Independence Day Deal! Unlock 25% OFF Today – Limited-Time Offer - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Pure Storage Exam FBAP_002 Topic 7 Question 35 Discussion

Actual exam question for Pure Storage's FBAP_002 exam
Question #: 35
Topic #: 7
[All FBAP_002 Questions]

A customer is deploying a FlashBlade into a datacenter where the top of rack switches cannot be configured into a single LAG.

Which two actions are necessary to configure the FlashBlade to use both switches? (Choose two.)

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

Contribute your Thoughts:

German
1 months ago
Alright, folks, let's keep it professional. The correct answers are C and E, and no slingshots allowed in this datacenter. Let's move on to the next question.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jolanda
1 months ago
Creating multiple VIPs? What is this, a networking party? Gotta stick with the LAGs and multi-chassis options, my friend.
upvoted 0 times
Maryann
12 days ago
Definitely, LAGs are the way to go. And don't forget about the multi-chassis configuration option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Oliva
16 days ago
Yeah, creating multiple VIPs is not the way to go here. Stick with the LAGs for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Mickie
2 months ago
Round robin load balancing? That's like using a slingshot to take down a tank. Not the most efficient solution here.
upvoted 0 times
Stephen
3 days ago
User 3: Using a multi-chassis configuration could also be helpful in this situation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavelle
19 days ago
User 2: Agreed, that would be a better solution than round robin load balancing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jules
29 days ago
User 1: We can create multiple LAGs to configure the FlashBlade with both switches.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Reyes
2 months ago
Haha, multi-chassis configuration? That's like bringing in the big guns! Overkill for this scenario, if you ask me.
upvoted 0 times
Luis
12 days ago
User 3: Definitely, using round robin load balancing could also help distribute the traffic efficiently.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mauricio
1 months ago
User 2: I think creating multiple LAGs and VIPs would be more appropriate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Veronika
1 months ago
User 1: Yeah, I agree. Multi-chassis seems like too much for this setup.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Dong
2 months ago
Creating multiple LAGs is the way to go! That's the best option when the top of rack switches can't be configured into a single LAG. Nice to see that's one of the correct answers.
upvoted 0 times
Merilyn
3 days ago
Agreed, having multiple LAGs and a multi-chassis configuration will help optimize the FlashBlade deployment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Muriel
6 days ago
Using a multi-chassis configuration is also important in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sharen
15 days ago
Yes, it's one of the necessary actions to configure the FlashBlade with both switches.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dottie
2 months ago
Creating multiple LAGs is definitely the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Pete
2 months ago
I'm not sure about that. I think the answer could also be E) Use a multi-chassis configuration to utilize both switches efficiently.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alonso
2 months ago
I agree with Twila. We need to create multiple LAGs to use both switches effectively.
upvoted 0 times
...
Twila
2 months ago
I think the answer is C) Create multiple LAGs because we can't configure the switches into a single LAG.
upvoted 0 times
...
Margot
2 months ago
But shouldn't we also consider using a multi-chassis configuration for better performance?
upvoted 0 times
...
Vanna
2 months ago
I agree with Thersa. Creating multiple LAGs will help in utilizing both switches.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thersa
2 months ago
I think we need to create multiple LAGs for the FlashBlade.
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