Salesforce Communications Cloud Accredited Professional (AP-203) Exam - Topic 1 Question 37 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's Communications Cloud Accredited Professional (AP-203) exam

Question #: 37
Topic #: 1

[All Communications Cloud Accredited Professional (AP-203) Questions]

The discovery phase has identified the industries order management should integrate with the provisioning system using HTTP protocol, however to activate the service the external system requires two HTTP requests passing formatted JSON payloads. A temporary identifier is returned from the first request and must be used on the second one, but it has no relevance to CRM. The provisioning system is known to reply within 750ms for each request. What are two out of the box options for integration within this system?

ADesign for one callout each request and cache the identifier in memory

BDesign integration procedure that makes both request and returns the result to order Management.

CUse Data raptor technology to make the request and return the response to order management

DDesign for one callout each request and save the identifier in a non-assetizable attribute on the fulfillment request line

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: C, D

by Skye at Jun 14, 2025, 03:35 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium Communications Cloud Accredited Professional (AP-203) Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Valentine

4 months ago

Totally agree with A, makes the process smoother!

upvoted 0 times

...

Amie

4 months ago

I think B is better, handling both requests in one go simplifies things.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dawne

5 months ago

C is interesting, but does it really fit the requirements?

upvoted 0 times

...

Sherita

5 months ago

Wait, why would we save the identifier in a non-assetizable attribute? That seems odd.

upvoted 0 times

...

Salley

5 months ago

Option A sounds efficient, caching the identifier is smart.

upvoted 0 times

...

Pearline

5 months ago

Option D sounds familiar, but I’m uncertain about the implications of saving the identifier in a non-assetizable attribute.

upvoted 0 times

...

Larue

5 months ago

I feel like option C could be relevant since we talked about using Data raptor technology in a similar question last week.

upvoted 0 times

...

Torie

6 months ago

I'm not entirely sure about the specifics, but I think option B might be too complex since it involves making both requests at once.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dexter

6 months ago

I remember we discussed caching identifiers in memory during our practice sessions, so option A seems like a solid choice.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lilli

6 months ago

I think option D, saving the identifier in a non-assetizable attribute, could be a good approach. That way, I don't have to worry about caching or passing the identifier between requests. It seems like a pretty straightforward solution.

upvoted 0 times

...

Bobbie

6 months ago

Option C with Data Raptor sounds interesting, but I'm not super familiar with that technology. I'd have to do some research to see if it's the best fit for this use case. The 750ms response time requirement is also something I'd want to double-check.

upvoted 0 times

...

Annabelle

6 months ago

Hmm, I'm a little confused about the requirement to use the temporary identifier from the first request on the second one. I'm not sure if that rules out option A, where I just cache the identifier in memory. I'll have to think that through a bit more.

upvoted 0 times

...

Alise

7 months ago

This seems like a pretty straightforward integration problem. I think I'd go with option B - designing an integration procedure that makes both requests and returns the result to order management. That way, I don't have to worry about caching the temporary identifier or anything like that.

upvoted 0 times

...

Noah

9 months ago

I'm going with Option B. Ain't nobody got time to be messing with caching or non-assetizable attributes. Just make the requests and get the job done.

upvoted 0 times

...

Major

9 months ago

Option B, easy peasy. Though I have to say, the provisioning system's 750ms response time is suspiciously fast. Must be using a flux capacitor or something.

upvoted 0 times

Terrilyn

8 months ago

User 2: Yeah, the response time does seem too fast, maybe they are using some advanced technology.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shakira

9 months ago

User 1: Option B sounds good, let's go with that.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kerry

9 months ago

Option B is definitely the way to go. Who wants to deal with saving identifiers and all that jazz? Just get the job done and move on.

upvoted 0 times

Clorinda

9 months ago

User 3: I think caching the identifier in memory could also work well.

upvoted 0 times

...

Josue

9 months ago

User 2: Yeah, let's just make both requests and be done with it.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rima

9 months ago

User 1: I agree, option B sounds the most efficient.

upvoted 0 times

...

Pete

10 months ago

I'm not sure about option B, it might be too complex and slow down the process.

upvoted 0 times

...

Annmarie

10 months ago

I agree with Jennifer, option A seems like the most efficient way to integrate the systems.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jennifer

10 months ago

I think option A makes sense because caching the identifier can help speed up the process.

upvoted 0 times

...

Salley

10 months ago

I agree, Option B is the way to go. Caching the identifier or using a non-assetizable attribute feels like a workaround, and Data Raptor seems overkill for this use case.

upvoted 0 times

Inocencia

9 months ago

User 4: Let's go with designing integration procedure for both requests.

upvoted 0 times

...

Francoise

10 months ago

User 3: Yeah, using Data Raptor for this seems like overkill.

upvoted 0 times

...

Hannah

10 months ago

User 2: I agree, caching the identifier seems like a workaround.

upvoted 0 times

...

Raelene

10 months ago

User 1: I think Option B is the best choice.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lewis

10 months ago

Option B seems the most straightforward approach. Making both requests and returning the result to Order Management keeps the integration simple and centralized.

upvoted 0 times