At ValidExamDumps, we consistently monitor updates to the VMware 2V0-13.24 exam questions by VMware. Whenever our team identifies changes in the exam questions,exam objectives, exam focus areas or in exam requirements, We immediately update our exam questions for both PDF and online practice exams. This commitment ensures our customers always have access to the most current and accurate questions. By preparing with these actual questions, our customers can successfully pass the VMware Cloud Foundation 5.2 Architect Exam exam on their first attempt without needing additional materials or study guides.
Other certification materials providers often include outdated or removed questions by VMware in their VMware 2V0-13.24 exam. These outdated questions lead to customers failing their VMware Cloud Foundation 5.2 Architect Exam exam. In contrast, we ensure our questions bank includes only precise and up-to-date questions, guaranteeing their presence in your actual exam. Our main priority is your success in the VMware 2V0-13.24 exam, not profiting from selling obsolete exam questions in PDF or Online Practice Test.
A customer is designing a new VMware Cloud Foundation stretched cluster using L2 non-uniform connectivity, where due to a past incident an attacker was able to inject some false routes into their dynamic global routing table. What design decision can be taken to prevent this when configuring the Tier-0 gateway?
The scenario involves designing a VMware Cloud Foundation (VCF) stretched cluster with L2 non-uniform connectivity, leveraging NSX (a core component of VCF) for networking. The customer's past incident, where an attacker injected false routes into their dynamic global routing table, indicates a security vulnerability in the routing protocol. The Tier-0 gateway in NSX handles external connectivity and routing, typically using dynamic routing protocols like BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) or OSPF (Open Shortest Path First) to exchange routes with external routers. The design decision must prevent unauthorized route injection, ensuring the integrity of the routing table.
Context Analysis:
Stretched Cluster with L2 Non-Uniform Connectivity: In VCF 5.2, a stretched cluster spans multiple availability zones (AZs) with L2 connectivity for workload VMs, but the Tier-0 gateway uplinks may use L3 routing to external networks. ''Non-uniform'' suggests varying latency or bandwidth between sites, but this does not directly impact the routing security concern.
False Routes Injection: This implies the attacker exploited a lack of authentication or filtering in the routing protocol, allowing unauthorized route advertisements to be accepted into the Tier-0 gateway's routing table.
Tier-0 Gateway: In NSX, the Tier-0 gateway is the edge component that peers with external routers (e.g., top-of-rack switches or upstream routers) and supports dynamic routing protocols like BGP and OSPF.
Routing Security in NSX:
NSX Tier-0 gateways commonly use BGP for external connectivity due to its scalability and flexibility in multi-site deployments like stretched clusters. OSPF is also supported but is less common for external peering in VCF designs.
Route injection attacks occur when an unauthorized device advertises routes without validation, often due to missing authentication mechanisms.
Option Analysis:
A . OSPF MD5 authentication:
OSPF supports MD5 authentication to secure routing updates between neighbors. Each OSPF message is hashed with a shared secret key, ensuring only trusted peers can exchange routes. This would prevent false route injection if OSPF were the protocol in use. However, in VCF stretched cluster designs, BGP is the default and recommended protocol for Tier-0 gateway uplinks to external networks, as per the VMware Cloud Foundation Design Guide. OSPF is typically used for internal NSX routing (e.g., between Tier-0 and Tier-1 gateways) rather than external peering. Without evidence that OSPF is used here, and given BGP's prevalence in such scenarios, this option is less applicable.
B . Gateway Firewall with ECMP:
The Gateway Firewall on the Tier-0 gateway filters traffic, not routes. Equal-Cost Multi-Path (ECMP) enhances bandwidth by load-balancing across multiple uplinks but does not inherently secure the routing table. While a firewall could block traffic from malicious sources, it cannot prevent the Tier-0 gateway from accepting false route advertisements in the control plane (routing protocol). Route injection occurs at the routing protocol level, not the data plane, so this option does not address the root issue. The NSX Administration Guide confirms that firewall rules apply to packet forwarding, not route validation, making this incorrect.
C . Implicit deny for any traffic:
An implicit deny rule in the Gateway Firewall blocks all traffic not explicitly allowed, enhancing security for data plane traffic. However, this does not protect the control plane---specifically, the dynamic routing protocol---from accepting false routes. Route injection happens before traffic filtering, as the routing table determines where packets are sent. The VMware Cloud Foundation 5.2 documentation emphasizes that routing security requires protocol-specific measures, not just firewall rules. This option fails to prevent the described attack and is incorrect.
D . BGP peer password:
BGP supports authentication via a peer password (MD5-based in NSX), where each BGP session between the Tier-0 gateway and its external peers (e.g., physical routers) uses a shared secret. This ensures that only authenticated peers can advertise routes, preventing unauthorized devices from injecting false routes into the dynamic routing table. In VCF 5.2 stretched cluster deployments, BGP is the standard protocol for Tier-0 uplinks, as it supports multi-site connectivity and ECMP for redundancy. The NSX-T Data Center Design Guide and VCF documentation recommend BGP authentication to secure routing in such environments, directly addressing the customer's past incident. This is the most relevant and effective design decision.
Conclusion:
The architect should choose BGP peer password (D) as the design decision for the Tier-0 gateway. This secures the BGP routing protocol---widely used in VCF stretched clusters---against false route injection by requiring authentication, aligning with the scenario's security requirements and NSX best practices.
VMware Cloud Foundation 5.2 Design Guide (Section: NSX Design for Stretched Clusters)
VMware NSX-T Data Center 3.2 Administration Guide (Section: Tier-0 Gateway Routing)
VMware Cloud Foundation 5.2 Planning and Preparation Workbook (Section: Networking Security)
VMware Validated Design for Stretched Clusters (Section: Routing Security)
The following are a list of design decisions made relating to networking:
NSX Distributed Firewall (DFW) rule to block all traffic by default.
Implement overlay network technology to scale across data centers.
Configure Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) - Listen mode on all Distributed Virtual Switches (DVS).
Use of 2x 64-port Cisco Nexus 9300 for top-of-rack ESXi host switches.
Which design decision would an architect document within the logical design?
In VCF 5.2, the logical design focuses on high-level architectural decisions that define the system's structure and behavior, as opposed to physical or operational details. Networking decisions in the logical design emphasize scalability, security policies, and connectivity frameworks, per the VCF 5.2 Architectural Guide. Let's evaluate each:
Option A: Use of 2x 64-port Cisco Nexus 9300 for top-of-rack ESXi host switches
This specifies physical hardware, a detail typically documented in the physical design (e.g., BOM, rack layout). The VCF 5.2 Design Guide distinguishes hardware choices as physical, not logical, unless they dictate architecture (e.g., spine-leaf), which isn't implied here.
Option B: NSX Distributed Firewall (DFW) rule to block all traffic by default
This is a security policy configuration within NSX, defining how traffic is controlled. While critical, it's an operational or detailed design decision (e.g., rule set), not a high-level logical design element. The VCF 5.2 Networking Guide places DFW rules in implementation details, not the logical overview.
Option C: Implement overlay network technology to scale across data centers
Overlay networking (e.g., NSX VXLAN or Geneve) is a foundational architectural decision in VCF, enabling scalability, multi-site connectivity, and logical separation of networks. The VCF 5.2 Architectural Guide highlights overlays as a core logical design component, directly impacting how the solution scales across data centers, making it a prime candidate for the logical design.
Option D: Configure Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) - Listen mode on all Distributed Virtual Switches (DVS)
CDP in Listen mode aids network discovery and troubleshooting on DVS. This is a configuration setting, not a logical design decision. The VCF 5.2 Networking Guide treats such protocol settings as operational details, not architectural choices.
Conclusion:
Option C belongs in the logical design, as it defines a scalable networking architecture critical to VCF 5.2's multi-data center capabilities.
VMware Cloud Foundation 5.2 Architectural Guide (docs.vmware.com): Logical Design and Overlay Networking.
VMware Cloud Foundation 5.2 Networking Guide (docs.vmware.com): NSX and DVS Configuration.
VMware Cloud Foundation 5.2 Design Guide (docs.vmware.com): Logical vs. Physical Design.
A VMware Cloud Foundation (VCF) platform has been commissioned, and lines of business are requesting approved virtual machine applications via the platform's integrated automation portal. The platform was built following all provided company security guidelines and has been assessed against Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) regulations. The platform has the following characteristics:
One Management Domain with a single cluster, supporting all management services with all network traffic handled by a single Distributed Virtual Switch (DVS).
A dedicated VI Workload Domain with a single cluster for all line of business applications.
A dedicated VI Workload Domain with a single cluster for Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI).
Aria Operations is being used to monitor all clusters.
VI Workload Domains are using a shared NSX instance.
An application owner has asked for approval to install a new service that must be protected as per the Payment Card Industry (PCI) Data Security Standard, which is going to be verified by a third-party organization. To support the new service, which additional non-functional requirement should be added to the design?
In VMware Cloud Foundation (VCF) 5.2, non-functional requirements define how the system operates (e.g., security, performance), not what it does. The new service must comply with PCI DSS, a standard for protecting cardholder data, and the design must reflect this. The platform is already SOX-compliant, and the question seeks an additional non-functional requirement to support PCI compliance. Let's evaluate:
Option A: The VCF platform and all PCI application virtual machines must be monitored using the Aria Operations Compliance Pack for Payment Card Industry
This is correct. PCI DSS requires continuous monitoring and auditing (e.g., Requirement 10). The Aria Operations Compliance Pack for PCI provides pre-configured dashboards, alerts, and reports tailored to PCI DSS, ensuring the VCF platform and PCI VMs meet these standards. This is a non-functional requirement (monitoring quality), leverages existing Aria Operations, and directly supports the new service's compliance needs, making it the best addition.
Option B: The VCF platform and all PCI application virtual machines must be assessed for SOX compliance
This is incorrect. The platform is already SOX-compliant, as stated. SOX (financial reporting) and PCI DSS (cardholder data) are distinct standards. Reassessing for SOX doesn't address the new service's PCI requirement and adds no value to the design for this purpose.
Option C: The VCF platform and all PCI application virtual machine network traffic must be routed via NSX
This is incorrect as a new requirement. The VI Workload Domains already use a shared NSX instance, implying NSX handles network traffic (e.g., overlay, security policies). PCI DSS requires network segmentation (Requirement 1), which NSX already supports. Adding this as a ''new'' requirement is redundant since it's an existing characteristic, not an additional need.
Option D: The VCF platform and all PCI application virtual machines must be assessed against Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) compliance
This is a strong contender but incorrect as a non-functional requirement. Assessing against PCI DSS is a process or action, not a quality of the system's operation. Non-functional requirements specify ongoing attributes (e.g., ''must be secure,'' ''must be monitored''), not one-time assessments. While PCI compliance is the goal, this option is more a project mandate than a design quality.
Conclusion:
The additional non-functional requirement to support the new PCI-compliant service is A: monitoring via the Aria Operations Compliance Pack for PCI. This ensures ongoing compliance with PCI DSS monitoring requirements, integrates with the existing VCF design, and qualifies as a non-functional attribute in VCF 5.2.
VMware Cloud Foundation 5.2 Architecture and Deployment Guide (Section: Aria Operations Compliance Packs)
VMware Aria Operations 8.10 Documentation (integrated in VCF 5.2): PCI Compliance Pack
PCI DSS 3.2.1 (Requirements 1, 10: Network Segmentation and Monitoring
The following design decisions were made relating to storage design:
* A storage policy that would support failure of a single fault domain being the server rack
* Two vSAN OSA disk groups per host each consisting of four 4TB Samsung SSD capacity drives
* Two vSAN OSA disk groups per host each consisting of a single 300GB Intel NVMe cache drive
* Encryption at rest capable disk drives
* Dual 10Gb or faster storage network adapters
Which two design decisions would an architect include within the physical design? (Choose two.)
Physical design in VCF focuses on hardware specifications, not policies or logical configurations. Option D, 'Dual 10Gb or faster storage network adapters,' and Option E, 'Two vSAN OSA disk groups with four 4TB Samsung SSDs,' specify physical components (NICs, drives) critical to vSAN performance and redundancy in the physical layer. Option A (storage policy) is logical, defined in vSphere. Option B (cache drives) and C (encryption capability) are also physical but less specific without vendor/model details compared to E, and encryption is often a feature, not a standalone decision. D and E are the clearest physical design elements per VCF 5.2 vSAN OSA requirements.
An organization is planning to expand their existing VMware Cloud Foundation (VCF) environment to meet an increased demand for new user-facing applications. The physical host hardware proposed for the expansion is a different model compared to the existing hosts, although it has been confirmed that both sets of hardware are compatible. The expansion needs to provide capacity for management tooling workloads dedicated to the applications, and it has been decided to deploy a new cluster within the management domain to host the workloads. What should the architect include within the logical design for this design decision?
In VCF, the logical design documents how design decisions align with requirements, often through justifications, assumptions, or implications. Here, adding a new cluster within the management domain for dedicated management tooling workloads requires a rationale in the logical design. Option A, a justification that the separate cluster enhances 'flexibility for manageability and connectivity,' aligns with VCF's principles of workload segregation and operational efficiency. It explains why the decision was made---improving management tooling's flexibility---without assuming unstated outcomes (like B's 'complete isolation,' which isn't supported by the scenario) or merely stating effects (C and D). The management domain in VCF 5.2 can host additional clusters for such purposes, and this justification ties directly to the requirement for dedicated capacity.