MENU
You are creating the CLI script to be used on a new SD-WAN deployment You will have branches with a different number of internet connections and want to be sure there is no need to change the Performance SLA configuration in case more connections are added to the branch.
The current configuration is:
Which configuration do you use for the Performance SLA members?
Suggested Answer: B
Get Premium NSE8_812 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
Performance SLA | FortiGate / FortiOS 7.4.0
Configuring Performance SLA | FortiGate / FortiOS 7.4.0
25 comments · newest first
GW
Gwenn
3 months ago
A static config might be safer for performance.
CA
Casie
3 months ago
But what if it complicates troubleshooting?
RE
Reena
4 months ago
Agreed, it makes scaling easier.
TE
Terry
5 months ago
I think we should use a dynamic configuration.
DA
Dallas
5 months ago
Just make sure to test it after adding new connections!
LA
Laurel
5 months ago
I think you should specify the minimum bandwidth for each connection.
KE
Kent
6 months ago
Wait, does that really work with varying connection numbers?
DE
Derick
6 months ago
Totally agree, that way it scales automatically!
AY
Ayesha
6 months ago
You can set the SLA members to use all available connections.
LA
Lamonica
6 months ago
Haha, "Any" is the way to go. Ain't nobody got time for that manual config nonsense!
SO
Soledad
6 months ago
"Any" is the obvious choice here. Who wants to deal with manual config changes, am I right?
RO
Rosenda
6 months ago
I'd go with the "Any" option to avoid having to update the config every time a new connection is added.
VA
Vallie
7 months ago
The "Any" option seems like the way to go to future-proof the configuration.
MA
Marya
7 months ago
Use the "Any" option for the Performance SLA members.
EA
Earnestine
7 months ago
I think we should look into using a loop in the script to handle the connections, but I'm not entirely confident about the implementation details.
FE
Felix
8 months ago
I feel like we covered this in our last session, but I can't recall the exact syntax for adding multiple members without hardcoding them.
FR
Francesco
8 months ago
This reminds me of a practice question where we had to configure SLA for different branches. I think we might need to use a wildcard or a template approach.
LY
Lyla
8 months ago
I remember we discussed how to set up Performance SLA for multiple connections, but I'm not sure if we need to use a specific command for dynamic scaling.
LO
Louvenia
8 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the wording of the question. I want to make sure I fully grasp what the requirements are before I start trying to come up with a solution. Let me re-read this a few times to make sure I understand it correctly.
TO
Tori
8 months ago
Okay, I see the current configuration. I think the key here is to set up the Performance SLA members in a way that can accommodate different numbers of internet connections at the branches. I'll need to think through the best approach for that.
ME
Mel
9 months ago
Hmm, this seems like it could be tricky. I'll need to make sure I understand the requirements around not needing to change the configuration if more connections are added. Maybe I can find a way to make the configuration flexible and scalable.
JO
Joanna
9 months ago
I think I need to look closely at the current configuration and understand how the Performance SLA members are set up. That will give me a good starting point for determining the appropriate configuration.
IR
Iraida
3 months ago
Once we have that, we can decide on the best configuration for future connections.
DE
Denny
3 months ago
Definitely! We should analyze the existing Performance SLA members first.
MA
Marleen
3 months ago
I agree, understanding the current setup is crucial.