Hi
Awesome question! 🙂
According to my understanding this is the deal:
vPC is basically a PortChannel so it expects LACP or a manually configured PortChannel from its peer.
I strongly believe your setup is not a supported configuration. It will probably work though, but some of the links will be disabled because of STP and LACP and I think you won't reap the benefits of a clean failover in case an MX or vPC member goes offline.
Also keep in mind the MXes *don't run STP*, take that into account when you design (= don't disable or filter STP).
We have a few clients with such a setup and the best way for us is to just use no vPC / bonding whatsoever between the MXes and the switches. Mainly because the MXes don't support bonding/aggregating their ports. (I don't know why they don't, it's a feature I dearly miss).
So basically just connect the MXes to each of the Nexuses (as in your diagram) just don't use any vPC between those. Let STP figure it out. And use "orphan-port suspend" (https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/sw/design/vpc_design/vpc_best_practice... page 125 ) to safeguard against peer-link failure. Basically ports connected to MXes would be "orphan ports" as Cisco calls them.
And I strongly recommend not to use the VRRP link between the MXes. According to our experience this would perhaps result in a bit better switchover behaviour, but it increases complexity of the setup and some MX firmwares (I think all 14.x) have a problem where during startup they actually create loops and flood the network in such a setup (and never converge as a result). We have seen this on occasion before fixing it by removing the VRRP link between the MXes (even if configured correctly with VLAN pruning).
HTH