Free VMware 2V0-13.25 Actual Exam Questions - Question 12 Discussion
customer. During the customer requirements gathering workshop, the customer has stated the
following:
All Platinum applications/services must have an availability SLA of 99.99%.
All Gold applications/services must have an availability SLA of 99.9%.
All Silver applications/services must have an availability SLA of 99%.
The private cloud must have an availability SLA of 99.9%.
What should the architect recommend to meet the stated requirements?
Makes sense, infrastructure caps at 99.9%, so Platinum apps must handle higher SLA themselves—C.
Option C makes sense because the infrastructure can only guarantee 99.9%, so anything needing 99.99% availability has to handle that on the app side. Proactive HA (D) improves recovery but doesn’t guarantee hitting that higher SLA alone. Also, option B about multiple VCF instances might not be practical or even allowed, depending on app distribution, so it’s safer to assume apps themselves need to cover their higher availability needs.
C/D seems right since infra maxes at 99.9%, apps must cover Platinum’s higher SLA.
C/D? The question says the private cloud is only 99.9%, so Platinum apps can’t rely solely on infrastructure. Proactive HA helps but may not boost SLA enough, so apps probably need built-in redundancy too.
Maybe C works since the infra can only guarantee 99.9%, so the Platinum apps must handle that extra availability on their own. D sounds like it helps, but might not fully reach 99.99%.
It’s B because a single VCF instance only guarantees 99.9% SLA. To get that 99.99% for Platinum apps, you’d need multiple VCF instances working together as a fleet to improve overall availability.
B imo. Since a single VCF instance maxes out at 99.9% SLA, using multiple instances as a fleet is the only way to raise overall availability beyond that for Platinum apps.
C imo. Since the private cloud SLA maxes out at 99.9%, the Platinum 99.99% has to be ensured by the application itself, not just the infrastructure or HA settings.
D. Proactive HA can reduce downtime by preempting failures, which helps push Platinum apps closer to that 99.99% SLA without relying solely on app-level fixes or multiple VCF instances.
Not B, because VCF Fleet is more about scaling and management, not directly increasing SLA. The question hints that the private cloud’s SLA is fixed at 99.9%, so the higher Platinum SLA probably needs app-level handling or extra HA features.
Probably D makes sense here. Proactive HA on the workload domain can help push the availability closer to that 99.99% SLA for Platinum apps by reducing downtime from hardware or host issues. The private cloud itself only guarantees 99.9%, so relying on application-level fixes alone (like in C) might not be enough.
Also, A seems too limiting since the customer wants to run Platinum services too, and B is probably overkill unless they specifically want a multi-VCF setup for extra redundancy. So proactive HA is a neat way to boost availability within the workload domain itself.
Option C makes the most sense here. Since the private cloud’s SLA is 99.9%, it can’t guarantee 99.99% by itself for Platinum services. So, the higher availability for Platinum apps has to be handled at the application level. The cloud platform can support Gold and Silver SLAs, but for that top tier, it’s on the app to ensure that extra uptime. I’ve seen similar setups where the infrastructure provides a baseline, but critical app availability is managed separately.