Palo Alto Networks Exam PSE-Platform Topic 1 Question 57 Discussion

Actual exam question for Palo Alto Networks's PSE-Platform exam

Question #: 57
Topic #: 1

A price sensitive customer wants to prevent attacks on a windows 2008 Virtual Server. The server will max out at 100Mbps but needs to have 45,000 sessions to connect to multiple hosts within a data center

Which VM instance should be used to secure the network by this customer?

AVM-200

BVM-100

CVM-300

DVM-50

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: D

by Johnna at Apr 12, 2024, 03:47 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

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

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Keneth

6 months ago

VM-100 could also be a good option as it might strike a balance between performance and cost.

upvoted 0 times

...

Andree

6 months ago

I agree with User 1, VM-300 is the best option to handle that many sessions.

upvoted 0 times

...

Johana

7 months ago

But VM-200 might be more cost-effective for a price sensitive customer.

upvoted 0 times

...

Carolynn

7 months ago

I think the customer should go for VM-300 because it can handle more sessions.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dawne

8 months ago

Oof, 45,000 sessions is a lot. I'm getting sweaty just thinking about the server load. Hopefully the customer has a good IT team to monitor and optimize the virtual server.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sueann

8 months ago

I hear you, but you know what they say, 'when in doubt, go for the biggest and baddest'! (laughs) Maybe the VM-300 is the way to go.

upvoted 0 times

...

Linwood

8 months ago

It's a good thing the customer is price-sensitive, because the VM-300 is going to be the most expensive option. I'd start with the VM-200 and see if that meets their needs. If not, then the VM-300 might be the way to go.

upvoted 0 times

Reita

7 months ago

A) VM-200

upvoted 0 times

...

Wai

7 months ago

If VM-200 doesn't work out, they can always consider upgrading to VM-300 for higher performance. It's better to start with the cheaper option.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lisandra

8 months ago

C) VM-300

upvoted 0 times

...

Marge

8 months ago

Agreed, VM-200 seems to be a good balance between performance and cost. The customer should try this option first.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sheldon

8 months ago

A) VM-200

upvoted 0 times

...

Marguerita

8 months ago

I think the VM-100 might not be powerful enough to handle the 45,000 sessions. VM-200 sounds like a better choice.

upvoted 0 times

...

Hillary

8 months ago

B) VM-100

upvoted 0 times

...

Mitsue

8 months ago

Personally, I'm not a fan of these types of questions. They're too vague and don't give us enough information to make a confident decision.

upvoted 0 times

...

Estrella

8 months ago

Yeah, I agree. The VM-100 and VM-50 don't seem powerful enough to handle 45,000 sessions and 100Mbps. The only question is whether the VM-300 is overkill or if the VM-200 will be sufficient.

upvoted 0 times

...

Britt

8 months ago

I'm with you on that, but I'm also considering option B, the VM-100. It might be a better fit if the customer is more price-sensitive.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sherita

8 months ago

Hmm, this is a tricky one. The customer needs a lot of sessions and high throughput, so I'm thinking either the VM-300 or the VM-200 would be the best options here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shasta

8 months ago

I'm leaning towards option C, the VM-300, since it's the highest-end option presented. But I'm not 100% sure if that's the right choice.

upvoted 0 times

...

Francis

8 months ago

Yeah, I'm a bit stumped too. We need more details about the specific requirements and the capabilities of each VM instance to make an informed decision.

upvoted 0 times

...

Elvera

8 months ago

Hmm, this seems like a tricky one. The customer is looking to secure a Windows 2008 Virtual Server that needs to handle a lot of sessions and bandwidth. I'm not sure which VM instance would be the best fit based on the information provided.

upvoted 0 times

Kris

7 months ago

I see your point, but I think VM-100 could handle the workload just fine.

upvoted 0 times

...

Bernardine

7 months ago

I disagree, VM-300 might be too much for their needs. I would go with VM-200.

upvoted 0 times

...

Annice

7 months ago

I think VM-300 would be the best choice.

upvoted 0 times

...