I think is a nice idea indeed, and you can even use the VNX virtual appliance to do it even quicker. however, I still would prefer an official answer from VMware, and I'm sure Cormac can find it internally. I understood there are some degrees of freedom in the implmentation of the VVOLs design, but as much as VMware has pushed some strict rules on some design aspects, also the exact placement of VVOLs "pointers" (for a lack of a better term)are inside the VVOL itself. As Anton said at the beginning of the thread, VMFS has always been good cause it was self contained: every needed information (vmx and the linked files) are all in the filesystem, regardless what you connect to it.
Cormac is saying this should be the case also for VVOLs (I guess those info are in the config VVOL at this point, and with it you can trace the other VVOLS belonging to the same VM), but is this "it should" that still worries me. It means that a VVOL implementation could be potentially awesome or extremely dangerous (and I'm being polite...) depending on the storage vendor. I'd prefer VMware to force storage vendors to follow some design principles, and if not, the storage not being recognized and mounted by vCenter.
And by the way, since all the connection is done by vCenter, it means we cannot have a VVOL directly attached to a single ESXi I guess.
Anyway, this is becoming a really interesting conversation, the first in many months here in the forums.
EMEA Cloud Architect @ Veeam Software
Veeam VMCE #1