I need to point out that the term "Policies" in WFA has changed to "Templates" with the 1.0 version of WFA. There were several reasons for this, but the main reason was to make a clear distinction that WFA Templates are different from Service Catalog Policies.
There are some slides in the WFA 1.0 Technical Presentation, but I know they only explain what Templates are. They don't necessarily show examples of Templates.
As mentioned in a previous communities discussion, the WFA 1.0 Technical Presentation is an initial document and it needs some fine tuning. I will do some quick edits right now to remove the references to "Policies" since those should have been changed to "Templates". I will also add a couple of slides to show how to access "Templates" and provide examples.
Please let me know if this helps, or if you have any additional questions.
thanks kevin, this is a bit clearer; although i'd still like to see/understand how & where they get applied (see my response to yaron, below)
on a slight tangent - i'd like to suggest avoiding "gold","silver","bronze", etc from template names (& policies for that matter): they're such arbitrary words & leave little scope for nuance or adjustment.
what is "gold" ? is it performance? is it availability? is it both? what if you can get high-enough performance on SATA with flashcache, but it needs to be extremely highly-available? is gold a 2hour RTO ? or 4? how many snapshots should we keep locally? etc etc etc - i'm sure you get what i mean.
i like the templates you show in the presentation: "VolumeForOracle", "ExportForVMWare", etc
at my WFA customer we're proposing services like: "VMWare datastore for VSI on NFS"; "VMWare datastore for VSI on NFS with local snapshots"; "VMWare datastore for VSI on NFS with remote backup"; etc
so i'd like to take this opportunity to start a movement of "ban the metals" - let's use more descriptive terms for the policies, templates and services we propose, and show people there's a Better Way to Do It.