Cyber Monday 2024! 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 PL
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Palo Alto Networks Exam PCSFE Topic 4 Question 33 Discussion

Actual exam question for Palo Alto Networks's PCSFE exam
Question #: 33
Topic #: 4
[All PCSFE Questions]

What is a design consideration for a prospect who wants to deploy VM-Series firewalls in an Amazon Web Services (AWS) environment?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

A design consideration for a prospect who wants to deploy VM-Series firewalls in an Amazon Web Services (AWS) environment is that only active-passive high availability (HA) is supported. High availability (HA) is a feature that provides redundancy and failover protection for firewalls in case of hardware or software failure. Active-passive HA is a mode of HA that consists of two firewalls in a pair, where one firewall is active and handles all traffic, while the other firewall is passive and acts as a backup. Active-passive HA is the only mode of HA that is supported for VM-Series firewalls in an AWS environment, due to the limitations of AWS networking and routing. Active-active HA, which is another mode of HA that consists of two firewalls in a pair that both handle traffic and synchronize sessions, is not supported for VM-Series firewalls in an AWS environment. A design consideration for a prospect who wants to deploy VM-Series firewalls in an AWS environment is not that special AWS plugins are needed for load balancing, resources are shared within the cluster, or high availability (HA) clusters are limited to fewer than 8 virtual appliances, as those are not valid or relevant factors for firewall deployment in an AWS environment. Reference:Palo Alto Networks Certified Software Firewall Engineer (PCSFE), [High Availability Overview], [High Availability on AWS]


by Galen at Sep 15, 2024, 09:27 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium PCSFE Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Shawna
2 months ago
Wait, is this a trick question? I bet the answer is actually a combination of all the options. That's the kind of thing they like to do on these exams!
upvoted 0 times
Julene
23 days ago
D) High availability (HA) clusters are limited to fewer than 8 virtual appliances.
upvoted 0 times
...
Billye
28 days ago
C) Only active-passive high availability (HA) is supported.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wilda
1 months ago
B) Resources are shared within the cluster.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nickie
1 months ago
A) Special AWS plugins are needed for load balancing.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Joanna
2 months ago
I'm going with option C. Only active-passive HA is supported, which is a critical factor to consider when deploying these firewalls.
upvoted 0 times
Teresita
1 months ago
It's crucial to plan for high availability and understand the limitations of the HA clusters with these firewalls.
upvoted 0 times
...
Quinn
1 months ago
I agree, having only active-passive HA supported can impact the overall architecture of the deployment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Daren
1 months ago
Option C is definitely an important design consideration for deploying VM-Series firewalls in AWS.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Emmanuel
2 months ago
Option B sounds plausible. The resources are shared within the cluster, which is a key design consideration for the VM-Series firewalls in AWS.
upvoted 0 times
Leonida
28 days ago
It definitely helps with scalability and resource optimization in the AWS environment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Margarett
1 months ago
I agree, sharing resources within the cluster is important for efficient deployment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Felicidad
1 months ago
Option B sounds plausible. The resources are shared within the cluster, which is a key design consideration for the VM-Series firewalls in AWS.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Shawnna
2 months ago
I heard that high availability clusters are limited to fewer than 8 virtual appliances, which could be a limitation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Celestina
2 months ago
I believe resources are shared within the cluster, so that's something to consider.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bernardine
3 months ago
I'm not sure, but I think option D might be the right choice. Doesn't the question mention something about HA clusters being limited?
upvoted 0 times
Santos
2 months ago
So, it seems like option D is the design consideration for deploying VM-Series firewalls in an AWS environment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Devorah
2 months ago
That's correct, the question does mention a limit on the number of virtual appliances in the HA cluster.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arlean
2 months ago
I think you're right, option D mentions that HA clusters are limited to fewer than 8 virtual appliances.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Barrie
3 months ago
I think option A is the correct answer. AWS plugins are essential for load balancing the VM-Series firewalls.
upvoted 0 times
Crista
2 months ago
I think option D is the best choice. High availability (HA) clusters are limited to fewer than 8 virtual appliances.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kerrie
2 months ago
I agree with option B. Sharing resources within the cluster is an important design consideration.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alecia
2 months ago
I believe option B is more accurate. Resources are shared within the cluster.
upvoted 0 times
...
Galen
2 months ago
I think option B might also be a consideration, resources are shared within the cluster.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ardella
2 months ago
I think option A is the correct answer. AWS plugins are essential for load balancing the VM-Series firewalls.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sheldon
2 months ago
I agree, option A is the correct answer. AWS plugins are necessary for load balancing.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Wilda
3 months ago
I think the design consideration is important for deploying VM-Series firewalls in AWS.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77