MENU
A network administrator must create a redundant vHBA for the mission-critical virtual machines (VMs) installed on a Cisco UCS Fabric Interconnect blade server. The VMs access multiple datastores using VSAN55 and VSAN95. The datastore on which the VMs are hosted must be accessible if any of the uplinks goes offline. Which action meets these requirements?
Suggested Answer: B
Get Premium 300-610 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
28 comments · newest first
AR
Aracelis
10 months ago
Wait, can you really attach both VSANs to one vHBA? Sounds risky!
AL
Alfreda
10 months ago
D seems off, load-balancing isn't the priority.
CA
Candida
11 months ago
C sounds right, failover is key here!
DO
Donte
11 months ago
I think B might actually work too, but not sure.
LE
Levi
11 months ago
A is the way to go for redundancy.
CO
Colby
11 months ago
Load balancing sounds good in theory, but I’m not sure if it actually provides the redundancy needed for the VMs in this scenario.
DU
Dustin
11 months ago
I think assigning both VSANs to the same vHBA could work, but I’m not completely confident if that meets the redundancy requirement.
RU
Rusty
12 months ago
This question feels similar to one we practiced where we had to ensure failover capabilities. I think enabling failover might be the right choice here.
TY
Tyisha
12 months ago
I remember we discussed the importance of redundancy in vHBAs, but I'm not sure if attaching VSANs to separate vHBAs is the best approach.
CH
Chandra
1 year ago
The key here is to have the VMs access the datastores through separate vHBAs. I'm going to go with option A, as it seems to best meet the requirements.
BA
Barney
1 year ago
I think option C might be the way to go. Enabling failover for the vHBA with both VSAN55 and VSAN95 enabled should ensure redundancy and maintain access to the datastore.
AY
Ayesha
1 year ago
Okay, let me think this through. We need to create a redundant vHBA for the mission-critical VMs, and the datastore must be accessible even if an uplink goes offline. I'm leaning towards option B, but I'll double-check the details.
BE
Bettina
1 year ago
This question seems straightforward, but I want to make sure I understand the requirements correctly before selecting an answer.
SH
Sheldon
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm not sure. Maybe I should have paid more attention in class instead of doodling cute kittens in my notebook.
LE
Leandro
1 year ago
D is the way to go! Load-balancing the vHBAs with the two VSANs is the best way to ensure high availability.
VA
Valentin
1 year ago
User 4: I think option D is the best solution for high availability.
MA
Mattie
1 year ago
User 3: I agree with Tammara, option A seems like the most logical choice.
TA
Tammara
1 year ago
User 2: I disagree, I believe option B is the way to go.
TI
Titus
1 year ago
User 1: I think option A is the best choice.
NO
Nobuko
1 year ago
I think enabling failover for the vHBA with both VSANs is the best option for redundancy.
AL
Alline
1 year ago
I'd go with C. Enabling failover for the vHBA with both VSANs should keep the datastore accessible even if an uplink goes down.
VA
Valentin
1 year ago
But wouldn't assigning both VSANs to separate vHBAs provide redundancy?
CR
Craig
1 year ago
Option B looks good to me. Assigning both VSANs to both vHBAs seems like the way to go for redundancy.
TO
Tori
1 year ago
User 3: That makes sense, it's important to have redundancy for mission-critical VMs.
LI
Lizette
1 year ago
User 2: I agree, having both VSAN55 and VSAN95 on both vHBAs ensures access to the datastore even if an uplink goes offline.
MA
Matthew
1 year ago
User 1: I think option B is the best choice. Assigning both VSANs to both vHBAs provides redundancy.
HE
Hermila
1 year ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is B.
VA
Valentin
1 year ago
I think the answer is A.