting Unified Communications deployments or even disaster recovery environments. Simply use the linked vCenter feature to combine all of these licenses into a common pool. I have always recommended organizations link all of their vCenter servers together, for the many administrative advantages this configuration provides. However, with the new licensing model, such a configuration can also provide for better license utilization.

In terms of availability and agility, it is also important to note that vRAM limits are “soft” limits that are monitored and alerted on, but will not actually prevent a virtual machine from being powered on. You are bound by your End User License Agreement to comply with these license limits, but VMware has chosen to monitor based on this metric and not actually impose hard limits that may negatively impact your ability to respond to business demands.

Mind the “Air Gap”

May 27, 2011 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

I regularly work with organizations that are wary of mixing public and private workloads in a common virtualization environment. Whether it is mixing public and private workloads, mixing multiple organizations on a common virtual infrastructure or simply mixing workloads from various internal networks, there is still a lot of concern around the security aspects of this discussion. Many people still look at one physical server, and get uneasy about different workloads sharing that server. Logically, many people relate it to sharing an operating system and that is the root of many concerns. This is an easy misconception, since traditional deployments have long been just that, one operating system for each physical server. If not properly explained, virtualization remains a black box to many people and old perceptions remain in place.

This is where we, as consultants and virtualization architects, need to do a better job of explaining new technologies. In this, case, it is not even a new technology, just a real lack of education in the marketplace. In 2001, the National Security Agency (NSA) worked with VMware on a project called NetTop to develop a platform for mixing secure and non-secure workloads on a common device. Previously the NSA maintained an “Air Gap” policy of not letting servers with mixed security needs touch each other. With the NetTop project, the NSA leveraged virtualization to bring these workloads onto a common server or workstation. This was not 2 years ago, but 10 years ago. And the security measures deployed in NetTop have only been improved on since then.

In fact, in 2007, the NSA came back to VMware to develop their High Assurance Platform (HAP). I won’t pretend to know your security needs, but I know virtualization has long been used for mixing highly sensitive data by people who live and die by data security.

iPad vCenter Client

March 18, 2011 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

Had to throw out a quick comment on the new iPad vCenter Client from VMware.

For over a year now, VMware has offered the vCenter Mobile Access (vCMA) appliance. I have used it internally, but it has never caught on as well as I had thought. One drawback was the lack of SSL support, and that was fixed last week. Here are some quick screenshots of vCMA in action (these were on an iPad, it is really made to be viewed on a smaller PDA or phone screen, so some screens have excess whitespace):

vCMA was a great tool, but it just got better. VMware has developed a new iPad vCenter Client that leverages the vCMA to provide an even better user interface. Like the vCMA, the iPad vCenter Client can only do about 50% of the standard functions available in the Windows vCenter Client, but they are now committed to growing this application and adding more functionality. From some of the pre-launch discussions I was able to be in, VMware is very excited about this tool and anxious to begin expanding it’s functionality. The iPad client connects through the vCMA, and I am not sure I will be exposing it to the internet any time soon. I only operate a lab, and the vCMA now has SSL support, but I have VPN access and will likely use that to allow vCMA to stay behind the firewall…for now. Here are some shots of the iPad client, and you can see how much it improves on the previous vCMA interface:

As you can see in the images above (click on any to enlarge them), you can view the stats for ESXi hosts and for the VMs from the main screen. There is a small stats icon in the upper right corner of each VM’s image that will change its image form a banner representing the OS to a stats chart. Once you drill down to a VM, you can perform start/stop/suspend/restart functions, as well as restore snapshots. You can also view recent events, monitor stats and perform tests (ping and traceroute). Not bad for a convenient app you take with you on an iPad.

Steve Herrod, CTO at VMware, officially announced the iPad vCenter Client this morning, along with a link to this article on VMware’s CTO blog site.

Eric Siebert (virtualization guru and fellow vExpert) also wrote a great post on this at vSphere-Land. Be sure to follow the “full article” and “part 2” links at the bottom of the article to get more information and installation instructions.

As great as this client is, do not feel left out if you do not have an iPad (or if you use one of those inferior tablets…Aaron ;-), you can still use the vCMA from almost any mobile browser on a cell phone or tablet. Though the interface is not as refined, it will provide the same basic functionality.

VMware Express – The Challenge

September 19, 2010 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

If you have not had a chance to see the VMware Express, you should stop now and go read up on it HERE. To see it in person, look at the schedule HERE.

This is an amazing vehicle, and the result of a strong commitment by VMware to demonstrate both their own technologies and those of their partners. You have a world class data center on wheels, traveling the country to promote the game changing virtualization technologies VMware has to offer.

Since seeing the data center in a trailer at VMWorld 2008, I have loved the concept of how much processing power and functionality you can pack into a mobile data center with virtualization. As a customer, I was excited when VMware announced the VMware Express several months ago and was checking the schedule for my first chance to actually get inside. Now that I am a partner, I see this as a mobile marketing tool (which it really always was). I am now checking the schedule for opportunities to bring customers to see the VMware Express.

In fact, that brings up a second point. Many partners are working on mobile demo platforms, looking to create platforms that can demonstrate core virtualization functionalities with a price tag and footprint that actually make the unit feasible. To that point, two people have put together some very impressive mobile demo platforms. Simon Gallagher (@vinf_net) has developed the v.T.A.R.D.I.S., and describes it on his blog HERE and HERE. This is a configuration made of two cheap PC-grade desktops, hosting 4 ESXi servers as VM’s and another 60 VM’s running on those hosts. With this, you can easily demo vMotion, DRS, SRM, VDI and many other technologies. At VMWorld, Simon also pointed me to Didier Pironet’s (@dpironet) post on a similar setup using slightly more powerful computers. You can read Didier’s post HERE.

So what is the challenge? What if there was a vehicle with a portion of the VMware Express functionality, in a footprint that was more feasible for partners to use? Maybe utilizing a setup similar to Simon’s or Didier’s, throwing in a wireless network and a Cisco Cius, an Apple iPad and a smaller zero client that could be used for a demonstration anywhere in the range of the wireless network. Maybe even throw in one wireless repeater for a little boost. Imagine showing a nice SRM or VDI demo, then saying “And all of this is running from that small vehicle out the window.”

I would recommend the Mini Club-S, taking out the back seats and leveraging the slightly expanded interior room. Besides, if you are making a miniature version of the VMware Express, why not use a “Mini”? Ladies and gentlemen, I present the VMware Mini-Express concept car.

So, that is the challenge. VMware, could you make a VMware Mini-Express, come up with a good competition and award it to a partner at VMware Partner Exchange next spring? Maybe even create a few additional Mini-Expresses to use in a regional role within VMware sales/marketing. Either way, it would make a great showcase for just how much power you can fit in a small package with VMware technologies. In fact, you could almost fit this in the conference room of the VMware Express trailer for transportation and have them tour together. Now I see images of Knight Rider or Smokey and The Bandit, but that is another blog post all together 😉

If anyone does decide to take up this challenge, even if only for your own use, please let me know. I would love to see the final product!

It’s 10pm, where is your capacity?

July 16, 2010 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

You can no longer simply set an alarm on capacity measurements and trust that to keep you clear of capacity problems, especially if you are looking at virtualization and/or cloud computing. Shared resources are a tremendous gain for efficiency, but can be a double-edged sword when it come to managing that shared capacity. It is well worth the extra effort, but you need to know how critical that extra effort is.

You can no longer just know where your capacity is, you have to know how it got there, where it is going, why it is going there, WHEN it is going there, what factors may speed up or slow down that growth rate…I think you get the point. The role of resource/capacity management has just stepped into the spotlight, and you need to adjust your policies and practices to recognize that.

Read more on this topic in the SearchServerVirtualization article “It’s 10p.m. Do you know where your capacity is?“, then come back here to leave your comments. These are big topics, I would love to hear what you think or how you may be adjusting to these changes.

vSphere 4.1

July 13, 2010 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

Just a year after introducing vSphere 4.0, which ushered in dramatic performance gains and increases in configuration maximums, vSphere 4.1 is now available. Once again, the performance gains and increased configuration maximums are big. These are the kind of gains rarely seen in a major release, let alone a minor rev update.

Another notable piece of information about vSphere 4.1…it will be the last release to feature the ESX product. ESXi has long been hailed as the successor to the vSphere throne, and now they have set a date. Well, not a date, but a marker. The next release of vSphere, likely in 2011, will only include the ESXi product. For all of those vendors still relying on the CLI of ESX, wake up and smell the vMA coffee.

A few highlights in the many vSphere 4.1 improvements are:

3x increase in VMs per host
2x to 4x increase in concurrent vMotions (no longer VMotion as of 4.1)
Improvements in the scalability of Linked Mode (I LOVE this feature in vSphere)
Added Memory Compression to provide further gains in efficient memory utilization
DRS VM Host affinity rules (more on this below)
Active Directory integration on the ESX/ESXi Host
Multiple vCPU per virtual socket (think of vCPUs as cores in a virtual multi-core proc)
Host Profiles can now roll out password changes (host profiles are right up there with Linked Mode for me, great new feature in vSphere)
Fault Tolerance (FT) was made a little more forgiving in handling patch level mismatches
Network I/O control to group and manage NIC bandwidth by traffic types (VM, vMotion, FT, etc)
Load-Based Teaming for vNetwork Distributed Switches, to keep the load balanced across all physical adapters (vDS is probably my favorite new vSphere feature)
Hardware Acceleration with vStorage APIs for Array Integration (VAAI – more on this below).
ESXi can be deployed via a new scripted install feature (as a long time Unix/Linux admin, I really like this…but I did not have the time to test it in the beta)

DRS VM host affinity rules are something I was very excited to see in the beta. As I have been implementing vSphere and designing a private cloud environment, a lot of effort has gone into the right methods for determining cluster groupings. Licensing is always a pain point in these discussions. I lose efficiency in creating a two small licensing-driven clusters for applications A and B, while maintaining N+1 within both clusters. If I could create one larger cluster, forcing the appropriate VMs to remain on their licensed group of hosts, I gain efficiency in the N+1 capacity if nothing else. There is also ease of management and a number of other advantages to this.

Now, throw into the mix that application A never allows the instances to run on unlicensed hardware, but application B will allow the instances to temporarily run on unlicensed servers in the event of a hardware failure. The new affinity rules will allow you to state that group A can never run anywhere else, while stating that group B can run somewhere else in an HA event. Now this feature becomes even more valuable.

Another new feature worth dedicating a few lines to is the VAAI. This will allow vSphere 4.1 to offload specific storage operations to compliant storage hardware. Why make vSphere use the less efficient “this copy command will work anywhere” approach for Storage vMotion when NetApp or EMC already have specialized commands on their arrays for these functions and know the most efficient way to carry out the task. This is a true win-win partnership with the storage vendors and one that can yield significant performance gains in your environment. Look for the major storage vendors to all be announcing their support for this within days, not weeks.

Finally, I will part with a list of KB articles passed on to me from our friendly neighborhood Technical Account Manager at VMware. Carl Olafson has always been quick to share information with me at my work, and this particular list is all public info. That being the case, I will pass it on to you:

KB Article: 1022842 – Changes to DRS in vSphere 4.1
KB Article: 1022290 – USB support for ESX/ESXi 4.1
KB Article: 1022263 – Deploying ESXi 4.1 using the Scripted Install feature
KB Article: 1021953 – I/O Statistics in vSphere 4.1
KB Article: 1022851 – Changes to vMotion in vSphere 4.1
KB Article: 1022104 – Upgrading to ESX 4.1 and vCenter Server 4.1 best practices
KB Article: 1023118 – Changes to VMware Support Options in vSphere 4.1
KB Article: 1021970 – Overview of Active Directory integration in ESX 4.1 and ESXi 4.1
KB Article: 1021769 – Configuring IPv6 with ESX and ESXi 4.1
KB Article: 1022844 – Changes to Fault Tolerance in vSphere 4.1
KB Article: 1023990 – VMware ESX and ESXi 4.1 Comparison
KB Article: 1022289 – Changing the number of virtual CPUs per virtual socket in ESX/ESXi 4.1

vExpert 2010

June 7, 2010 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

First, I am humbled and honored to have been a vExpert in 2009. As the year went on, and I got to know more of my fellow vExperts, I was in awe of the people that I was sharing this title with. In fact, it inspired me to work even harder and to put more effort into be an active member of the virtualization community.

That being said, I am amazed to once again receive the vExpert award for 2010. I look forward to learning from my fellow vExperts, as they are a truly talented group of people. I have yet to meet a vExpert that was not both highly talented and eager to assist. In fact, that is why they are vExperts.

Some of you may be asking, what is a vExpert? VMware describes it like this:

The VMware vExpert Award is given to individuals who have significantly contributed to the community of VMware users over the past year.

The criteria for vExpert selection are value to the community, technical merit, effectiveness, professionalism, reach and effort. The group is full of authors, bloggers, technology leaders and a wide range of highly skilled individuals. Again, I am humbled to have been grouped with these people.

Being a vExpert led me to become more involved in sharing my opinions and contributing to discussions via twitter. I also launched this blog site and began writing for Tech Target. In these pursuits I received a lot of input and advice from fellow vExperts like Steve Kaplan, David Davis and Scott Lowe. Those names stand out, but so many others have contributed to helping me grow. John Troyer, the driving force within VMware that launched the vExperts and a number of other programs, worked very hard to add value to this program last year. John is promising even more from the coming year and I cannot wait to see what that will look like.

To all of my fellow 2009 vExperts, thank you so much for your encouragement and assistance, it was an honor to share that title with you. To my fellow 2010 vExperts, congratulations! I am honored to be in your company and I look forward to getting to know you better as the year goes on.

VMWorld 2010 – Please Vote

May 20, 2010 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

Public voting for VMWorld 2010 will be live through May 26, so please make sure you stop by, review the submissions and vote for the ones that you would like to see. This year, VMware received a record number of submissions, and will be using a model of fewer high quality sessions with more repeat opportunities to attend. With more people competing for fewer slots, your opinion is even more important. To vote, go to:

http://www.vmworld.com/community/conferences/2010/cfpvote/

As a shameless plug, here is a rundown of the sessions that I am involved in. I have presented at the last 3 VMWorld conferences, and am very passionate about the topics I have submitted this year (due to a flaw that only shows one presenter per session, my name will not appear as presenter on some of these tracks on the voting site).

——————————————-

Tech & Architecture – PC8279 From Guessing to Knowing: An Effective Architecture
http://www.vmworld.com/community/conferences/2010/cfpvote/hapcloud

This is a great session that I have worked on with Michael Mannarino from VMware’s Professional Services Organization. We will walk you through a sound approach to designing an environment where decisions are based on defensible data and where every business requirement is mapped to a design element. As organizations prepare to expand virtualization further into their environment, or even to develop cloud computing strategies, they not only need to be able to solidify their requirements and practices, but they must know how to measure and enforce compliance. By breaking available resources (memory, cpu, storage, etc) into units of allocation, this approach assists organizations in better understanding how business requirements impact the ratio of raw capacity to usable capacity.

Mark Vaughn
Michael Mannarino

——————————————-

Tech & Architecture – TA8351 Linux P2V Hurdles and How To Overcome Them
http://www.vmworld.com/community/conferences/2010/cfpvote/tarchitecture

This session breaks down the tools available for Linux P2V migrations, and the caveats to each one. In the Linux world, there are a number of “gotchas” in the P2V process, and many failures are actually near misses that can be quickly repaired in a few easy steps. I have 14 years of Unix/Linux experience and over 4 years of experience with Linux on VMware.

Mark Vaughn

——————————————-

First American Virtualizes WebLogic Server in Production – Lessons Learned and Best Practices
http://www.vmworld.com/community/conferences/2010/cfpvote/eapplications

Between Troy and myself, we have over 24 years of java experience, with a large portion of that on the WebLogic Server. In addition to being a VCP3 and VCP4, I am also a WebLogic Certified Administrator. Troy is both an administrator and developer with a very deep knowledge of java from any angle. In this session, we evaluate an environment that has run on WebLogic Server for over 10 years, with more than 3 years of that being on VMware.

Mark Vaughn
Troy Washburn

——————————————-

Tech & Architecture – TA7363 Ask the vExperts
http://www.vmworld.com/community/conferences/2010/cfpvote/tarchitecture

The Traditional panel of leading Virtualisation experts who will be quizzed and squeezed for their knowledge. There will be 4 to 5 panellists and a moderator to lead the session and questions will be asked from the floor. The format will be free flowing and and virtualization topic will be covered. As per the successful panel as VMworld 2009, requests for questions will be issues prior to the conference to enable fillers during quiet times. Not all personal will be at both conferences

Tom Howarth (submitter)
Chad Sakac
Scott Lowe
Cody Bunch
Jason McCarty
Ken Cline
Mark Vaughn

——————————————-

Virtualization 101 – V18354 Virtualization Advice From vExperts
http://www.vmworld.com/community/conferences/2010/cfpvote/v101

A panel of industry experts will discuss virtualization technologies, cloud computing, business strategies, architectural design considerations and overall best practices related to virtualization. Discussion topics will include: the business case for virtualization, virtualization technologies and their strengths/weaknesses, design challenges in a virtualized environment, and horizontal vs vertical design of a virtualization platform. This session will also include opportunities for quesitons from the public.

Mark Vaughn
Simon Gallagher
Joachim Heppner
David Convery

Death of the OS

May 10, 2010 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

I wouldn’t begin the funeral procession just yet, but the server OS may have to come to grips with its own mortality soon. As virtual appliances progress, they are returning the focus to the application and moving the OS from the role of a maintenance burden to one of a service enabler.

Case in point, I used to run a 486 workstation my home router. It ran Linux and had two NICs, with the ipchains and ipfwd services providing my firewall and routing. I loved building that, I even had the entire thing running DSL Linux and booting form a write-protected floppy at one point. Over time, that server’s value diminished. For $30, I could by a wireless router that did much more, and did not require hours of messing with NE1000 NIC drivers every time I did a kernel upgrade. The home router appliance removed the administrative concerns of the OS, actually locking it away from my meddling fingers. I no longer know or care what distribution of Linux it uses, what rev of drivers are in use, or even what the hardware components are. I turn it on, answer a few questions from my web browser and walk away. Aside from the occasional firmware updates, I forget it is even there…and that is of tremendous value to me.

When your server OS requires more maintenance than the application or service being delivered, your priorities are out of alignment with your business needs. Virtual appliances are seeking to return a healthy balance to the data center, turning the attention back toward the service. To read more of my thoughts on this, read my latest TechTarget article, “JeOS: Death of the operating system“.

As always, your feedback is welcome.

VMWorld 2010 Content Selection process

May 5, 2010 / Mark Vaughn / 0 Comments

The process of selecting sessions for VMWorld 2010 is rolling along, and registrations is now open for both the US and European conferences. With virtualization and cloud computing being the hot technologies on every business’ radar for 2010, it is no surprise that this year brought in a record number of submissions for the VMWorld 2010 Call for Papers.

Changes

For anyone familiar with the content selection process for previous VMWorld conferences, there are three changes to be aware of this year. First, there will be no registering for sessions. The process of registering for sessions has always ended in popular sessions being overbooked, with people waiting in lines with the hopes of snagging some space to stand in the back of the room or simply being turned away.

This brings us to the second change, fewer unique sessions. With a record number of submissions and no registration for sessions, why lower the number of unique sessions? Good question. The goal is to have higher quality sessions, and more repeats to insure everyone gets a chance to attend them. Hopefully, this will lead to fewer lines and more opportunities to catch the sessions that matter the most. If you are like me, you have been in the situation where some time slots on the session agenda had nothing of interest for you, while other time slots had multiple items and you could only pick one. With the new approach, I hope that I will not be faced with those difficult choices this year.

The final change is one I think everyone will like. In each track, a percentage of sessions have been allocated for selection through online voting. Track Owners will be soliciting feedback from the Content Committee and selecting their portion of sessions, then the remaining submissions will be opened up to the public for online review and voting. I think this is a great idea, giving people a chance to provide input on what they want to attend at VMWorld.

Process

Here is a quick breakdown on the process for selecting this year’s content.

CORRECTION: final emails will now go out week of June7, not June 2 as originally stated.

April 9 – Call for Papers Ends
Originally set for April 2, the Call for Papers was extended to April 9. This process is for the non-paid sessions at VMWorld. Vendors and partners can purchase sponsorship packages that come with paid sessions for promoting their services, but this process is for the non-paid sessions, so all content is supposed to be focused on business and technical value instead of selling products or services. To allow the Track Owners more control over their tracks, filtering of marketing content and incomplete submissions are only lightly applied at this point.

April 19-30 – Content Committee Voting
The Content Committee is selected from a cross-section of customers, partners and VMware employees. This committee will review, rank and leave comments for a particular track(s) of content. Each submission is ranked on a scale of 1-5. If necessary, they can also work with the Track Owner to request additional information from a submission owner to better understand their content and the message they hope to convey.

May 3-7 – Initial Session Selections
At this stage, the Track Owners will use the feedback from the Content Committee to aid in selecting a predefined portion of their total conference sessions. After Track Owners make their initial selections, another round of filtering will take place. Submissions that are too heavily geared towards marketing, that are incomplete or that fail to line up with the conference tracks are eliminated. This leaves a selection of good content for the public voting.

May 14-26 – Public Voting on vmworld.com
Remaining sessions will be made available for public voting on the vmworld.com website. If you do not already have an account here, you can set one up for free. You will be able to review session content and vote on what you think would be the most valuable material for VMWorld.

May 31-June 4 – Final Session Selections
The public votes will be tabulated and used to fill the remaining track sessions for VMWorld 2010.

Week of June 7 – Notifications Sent to Submitters
Good or bad, this is when submitters will learn their fate. You cannot cheat and assume that if you content was not available during the public voting that it was selected in Initial Session Selections (I already checked on that), because of the two filtering steps that take place prior to the public voting. The week of June 7 will truly be your first chance to find out the fate of your submission.

Let The Games Begin

I personally reviewed 275 submissions in the “Private Cloud – Management” track. I found very few that were not good, and many that were great. I do not envy the Track Owners that have to narrow this list down, but I do look forward to a second chance to vote during the public voting. I am excited about the changes, and I cannot wait to see the final session list. I think these changes will make for a better experience, I just hope my submissions can make it through this more difficult selection process.

NOTE: I updated this post to reflect that final notices will be sent to submitters the week of June 7, not on June 2 as originally stated. Public voting also moved to start on May 14.

For more information on VMWorld, follow @vmworld on twitter, visit the VMWorld website or visit the VMWorld Community Discussion page.

Tag: VMware (Page 2 of 3)

vSphere 5 Licensing Thoughts

Mind the “Air Gap”

iPad vCenter Client

VMware Express – The Challenge

It’s 10pm, where is your capacity?

vSphere 4.1

vExpert 2010

VMWorld 2010 – Please Vote

Death of the OS

VMWorld 2010 Content Selection process

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Categories