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 350-901 Exam - Topic 5 Question 68 Discussion

A developer is designing a modem, distributed microservice enterprise application. The application will be integrating with other systems and focus on a large deployment, so control of API calls is necessary. What is the best practice to reduce application response latency and protect the application from excessive use?
B) Implement rate limiting on the client and server sides.
A) Implement rate limiting on the client side.
C) Do not enforce any rate Imiting
D) Implement rate limiting on the server side.

Cisco 350-901 Exam - Topic 5 Question 68 Discussion

Actual exam question for Cisco's 350-901 exam
Question #: 68
Topic #: 5
[All 350-901 Questions]

A developer is designing a modem, distributed microservice enterprise application. The application will be integrating with other systems and focus on a large deployment, so control of API calls is necessary. What is the best practice to reduce application response latency and protect the application from excessive use?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

by Willow at Mar 15, 2024, 01:05 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 350-901 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Vallie
9 months ago
B is the best choice for handling high traffic!
upvoted 0 times
...
Hillary
9 months ago
Wait, why would you limit on the client side? Seems odd.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ammie
10 months ago
Definitely not a fan of no rate limiting at all!
upvoted 0 times
...
Jestine
10 months ago
I think server-side only is enough, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorothy
10 months ago
Rate limiting on both sides is key for performance!
upvoted 0 times
...
Lorrie
10 months ago
I’m a bit confused about whether client-side rate limiting is effective enough. I thought the server-side was more critical for protecting the application.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavonda
11 months ago
I feel like we practiced a question similar to this, and I think the server-side rate limiting was emphasized as a key practice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tawanna
11 months ago
I think implementing rate limiting on both client and server sides makes sense, especially for a distributed system. It could help manage traffic effectively.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rozella
11 months ago
I remember discussing the importance of rate limiting in our last study group, but I'm not sure if it should be on both sides or just the server.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elliott
11 months ago
The key here is that the application needs to control API calls and reduce latency, so I'd say the best practice is to implement rate limiting on the server side. That way the application can directly manage and throttle incoming requests.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rodolfo
11 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the wording of the question. Does "do not enforce any rate limiting" mean that's the best practice, or that it's the worst option? I'll have to think about this one carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacquelyne
11 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. Since the application is distributed and focused on large deployments, I think implementing rate limiting on both the client and server sides would be the best approach to protect the application.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cecily
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. I know rate limiting is important, but I'm not sure if it's better to do it on the client or server side.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lemuel
11 months ago
This seems like a straightforward question about rate limiting. I'm pretty confident I know the best practice here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ernie
11 months ago
I remember we practiced using the `` tag, but I'm not sure if "shape='rectangle'" is the right attribute for this question.
upvoted 0 times
...
Phillip
11 months ago
This question looks pretty straightforward. I think I can handle it by carefully analyzing the information provided in the exhibits and applying the relevant concepts I've learned.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hector
11 months ago
Remote expert seems familiar; we covered AGVs in our study group last week. I might lean towards C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Barney
11 months ago
I'm a bit confused by this one. The options seem to cover different types of attacks, but I'm not sure which one fits best based on the information provided. I'll have to re-read the question and try to identify the key details.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anglea
11 months ago
The wording of these options is a bit tricky. I want to make sure I really understand the nuances of service composability before I start selecting answers. Let me re-read the question and think it through step-by-step.
upvoted 0 times
...
Clarinda
2 years ago
I think not enforcing any rate limiting could lead to high usage and impact application performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Terrilyn
2 years ago
That might be true, but having it on the server side adds an extra layer of protection.
upvoted 0 times
...
Allene
2 years ago
But wouldn't enforcing rate limiting on the client side only be enough to reduce response latency?
upvoted 0 times
...
Clarinda
2 years ago
I agree, it helps to control the flow of API calls and protect the application.
upvoted 0 times
...
Terrilyn
2 years ago
I think implementing rate limiting on both client and server sides is the best practice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ty
2 years ago
I believe option B is the most secure approach, covering both client and server sides.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rachael
2 years ago
But wouldn't implementing rate limiting on both client and server sides be more effective in controlling API calls?
upvoted 0 times
...
Dean
2 years ago
I agree with Tammara, server-side rate limiting can prevent excessive use and reduce latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tammara
2 years ago
I think implementing rate limiting on the server side would be the best option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Teddy
2 years ago
I'm with Beckie on this one. B is the way to go. Gotta protect that application from getting hammered, but also keep those response times snappy. Can't have one without the other, you know?
upvoted 0 times
...
Tequila
2 years ago
Haha, C is just begging for some serious performance issues, don't you think? I mean, who in their right mind would choose to not enforce any rate limiting at all? That's just asking for trouble.
upvoted 0 times
...
Claribel
2 years ago
You know, I was initially thinking D - server-side rate limiting only. But then I realized that could lead to a lot of wasted client-side resources if the requests are getting throttled. B makes a lot more sense to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beckie
2 years ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'm definitely leaning towards B - implementing rate limiting on both the client and server sides. That way, we can protect the application from excessive use and also ensure low response latency.
upvoted 0 times
Lemuel
2 years ago
I see, that makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Casey
2 years ago
Because implementing rate limiting on the server side can provide more control over API calls.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynda
2 years ago
Why do you think option D would be better?
upvoted 0 times
...
Regenia
2 years ago
D
upvoted 0 times
...
Fletcher
2 years ago
Good point, I agree with option B as well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tamekia
2 years ago
B
upvoted 0 times
...
Geoffrey
2 years ago
A
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel