Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Cisco 300-620 Exam - Topic 3 Question 83 Discussion

Refer to the exhibit.Refer to the exhibit. A Cisco ACI environment hosts two e-commerce applications. The default contract from a common tenant between different application tiers is used, and the applications work as expected. The customer wants to move to more specific contracts to prevent unwanted traffic between EPGs. A network administrator creates the app-to-db contract to meet this objective for the application and database tiers. The application EPGs must communicate only with their respective database EPGs. How should this contract be configured to meet this requirement?
C) Implement the app-to-db scope as VRF.
A) Set the app-to-db scope to Global.
B) Set the app-to-db scope to Application Profile.
D) Implement the app-to-db as a Taboo contract.

Cisco 300-620 Exam - Topic 3 Question 83 Discussion

Actual exam question for Cisco's 300-620 exam
Question #: 83
Topic #: 3
[All 300-620 Questions]

Refer to the exhibit.

Refer to the exhibit. A Cisco ACI environment hosts two e-commerce applications. The default contract from a common tenant between different application tiers is used, and the applications work as expected. The customer wants to move to more specific contracts to prevent unwanted traffic between EPGs. A network administrator creates the app-to-db contract to meet this objective for the application and database tiers. The application EPGs must communicate only with their respective database EPGs. How should this contract be configured to meet this requirement?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

in order to provide connectivity from EPGs from a specific site to networks reachable through a remote site L3OUT, a new stretched external EPG must be added to the existing L3OUT.


by Berry at Sep 13, 2024, 02:16 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 300-620 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Roosevelt
9 months ago
Implementing as VRF? Not sure that fits the requirement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bulah
9 months ago
I’m surprised they didn’t consider a Taboo contract!
upvoted 0 times
...
Shantay
10 months ago
Wait, why would anyone choose option A? Seems off.
upvoted 0 times
...
Horace
10 months ago
Totally agree, application profile makes sense here!
upvoted 0 times
...
Kati
10 months ago
I think option B is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Janella
10 months ago
I vaguely recall something about Taboo contracts, but I’m not confident if that applies to this situation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Fernanda
11 months ago
I practiced a similar question where the scope was set to Global, but I don't think that would limit traffic as needed here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shakira
11 months ago
I think setting the scope to Application Profile makes sense since it allows for more specific control between the app and database EPGs, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ocie
11 months ago
I remember studying the different scopes for contracts, but I'm not entirely sure which one is best for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Viva
11 months ago
This seems straightforward. The scope needs to be set to Application Profile to meet the requirement of restricting communication between the application and database tiers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eric
11 months ago
I've seen questions like this before. I believe the correct answer is to set the app-to-db scope to Application Profile, as that will limit the communication to just the intended EPGs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gladys
11 months ago
Okay, the key here is to ensure the application EPGs can only communicate with their respective database EPGs. I think setting the app-to-db scope to Application Profile might be the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lindy
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused by the different contract scope options. I'll need to make sure I understand the differences between them before selecting an answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shannan
11 months ago
This looks like a tricky one. I'll need to carefully review the options and think through the implications of each contract scope setting.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stephaine
11 months ago
Wait, what's the difference between "general employee information" and the other options? I'm a bit confused on that one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carman
1 year ago
Option C is a bit overkill for this scenario. Using a VRF would be like building a whole new highway system just to keep the cars in their lanes.
upvoted 0 times
Nan
1 year ago
Exactly, using a Taboo contract would be the most appropriate choice here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laurel
1 year ago
Setting the scope to Global might make it too broad, we need something more specific.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melodie
1 year ago
I think setting the scope to Application Profile would be a better option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavina
1 year ago
Agreed, using a VRF seems like too much for this situation.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Felice
1 year ago
Haha, I'd love to see the network admin try to implement the app-to-db contract as a Taboo contract. That would be like putting a 'Do Not Enter' sign on a two-way street!
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristel
1 year ago
I agree, B is the way to go. Scoping the contract to the Application Profile makes the most sense for this use case.
upvoted 0 times
Shawnta
1 year ago
User 2: I agree, scoping the contract to the Application Profile is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Britt
1 year ago
User 1: I think B is the best option here.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Alonzo
1 year ago
I'm not sure, but I think setting the scope to VRF could also work to meet the requirement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aron
1 year ago
I agree with Rebecka. Setting the scope to Application Profile will ensure that the application EPGs only communicate with their respective database EPGs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arthur
1 year ago
The correct answer is B. Setting the app-to-db contract scope to the Application Profile will restrict communication between the application and database EPGs within that profile, preventing unwanted traffic between tiers.
upvoted 0 times
Cherry
1 year ago
Exactly, it will prevent unwanted traffic between tiers within that profile.
upvoted 0 times
...
Benton
1 year ago
That makes sense, setting the scope to the Application Profile would restrict communication between the application and database EPGs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Junita
1 year ago
No, I believe the correct answer is B) Set the app-to-db scope to Application Profile.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wilda
1 year ago
I think the correct answer is A) Set the app-to-db scope to Global.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Rebecka
1 year ago
I think the contract should be configured with a scope of Application Profile.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel