Google Exam Professional-Cloud-Network-Engineer Topic 8 Question 79 Discussion

Actual exam question for Google's Professional Cloud Network Engineer exam

Question #: 79
Topic #: 8

[All Professional Cloud Network Engineer Questions]

You are designing an IP address scheme for new private Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) clusters. Due to IP address exhaustion of the RFC 1918 address space In your enterprise, you plan to use privately used public IP space for the new clusters. You want to follow Google-recommended practices. What should you do after designing your IP scheme?

ACreate the minimum usable RFC 1918 primary and secondary subnet IP ranges for the clusters. Re-use the secondary address range for the pods across multiple private GKE clusters

BCreate the minimum usable RFC 1918 primary and secondary subnet IP ranges for the clusters Re-use the secondary address range for the services across multiple private GKE clusters

CCreate privately used public IP primary and secondary subnet ranges for the clusters. Create a private GKE cluster with the following options selected and

DCreate privately used public IP primary and secondary subnet ranges for the clusters. Create a private GKE cluster With the following options selected --disable-default-snat, ---enable-ip-alias, and---enable-private-nodes

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: D

This answer follows the Google-recommended practices for using privately used public IP (PUPI) addresses for GKE Pod address blocks1. The benefits of this approach are:

It allows you to use any public IP addresses that are not owned by Google or your organization for your Pods, which can help mitigate address exhaustion in your enterprise.

It prevents any external traffic from reaching your Pods, as Google Cloud does not route PUPI addresses to the internet or to other VPC networks by default.

It enables you to use VPC Network Peering to connect your GKE cluster to other VPC networks that use different PUPI addresses, as long as you enable the export and import of custom routes for the peering connection.

It preserves the fully integrated network model of GKE, where Pods can communicate with nodes and other resources in the same VPC network without NAT.

The options that you need to select when creating a private GKE cluster with PUPI addresses are:

--disable-default-snat: This option disables source NAT for outbound traffic from Pods to destinations outside the cluster's VPC network.This is necessary to prevent Pods from using RFC 1918 addresses as their source IP addresses, which could cause conflicts with other networks that use the same address space2.

--enable-ip-alias: This option enables alias IP ranges for Pods and Services, which allows you to use separate subnet ranges for them.This is required to use PUPI addresses for Pods1.

--enable-private-nodes: This option creates a private cluster, where nodes do not have external IP addresses and can only communicate with the control plane through a private endpoint.This enhances the security and privacy of your cluster3.

Option A is incorrect because it does not use PUPI addresses for Pods, but rather RFC 1918 addresses. This does not solve the problem of address exhaustion in your enterprise. Option B is incorrect because it reuses the secondary address range for Services across multiple private GKE clusters, which could cause IP conflicts and routing issues. Option C is incorrect because it does not specify the options that are needed to create a private GKE cluster with PUPI addresses.

by Ernest at Apr 11, 2024, 08:16 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

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

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Susana

3 months ago

That's a valid point, security should always be a top concern when designing IP schemes

upvoted 0 times

...

Patti

3 months ago

I prefer option D), enabling IP alias and private nodes seems like a more secure choice

upvoted 0 times

...

Susana

4 months ago

That's true, but I believe pods have higher priority in terms of IP address allocation

upvoted 0 times

...

Ryan

4 months ago

But what about option B)? Reusing secondary address range for services could also be a good idea

upvoted 0 times

...

Goldie

4 months ago

I agree with Susana, using secondary address range for pods makes sense

upvoted 0 times

...

Susana

4 months ago

I think we should choose option A)

upvoted 0 times

...

Olen

4 months ago

Candidate 3: I see your point, Candidate 1. Option D does seem to cover all the necessary configurations for the new GKE clusters.

upvoted 0 times

...

Macy

4 months ago

Candidate 1: True, but I think in this case, following Google's recommendations with option D is the safest bet.

upvoted 0 times

...

Melynda

4 months ago

Candidate 4: Option A could work too, as re-using the secondary address range for pods across multiple clusters might be efficient.

upvoted 0 times

...

Starr

5 months ago

Candidate 3: I'm not sure, option C also seems like a viable option for creating the IP scheme for the clusters.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dean

5 months ago

Candidate 2: I agree with Candidate 1, option D looks like the best choice for ensuring proper configuration of the new GKE clusters.

upvoted 0 times

...

Val

5 months ago

Candidate 1: I think we should go with option D. It seems to align with Google-recommended practices for using privately used public IP space.

upvoted 0 times

...

Herminia

6 months ago

Haha, yeah, that's a good point. We're gonna need a whole team of IP address accountants to keep track of everything! But seriously, option D is the way to go. Gotta love those Google-recommended practices.

upvoted 0 times

...

Desiree

6 months ago

Yeah, Shawna's got a point. We need to be pragmatic here. If we don't have enough private IP space, we may need to venture into the public realm, as long as we lock it down properly. Option D looks like it covers all the bases.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shawna

6 months ago

Wait, hold on. If we're running out of RFC 1918 space, using privately used public IP addresses might be our only option. As long as we follow Google's best practices, it could work. Option D sounds like the way to go.

upvoted 0 times

...

Gerald

6 months ago

Yeah, I'm with you all on this one. Option D it is. Although, I have to say, I'm a little worried about the potential for IP address exhaustion, even with the privately used public IP space. Gotta keep an eye on that.

upvoted 0 times

...

Trinidad

6 months ago

I agree, Nadine. Using publicly routable IP addresses for our internal clusters seems like it could create some security and management headaches. Plus, I thought Google recommended staying within the private address ranges.

upvoted 0 times

...

Boris

6 months ago

You know, I was just reading about this the other day. I think option D is the best choice here. It's the only one that specifically mentions following the Google-recommended practices.

upvoted 0 times

...

Nadine

6 months ago

Hmm, this question is tricky. I'm not sure I fully understand the implications of using privately used public IP space for the GKE clusters. Shouldn't we be sticking to the recommended RFC 1918 address space?

upvoted 0 times

...

Viki

6 months ago

I completely agree with you guys. Option D is the way to go. It's important to follow the Google recommendations and use the right settings to ensure a robust and secure setup.

upvoted 0 times

Rosendo

5 months ago

User 3

upvoted 0 times

...

Jutta

5 months ago

User 2

upvoted 0 times

...

Denise

5 months ago

User 1

upvoted 0 times

...

Lore

6 months ago

Hmm, I'm not sure about reusing the secondary address range across multiple clusters. That could get messy. I think option D is the way to go, with the private nodes and IP aliasing.

upvoted 0 times

...

Alton

6 months ago

Ah, this is a tricky one! We need to be really careful with IP address management, especially in a complex environment like GKE. I'm leaning towards option D, as it seems to follow the Google-recommended practices.

upvoted 0 times

Janey

5 months ago

Agreed, choosing option D for the IP scheme is the way to go for a secure and efficient setup.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kimberlie

5 months ago

Security is definitely a top priority when designing IP address schemes for GKE clusters.

upvoted 0 times

...

Glendora

5 months ago

Option D also enables private nodes, which adds an extra layer of security to the clusters.

upvoted 0 times

...

Marsha

6 months ago

Absolutely, we don't want any IP address conflicts or issues affecting our clusters.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kaycee

6 months ago

I think it's crucial to follow Google's recommendations closely to ensure smooth operation of the GKE clusters.

upvoted 0 times

...

Fallon

6 months ago

Yes, option D includes the important Google-recommended practices like --disable-default-snat and ---enable-ip-alias.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kanisha

6 months ago

I agree, option D seems to be the best choice for IP address management in GKE.

upvoted 0 times

...