If you wish to block user access to MSN messenger, which chain should the firewall rule be placed in?
Suggested Answer: C
Get Premium MTCNA Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
13 comments · newest first
OR
Ora
11 months ago
Just blocking MSN? Seems a bit extreme!
JE
Jennie
12 months ago
Nope, definitely output!
KI
Kindra
12 months ago
Wait, are you sure? I thought it was input.
KA
Kallie
12 months ago
Totally agree, output is the right place!
GE
Gerald
1 year ago
It should go in the output chain.
RI
Ricarda
1 year ago
I feel like the process chain is not the right one for this. It seems more like a filtering issue rather than processing.
CH
Charlena
1 year ago
I practiced a similar question where we had to block a specific application, and I chose the forward chain. Not sure if that applies here though.
NI
Nikita
1 year ago
I think it might be the input chain since we're blocking access to a service coming into the network.
MA
Marquetta
1 year ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I remember something about the output chain being used for blocking outgoing traffic.
EM
Emerson
1 year ago
Okay, let's see. The Switch Center is related to video products, so it's likely in one of the technical layers, not the business management layer. I'll eliminate that option and focus on the other three.
RE
Reuben
1 year ago
This seems like a straightforward question about managing virtual machine power states. I'll need to think carefully about the options and choose the one that best allows customers to control their VMs.
AL
Alisha
1 year ago
Okay, I've got an idea. Since the question says the applications are used by multiple organizations, VMware Horizon Published Applications could be the way to go. That would let you publish the shared apps separately from the base images.
KA
Katheryn
1 year ago
Okay, let me see. The question is asking about what is NOT best practice under the 'Remuneration' principle. I'll need to analyze each option closely.