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

Salesforce Exam Integration Architect Topic 1 Question 41 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's Integration Architect exam
Question #: 41
Topic #: 1
[All Integration Architect Questions]

Universal Containers (UC) currently owns a middleware tool and they have developed an API-led integration architecture with three API tiers. The first tier interfaces directly with the systems of engagement, the second tier implements business logic and aggregates data, while the third tier interfaces directly with systems of record. Some of the systems of engagement will be a mobile application, a web application, and Salesforce.

UC has a business requirement to return data to the systems of engagement in different formats while also enforcing different security protocols.

What should an Integration Architect recommend to meet these requirements?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

Contribute your Thoughts:

Pearlie
4 months ago
Option A is just asking for trouble. Trying to manage all that at the first tier? No way, that's a recipe for a maintenance nightmare.
upvoted 0 times
Dell
3 months ago
Gracie: Yeah, that would definitely simplify things and make maintenance easier.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elza
3 months ago
Option B sounds like the best solution to enforce security protocols and return formats.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gracie
3 months ago
I agree, it would be much better to implement an API gateway for all systems to interface with first.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dortha
4 months ago
Option B sounds like the best solution to enforce security protocols and return formats.
upvoted 0 times
...
Micaela
4 months ago
I agree, it would be much better to implement an API gateway for all systems to interface with first.
upvoted 0 times
...
Corrina
4 months ago
Option A is definitely not the way to go. It would be too complicated to manage.
upvoted 0 times
...
Denny
4 months ago
Option A is definitely not the way to go. It would be too complicated to manage.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Shoshana
4 months ago
I prefer option D because it provides a more secure solution with SAML.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gilberto
4 months ago
I think option C could also work, depending on the specific requirements.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kimbery
5 months ago
Haha, I bet the developers are hoping the right answer isn't Option D. Who wants to deal with SAML, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Wilda
5 months ago
I disagree, I believe option B is more suitable.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melynda
5 months ago
I'm leaning towards Option C. Enforcing the security and formatting at the second tier seems more efficient than trying to handle it all at the first tier.
upvoted 0 times
Marnie
4 months ago
Yeah, it seems like a good balance between security and performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alton
4 months ago
I agree. It would be more efficient to enforce those requirements at the second tier.
upvoted 0 times
...
Minna
4 months ago
I think Option C is the way to go. It makes sense to handle security and formatting at the second tier.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Tien
5 months ago
Option B sounds like the way to go. Implementing an API gateway to handle the different security protocols and return formats makes a lot of sense. It keeps the complexity out of the individual API tiers.
upvoted 0 times
Renea
4 months ago
I agree. It centralizes the management of security and formats, making it easier to maintain.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paris
4 months ago
Option B sounds like the way to go. Implementing an API gateway to handle the different security protocols and return formats makes a lot of sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Bo
5 months ago
I think option A is the best choice.
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