New Year Sale 2026! 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

Google Professional Cloud Network Engineer Exam - Topic 7 Question 29 Discussion

Actual exam question for Google's Professional Cloud Network Engineer exam
Question #: 29
Topic #: 7
[All Professional Cloud Network Engineer Questions]

You are designing a Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) cluster for your organization. The current cluster size is expected to host 10 nodes, with 20 Pods per node and 150 services. Because of the migration of new services over the next 2 years, there is a planned growth for 100 nodes, 200 Pods per node, and 1500 services. You want to use VPC-native clusters with alias IP ranges, while minimizing address consumption.

How should you design this topology?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

The service range setting is permanent and cannot be changed. Please see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/60957040/how-to-increase-the-service-address-range-of-a-gke-cluster I think the correc tanswer is A since: Grow is expected to up to 100 nodes (that would be /25), then up to 200 pods per node (100 times 200 = 20000 so /17 is 32768), then 1500 services in a /21 (up to 2048)

https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/book/network/understanding-cidr-subnet-mask-notation.html


by Ligia at May 07, 2022, 06:22 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium Professional Cloud Network Engineer Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Della
4 months ago
Wait, are we sure those ranges will cover everything?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ruby
4 months ago
A is definitely the best choice here!
upvoted 0 times
...
Jolanda
4 months ago
C is the simplest way to get started, but is it enough?
upvoted 0 times
...
Cordell
4 months ago
I disagree, B is too small for the planned services.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chu
5 months ago
Option A seems solid for future growth.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sharan
5 months ago
I recall that just creating a VPC-native cluster without specifying ranges might not be sufficient. Option D seems too basic for our requirements.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bev
5 months ago
I'm a bit unsure about the subnet sizes. I thought a /28 subnet would be too small for our needs, but option B suggests resizing later. That seems risky.
upvoted 0 times
...
Remedios
5 months ago
I remember we discussed the importance of choosing the right subnet size for Pods and Services. I think option A might be the best choice since it provides enough IPs for future growth.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ettie
5 months ago
I practiced a similar question where we had to create a VPC-native cluster. I think enabling IP aliasing is crucial, so option C sounds like a good approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lonny
5 months ago
Alright, let's do this! I'm going to go through the state diagram and make a list of all the invalid transitions. Then I'll count them up to get the final answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Clarence
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. I know RSVP is used for resource reservation, but I'm not totally clear on the specific actions a router would take when a session times out. I'll have to review my notes.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel