An administrator is asked to improve Recovery Point Objective (RPO) and Recovery Time Objective (RTO) for Disaster Recovery (DR) in their company network.
The network has a primary site and a secondary site. The ability to support outages with minimum loss of connectivity to the company's core application is a priority.
Which design should the administrator recommend? (Choose the best answer.)
To improve Recovery Point Objective (RPO) and Recovery Time Objective (RTO) for Disaster Recovery (DR), the network should leverage capabilities that minimize loss of connectivity and ensure quick recovery. NSX-T Data Center using Federation (option B) enables creating global routing constructs across sites, which supports robust disaster recovery by allowing seamless failover and recovery between primary and secondary sites. Adopting an Orchestrator to recover VMs across sites (option A) ensures that virtual machines can be efficiently managed and recovered, aiding in minimizing downtime and data loss.
NSX-T federation allows creating global routing constructs ( Routers & Segments) and one of the main use cases of federation is BCDR. So option B is correct. Option D is wrong as there is no in-built automation in NSX-T for site recovery. Option C is wrong because it talks about adding a 3rd part solution which can complex the design even more. Also, no 3rd party solution offers nearly 0 RPO.
Answer: B
B is the correct answer
B is the correct. Absolutely agree with MJ86 explanation.
Correct Answer: B
Answer: B
B is the correct
D is correct when multi-site lite is part of the design B is correct if Federation is used Both options are valid, different designs.