VCF Automation 9.1 has two provisioning models, as two kinds of organisation. I ran the same use cases through both, from Windows VMs to nested ESXi. The honest scorecard, and how each case is done.
The same VKS cluster built twice: once with kubectl, once as a VCF Automation request. The Cluster object is identical. Everything around it isn’t, and the difference is what you get for free.
How an interactive PowerShell script grew into a catalog item that builds complete nested VCF 9.1 instances from one request form. The design rules that made it survivable, and the traps behind them.
Terraform has plan. Kubernetes has –dry-run. Your vRO workflows have nothing, unless you give them a validateOnly input and pass it down. The most valuable checkbox in the lab factory.
A 400-line menu-driven PowerShell script became a cloud template, two vRO actions and two subscriptions. Where each behaviour belongs, four non-obvious decisions, and the ‘yes’ that isn’t ’true’.
Stage 2 of the lab factory: a vRO workflow turns an environment number into a VCF 9.1 deployment spec, validates it and starts bringup, because the request dies long before the eight-hour build does.