Q: 6
An administrator has successfully configured Metro Availability for a Protection Domain. However,
after a few days, an NCC warning is raised:
"Following VMs are accessing data from remote clusters: VM-1 from remote cluster Remote-ML"
What is the first action an administrator must take to fix the issue?
Options
Discussion
C vs B-I've seen similar questions pop up in official practice. Migrating the VM first (option C) then using affinity or rules is usually what the guide says, not just applying affinity right away.
C . You need to actually move the VM back to the primary site so it stops pulling data remotely, that’s what resolves the warning. A and D are more about checking or listing, not fixing. B is a trap since you set affinity rules after the migration.
Yeah, most direct fix is C here. Moving VM back to primary site actually resolves the remote data access. Agree?
A is wrong, C. First thing is migrate the VM back to primary so it's not pulling data remote, then sort out DRS or affinity. Pretty sure that's what's needed per Nutanix docs.
Don’t think it’s B. C is the way-first you’ve got to migrate the VM back so it’s not reading from remote storage, then set DRS/affinity rules. B alone won’t fix if the VM already moved. Seen this catch people out in exam reports.
C tbh, D is just a status check trap, not a fix.
Maybe C, since A and D are just for info but B is a bit of a distractor. Seen similar in practice exams.
B , had something like this in a mock and picked B first.
C, official guide and recent practice exams both point at migrating VM to primary site first for Metro data locality issues.
C , seen similar on practice exams and official guide says move VM back first for Metro issues.
Be respectful. No spam.
