B , Istio's core job is providing that structured, observable comms layer between microservices. D sounds tempting but it's not really centralized routing, more about policy and telemetry. Trap option for sure. Correct me if you think otherwise!
I don’t think it should be A here. If you use the "VM Applications" org type (option A), it’s really just basic VM onboarding and doesn’t support all the integrations or NPC requirements. Option C is tempting because of the API mention, but unless automation at scale is explicitly required, Provider Management Portal (B) is more appropriate for these advanced features. Pretty sure B is best but open to other takes if I missed something tricky in post-5.2 behavior.
Yeah, C, D, and E are what I'd pick. You need to authenticate with Identity Broker (D), grant dashboard access (E), and set it to auto-expire after 3 months (C). Scheduling reports or embedding won't handle those time-based permissions. Pretty sure that's VMware's intent here but happy if someone spots a miss.
An administrator must configure a new Project in the Development tenant of VCF Automation. The requirement is to minimize ongoing management overhead as new developers onboard. Which four steps should be taken? (Choose four.)
B D F G for me. Using AD Groups (G) means less manual updates as the team grows, and you need Org Admin (F) to actually set everything up. Creating the project and linking a Cloud Zone are obvious steps too. Pretty sure this lines up with how VCF expects it.
Does the question mean "best" resiliency, or just any improvement? If the RPO wasn’t strictly zero, then maybe B could work, but with RPO=0 I think A is the only option.