Google Professional Cloud Network Engineer Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 8 Q106-120

Visit here for our full Google Professional Cloud Network Engineer exam dumps and practice test questions.

Question 106

A multinational bank wants to securely connect multiple on-premises branches to Google Cloud. They require predictable bandwidth, low latency, dynamic routing, automatic failover, and centralized route management. Which solution is most appropriate?

A) Cloud VPN Classic
B) Cloud Interconnect Dedicated with Cloud Router
C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router
D) Manually configured static routes

Correct Answer: C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router

Explanation

Multinational banks operate complex and distributed networks where connectivity performance and reliability are critical. Branches rely on secure, high-throughput links for transaction processing, data synchronization, and regulatory reporting. A robust network solution must ensure predictable bandwidth to prevent bottlenecks, low latency for time-sensitive financial transactions, dynamic routing to automatically adjust to network changes, automatic failover for uninterrupted operations, and centralized route management for operational simplicity.

The first approach, Cloud VPN Classic, uses IPsec tunnels over the public internet. VPNs provide encryption and basic connectivity but are limited in bandwidth and throughput. They cannot guarantee predictable performance, and latency may fluctuate due to internet conditions. Routing is largely static, requiring manual updates for changes in topology or branch locations. Failover is either manual or requires complex configuration with multiple tunnels. Operational overhead increases significantly as the number of branches grows. VPNs are suitable for small deployments or backup connectivity, but do not meet the performance and scalability requirements of a global banking network.

The second approach, Cloud Interconnect Dedicated with Cloud Router, offers high-bandwidth private connections with low latency. Dedicated interconnects provide predictable performance, which is essential for financial applications. Cloud Router enables dynamic route propagation, reducing manual intervention. Redundant interconnects can be configured to provide failover. However, managing dedicated interconnect infrastructure across multiple regions may require additional operational effort and support coordination, particularly for global banks with many branches. While viable, it may not be as operationally efficient as partner-managed solutions.

The fourth approach, manually configured static routes, is the least scalable. Each branch requires manual route configuration, and any change in the network topology necessitates updates across all locations. Failover is not automated, and traffic cannot dynamically optimize to maintain performance. Operational complexity and risk of misconfiguration increase exponentially with scale. For a multinational bank, this approach is impractical and prone to errors.

The third approach, Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router, provides high bandwidth, low latency, automatic failover, dynamic routing, and centralized route management. Partner interconnect ensures reliable performance without the bank managing physical infrastructure. Cloud Router enables automatic route propagation, so routes update dynamically as branches are added or network changes occur. Redundant interconnects allow automatic failover, ensuring continuous connectivity during link or device failures. Centralized management simplifies monitoring, logging, and policy enforcement, reducing operational risk. This solution meets all critical banking requirements: predictable throughput, low latency, dynamic route propagation, automated failover, and centralized operational control. It enables secure and efficient connectivity between global branches and Google Cloud.

Considering bandwidth, latency, failover, scalability, and centralized management, Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router is the optimal solution for multinational banks connecting multiple on-premises branches to Google Cloud.

Question 107

A global SaaS provider wants to expose a single public endpoint for its application. Requirements include SSL termination at the edge, health-based routing to the nearest healthy backend, and autoscaling to handle unpredictable traffic. Which load balancer should they use?

A) Regional External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
C) TCP Proxy Load Balancer
D) Internal HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Correct Answer: B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Explanation

Global SaaS providers must deliver applications with low latency, high availability, and scalable performance. Users around the world expect responsive access to services regardless of location. Key requirements include a single global IP for simplicity, SSL termination at the edge to offload encryption from backend servers, health-based routing to direct traffic to the nearest available backend, and autoscaling to handle traffic surges. Evaluating Google Cloud load balancer options identifies the best solution.

The first approach, regional external HTTP(S) load balancing, distributes traffic within a single region. SSL termination and autoscaling are supported regionally, but users outside the region experience higher latency because traffic cannot automatically route to the nearest backend in other regions. Multi-region failover is not automatic, reducing resilience and performance for global users. This solution is suitable for regional applications but does not satisfy global SaaS requirements.

The third approach, TCP Proxy Load Balancing, provides global routing at the TCP level. It can route traffic to the nearest healthy backend but lacks application-layer features such as SSL termination at the edge, content-based routing, and HTTP(S) optimizations. SaaS applications rely on HTTP(S), and edge SSL termination is critical to reduce backend load, optimize performance, and simplify certificate management. TCP Proxy alone cannot meet application-layer requirements.

The fourth approach, internal HTTP(S) load balancing, is designed for private traffic within a VPC. It does not provide a public IP for external users and cannot route global traffic. SSL termination and autoscaling are limited to internal workloads, making this approach unsuitable for public-facing SaaS applications.

The second approach, global external HTTP(S) load balancing, provides a single public IP address accessible worldwide. Traffic is automatically routed to the nearest healthy backend to minimize latency. SSL termination occurs at the edge, reducing backend processing. Autoscaling dynamically adjusts backend capacity across multiple regions, ensuring seamless handling of traffic spikes. Multi-region failover ensures high availability; if a backend in one region fails, traffic automatically reroutes to the next closest healthy backend. Centralized monitoring and logging simplify operational oversight, performance optimization, and troubleshooting. This solution fully meets global SaaS requirements: low-latency access, edge SSL termination, health-based routing, and autoscaling for unpredictable traffic patterns.

Given global reach, low latency, edge SSL termination, and autoscaling requirements, global external HTTP(S) load balancing is the optimal solution for SaaS providers serving worldwide users.

Question 108

A healthcare organization needs internal applications to access multiple Google Cloud managed services privately. Requirements include private IP connectivity, centralized access control, and support for multiple service producers. Which solution should they implement?

A) VPC Peering with each service
B) Private Service Connect endpoints
C) Assign external IPs and use firewall rules
D) Individual VPN tunnels for each service

Correct Answer: B) Private Service Connect endpoints

Explanation

Healthcare organizations must protect sensitive patient data and comply with regulatory requirements. Internal applications need private connectivity to Google Cloud managed services to avoid exposure over the public internet. Key requirements include private IP connectivity to isolate traffic, centralized access management to enforce consistent policies, and support for multiple service producers to simplify operational management and reduce administrative complexity. Evaluating connectivity options clarifies the optimal choice.

The first approach, VPC Peering with each service, provides private connectivity but is not scalable. Each managed service requires a separate peering connection. Overlapping IP ranges are unsupported, and centralized access management is limited because policies must be configured individually. Operational complexity grows as more services are added, making this approach impractical for large healthcare organizations.

The third approach, assigning external IPs and using firewall rules, exposes services to the public internet even if access is restricted. Firewall rules can limit connections to authorized users, but centralized access management is difficult to enforce, and multiple service producers require separate configurations. This method does not fully comply with healthcare privacy or regulatory standards.

The fourth approach, individual VPN tunnels for each service, provides encrypted connectivity but introduces high operational overhead. Each tunnel must be configured, monitored, and maintained independently. Scaling to multiple services or teams is cumbersome. Centralized access management is difficult because each tunnel is separate, increasing the risk of misconfiguration and administrative burden.

The second approach, Private Service Connect endpoints, provides private IP access to multiple managed services without using public IPs. Multiple service producers can be accessed through a single framework, reducing administrative effort. Centralized access management ensures consistent policy enforcement across teams. Multi-region support allows seamless scaling without redesigning the network architecture. Integrated logging and monitoring facilitate auditing and operational oversight. Private Service Connect is secure, scalable, and operationally efficient, meeting privacy, compliance, and operational requirements for healthcare organizations.

Considering private IP connectivity, centralized access control, support for multiple services, and regulatory compliance, Private Service Connect is the optimal solution for healthcare organizations accessing multiple Google Cloud managed services securely.

Question 109

A multinational manufacturing company needs to securely connect multiple on-premises factories to Google Cloud. Requirements include high throughput, low latency, dynamic route propagation, automatic failover, and centralized route management. Which solution is most appropriate?

A) Cloud VPN Classic
B) Cloud Interconnect Dedicated without Cloud Router
C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router
D) Manually configured static routes

Correct Answer: C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router

Explanation

Multinational manufacturing operations require robust connectivity between on-premises factories and cloud-based systems for real-time production monitoring, inventory management, and supply chain optimization. The network solution must support high throughput for large data transfers, low latency for time-sensitive operations, dynamic route propagation to minimize manual intervention, automatic failover for uninterrupted operations, and centralized route management for operational simplicity. Evaluating Google Cloud connectivity options reveals why Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router is the most suitable solution.

The first approach, Cloud VPN Classic, uses encrypted IPsec tunnels over the public internet. VPNs provide secure connectivity but cannot guarantee predictable bandwidth or low latency, as public internet traffic is variable. Routing is static, requiring manual configuration for each factory. Failover is either manual or requires complex configuration with multiple tunnels. Scaling VPNs across numerous factories increases operational overhead and is prone to configuration errors. While VPNs are suitable for small deployments or temporary connectivity, they do not meet the performance and reliability requirements of a global manufacturing network.

The second approach, Cloud Interconnect Dedicated without Cloud Router, provides private, high-bandwidth connections with predictable low latency. While dedicated interconnects offer excellent performance, all routes must be configured manually in the absence oa f a Cloud Router. Adding new factory locations or updating subnets requires significant manual effort. Failover is not automatically managed, which can lead to downtime during link failures. Operational complexity increases with the number of connected sites, reducing efficiency.

The fourth approach, manually configured static routes, is highly inefficient for large-scale networks. Each factory requires individual route updates, and any network changes necessitate updates across all sites. Failover is not automated, and traffic cannot dynamically optimize for performance. Operational complexity grows rapidly with network size, increasing the risk of errors and downtime.

The third approach, Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router, combines high throughput, low latency, dynamic route propagation, automatic failover, and centralized route management. Partner interconnect ensures reliable, high-performance connectivity without the organization managing physical infrastructure. Cloud Router automatically propagates routes, reducing manual configuration and administrative overhead. Redundant connections provide automatic failover, maintaining continuous connectivity. Centralized monitoring and management streamline operations, simplify logging and auditing, and ensure compliance. This solution meets all critical requirements for a manufacturing network: predictable bandwidth, low latency, dynamic routing, failover automation, and centralized management. It enables secure, efficient, and scalable connectivity between multiple factories and Google Cloud.

Considering throughput, latency, failover, scalability, and operational efficiency, Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router is the optimal solution for multinational manufacturing companies connecting multiple on-premises factories to Google Cloud.

Question 110

A global SaaS company wants to expose a single public endpoint for its application with SSL termination, health-based routing to the nearest healthy backend, and autoscaling for varying traffic levels. Which load balancer should they implement?

A) Regional External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
C) TCP Proxy Load Balancer
D) Internal HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Correct Answer: B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Explanation

SaaS applications serving a global audience require low-latency access, high availability, and scalability to handle unpredictable traffic patterns. Key requirements include a single global IP for simplicity, SSL termination at the edge to offload encryption from backend servers, health-based routing to direct users to the nearest available backend, and autoscaling to accommodate spikes in demand. Evaluating Google Cloud load balancing options demonstrates the optimal solution.

The first approach, regional external HTTP(S) load balancing, distributes traffic within a single region. SSL termination and autoscaling are supported within that region, but global users may experience increased latency because traffic cannot automatically route to the nearest backend in other regions. Multi-region failover is not automatic, which can limit resilience and reliability for a globally distributed user base. While suitable for regional deployments, it does not meet global SaaS application requirements.

The third approach, TCP Proxy Load Balancing, provides global routing at the TCP layer. Although it can direct traffic to the nearest healthy backend, it lacks application-layer features such as SSL termination at the edge and HTTP(S) content-based routing. SaaS applications rely on HTTP(S), and edge SSL termination is essential to reduce backend load, improve performance, and simplify certificate management. TCP Proxy alone cannot satisfy application-layer needs.

The fourth approach, internal HTTP(S) load balancing, is designed for private traffic within a VPC. It does not provide a public IP for external users and cannot route traffic globally. SSL termination and autoscaling are limited to internal workloads, making this solution unsuitable for public-facing SaaS applications.

The second approach, global external HTTP(S) load balancing, provides a single public IP accessible worldwide. Traffic is automatically routed to the nearest healthy backend to minimize latency. SSL termination occurs at the edge, reducing backend workload. Autoscaling dynamically adjusts backend capacity across multiple regions, ensuring uninterrupted service during traffic spikes. Multi-region failover ensures high availability; if a backend in one region becomes unavailable, traffic is automatically rerouted to the next closest healthy backend. Centralized monitoring and logging enable operational visibility, performance optimization, and troubleshooting. This solution fully satisfies the requirements of a global SaaS deployment: low-latency access, edge SSL termination, health-based routing, and autoscaling to handle unpredictable traffic patterns.

Considering global reach, low latency, edge SSL termination, health-based routing, and autoscaling, global external HTTP(S) load balancing is the optimal choice for SaaS providers serving worldwide users.

Question 111

A healthcare organization wants internal applications to access multiple Google Cloud managed services privately. Requirements include private IP connectivity, centralized access control, and support for multiple service producers. Which solution should they implement?

A) VPC Peering with each service
B) Private Service Connect endpoints
C) Assign external IPs and use firewall rules
D) Individual VPN tunnels for each service

Correct Answer: B) Private Service Connect endpoints

Explanation

Healthcare organizations must ensure patient data privacy and comply with regulatory requirements when accessing cloud services. Internal applications require private connectivity to Google Cloud managed services to avoid exposure over the public internet. Key requirements include private IP connectivity to isolate traffic, centralized access control for consistent policy enforcement, and support for multiple service producers to simplify operations. Evaluating connectivity options clarifies the optimal solution.

The first approach, VPC Peering with each service, provides private connectivity but is not scalable for multiple services. Each managed service requires a separate peering connection. Overlapping IP ranges are unsupported, and centralized access control is limited because policies must be configured individually per peering. Operational complexity increases as the number of services grows, making this approach unsuitable for large healthcare organizations.

The third approach, assigning external IPs with firewall rules, exposes services to the public internet, even if access is restricted. Firewall rules can limit connections to authorized users, but centralized access control is difficult to enforce. Multiple service producers require separate firewall configurations, increasing administrative burden. This approach does not fully comply with healthcare privacy and regulatory standards.

The fourth approach, individual VPN tunnels for each service, provides encrypted connectivity but introduces high operational overhead. Each tunnel must be configured, monitored, and maintained separately. Scaling to multiple services or teams is cumbersome. Centralized access control is challenging because each VPN operates independently. Operational complexity and administrative burden increase significantly without efficient scalability.

The second approach, Private Service Connect endpoints, provides private IP access to multiple managed services without exposing traffic to the public internet. Multiple service producers can be accessed through a single framework, reducing administrative overhead. Centralized access control ensures consistent policy enforcement across teams. Multi-region support enables seamless scaling without redesigning the network. Integrated logging and monitoring facilitate auditing and operational oversight. Private Service Connect is secure, scalable, and operationally efficient, meeting privacy, compliance, and operational requirements for healthcare organizations.

Considering private IP connectivity, centralized access control, multi-service support, and regulatory compliance, Private Service Connect is the optimal solution for healthcare organizations accessing multiple Google Cloud managed services securely.

Question 112

A global retail company needs to securely connect multiple on-premises stores to Google Cloud. Requirements include high throughput, low latency, dynamic route propagation, automatic failover, and centralized route management. Which solution is most appropriate?

A) Cloud VPN Classic
B) Cloud Interconnect Dedicated without Cloud Router
C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router
D) Manually configured static routes

Correct Answer: C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router

Explanation

Global retail companies rely on real-time communication between stores and cloud-based applications for inventory management, point-of-sale operations, analytics, and supply chain monitoring. These applications require high-throughput connections to handle large volumes of transactional and operational data. Additionally, low latency is critical for responsive point-of-sale systems and real-time inventory updates. Dynamic route propagation is necessary to simplify network management, as adding new stores or updating subnets should not require manual intervention. Automatic failover is crucial to maintain operations during link or device failures, and centralized route management reduces operational complexity and the risk of misconfigurations.

The first approach, Cloud VPN Classic, provides secure IPsec tunnels over the public internet. While VPNs are encrypted and secure, they cannot guarantee predictable bandwidth or low latency, since public internet performance is variable. Routing is primarily static, requiring manual updates for each store. Failover is manual or requires multiple tunnels to achieve redundancy. Scaling VPNs across hundreds of retail locations increases operational overhead and is prone to configuration errors. While VPNs are suitable for small deployments or backup connectivity, they cannot meet the performance, reliability, and scalability needs of a global retail network.

The second approach, Cloud Interconnect Dedicated without Cloud Router, provides private, high-bandwidth connections with predictable low latency. Dedicated interconnects are excellent for high-throughput workloads, but without Cloud Router, all network routes must be configured manually. Any addition of stores or changes in subnet configuration requires manual updates, increasing operational overhead. Failover is not automated and must be carefully configured, which complicates management for large networks. While throughput and latency requirements are met, operational efficiency and scalability remain limited.

The fourth approach, manually configured static routes, is the least scalable. Each store requires individual route updates, and any changes in the network topology necessitate manual reconfiguration across all sites. Failover is not automated, and traffic cannot dynamically adapt to maintain optimal performance. Operational complexity grows significantly as the number of stores increases, creating a high risk of errors and downtime.

The third approach, Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router, combines high throughput, low latency, dynamic route propagation, automatic failover, and centralized management. Partner interconnect ensures reliable performance without the retail company managing physical infrastructure. Cloud Router automatically propagates routes, reducing manual configuration and administrative burden. Redundant connections provide automatic failover, maintaining continuous connectivity in case of link or device failure. Centralized monitoring and management simplify logging, auditing, and policy enforcement, supporting operational efficiency and reducing risk. This solution meets all critical requirements for a global retail network and enables secure, efficient, and scalable connectivity between stores and Google Cloud.

Considering bandwidth, latency, failover, scalability, and centralized management, Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router is the optimal solution for a global retail company connecting multiple on-premises stores to Google Cloud.

Question 113

A global SaaS company wants to expose a single public endpoint for its application. Requirements include SSL termination at the edge, health-based routing to the nearest healthy backend, and autoscaling to handle unpredictable traffic. Which load balancer should they deploy?

A) Regional External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
C) TCP Proxy Load Balancer
D) Internal HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Correct Answer: B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Explanation

SaaS applications with a global user base demand low-latency access, high availability, and the ability to scale automatically during traffic spikes. Requirements include a single global IP for simplicity, SSL termination at the edge to reduce backend load, health-based routing to ensure users are directed to the nearest healthy backend, and autoscaling to manage traffic fluctuations efficiently. Evaluating Google Cloud load balancer options demonstrates the best solution.

The first approach, regional external HTTP(S) load balancing, provides SSL termination and autoscaling within a single region. Users outside the region may experience higher latency because traffic cannot automatically route to the nearest backend in another region. Multi-region failover is not automatic, reducing reliability for global users. While suitable for regional deployments, this approach does not meet global SaaS application requirements.

The third approach, TCP Proxy Load Balancing, operates at the TCP level and can route traffic globally to healthy backends. However, it lacks application-layer features such as SSL termination at the edge and HTTP(S)-specific routing. SaaS applications rely on HTTP(S), and offloading SSL termination is critical to reduce backend load, improve performance, and simplify certificate management. TCP Proxy alone cannot fulfill these requirements.

The fourth approach, internal HTTP(S) load balancing, is designed for private workloads within a VPC. It does not provide a public IP and cannot handle external global traffic. Autoscaling and SSL termination are limited to internal workloads, making this solution unsuitable for a public-facing SaaS application.

The second approach, global external HTTP(S) load balancing, provides a single public IP globally accessible by users. Traffic is automatically routed to the nearest healthy backend to minimize latency. SSL termination occurs at the edge, reducing backend workload. Autoscaling dynamically adjusts backend capacity across multiple regions, ensuring uninterrupted service during traffic spikes. Multi-region failover ensures high availability; if a backend in one region fails, traffic automatically reroutes to the nearest healthy backend. Centralized monitoring and logging enable operational oversight, troubleshooting, and performance optimization. This solution fully satisfies global SaaS requirements, providing low-latency access, edge SSL termination, health-based routing, and autoscaling for unpredictable traffic.

Given global reach, low latency, edge SSL termination, health-based routing, and autoscaling, global external HTTP(S) load balancing is the optimal solution for SaaS companies serving users worldwide.

Question 114

A) VPC Peering with each service
B) Private Service Connect endpoints
C) Assign external IPs and use firewall rules
D) Individual VPN tunnels for each service

Correct Answer: B) Private Service Connect endpoints

Explanation

Healthcare organizations must protect sensitive patient data and comply with strict regulatory requirements. Internal applications require private connectivity to Google Cloud managed services to avoid exposure over the public internet. Key requirements include private IP connectivity to isolate traffic, centralized access control to enforce consistent policies, and support for multiple service producers to simplify operational management and reduce administrative burden. Evaluating connectivity options identifies the most suitable solution.

The first approach, VPC Peering with each service, provides private connectivity but does not scale efficiently for multiple services. Each managed service requires a separate peering connection. Overlapping IP ranges are unsupported, and centralized access control is limited because policies must be applied individually per peering. Operational complexity grows as the number of services increases, making this approach impractical for large healthcare organizations.

The third approach, assigning external IPs with firewall rules, exposes services to the public internet, even if access is restricted. Firewall rules can limit connections to authorized users, but centralized access management is difficult to enforce. Multiple service producers require separate configurations, increasing administrative complexity. This method does not fully comply with healthcare privacy and regulatory requirements.

The fourth approach, individual VPN tunnels for each service, provides encrypted connectivity but introduces high operational overhead. Each tunnel must be configured, monitored, and maintained independently. Scaling to multiple services or teams is cumbersome, and centralized access control is difficult because each tunnel is independent. Operational complexity and administrative burden are significant without efficient scalability.

The second approach, Private Service Connect endpoints, provides private IP access to multiple managed services without using public IPs. Multiple service producers can be accessed through a single centralized framework, reducing administrative overhead. Centralized access management ensures consistent policy enforcement across teams. Multi-region support allows seamless scaling without redesigning the network architecture. Integrated logging and monitoring facilitate auditing and operational oversight. Private Service Connect is secure, scalable, and operationally efficient, meeting privacy, compliance, and operational requirements for healthcare organizations.

Question 115

A multinational bank wants to securely connect its global branches to Google Cloud. Requirements include predictable bandwidth, low latency, dynamic routing, automatic failover, and centralized route management. Which solution is most appropriate?

A) Cloud VPN Classic
B) Cloud Interconnect Dedicated with Cloud Router
C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router
D) Manually configured static routes

Correct Answer: C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router

Explanation

Global banking operations demand robust, secure, and high-performance connectivity between branches and cloud-based systems to support real-time transactions, data replication, and regulatory compliance. Predictable bandwidth is critical to prevent delays in transaction processing. Low latency ensures financial applications perform optimally, particularly for time-sensitive operations. Dynamic routing is required to automatically adjust to changes in network topology without manual intervention. Automatic failover guarantees continuous connectivity if a link or device fails, and centralized route management simplifies operational oversight while minimizing the risk of misconfigurations.

The first approach, Cloud VPN Classic, provides encrypted IPsec tunnels over the public internet. VPNs offer secure connectivity,, but cannot guarantee consistent throughput or low latency because performance depends on internet conditions. Routing is largely static, requiring manual updates for each branch. Failover is either manual or requires configuring multiple redundant tunnels, adding complexity. As the number of branches grows, operational overhead increases significantly. VPNs are suitable for limited deployments or temporary connectivity, but cannot meet the performance, reliability, and scalability requirements of a multinational bank.

The second approach, Cloud Interconnect Dedicated with Cloud Router, provides high-bandwidth, low-latency private connectivity. Dedicated interconnects deliver predictable throughput, which is essential for financial operations. Cloud Router supports dynamic route propagation, reducing manual intervention. Redundant connections can provide failover; however, managing dedicated interconnect infrastructure across multiple regions increases operational overhead. Coordinating physical infrastructure and maintaining service-level agreements across regions may require additional resources. While this solution is viable, it is a more complex operationally compared to partner-managed interconnects.

The fourth approach, manually configured static routes, is highly inefficient. Each branch requires individual route updates, and any network change necessitates manual reconfiguration across all sites. Failover is not automated, and traffic cannot dynamically optimize for performance. Operational complexity grows exponentially as the network expands, increasing the risk of human errors and downtime.

The third approach, Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router, provides high throughput, low latency, automatic failover, dynamic routing, and centralized route management. Partner interconnect ensures reliable performance without the bank managing physical infrastructure. Cloud Router propagates routes automatically, simplifying network management as branches are added or subnets are updated. Redundant connections deliver automatic failover, ensuring uninterrupted operations. Centralized monitoring, logging, and policy management reduce operational risk and streamline management. This solution addresses all critical banking requirements: predictable bandwidth, low latency, dynamic routing, automated failover, and centralized control. It enables secure, scalable, and efficient connectivity between global branches and Google Cloud.

Considering throughput, latency, failover, scalability, and operational efficiency, Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router is the optimal solution for multinational banks connecting multiple branches to Google Cloud.

Question 116

A global SaaS provider needs to deliver its application through a single public endpoint. Requirements include SSL termination at the edge, health-based routing to the nearest healthy backend, and autoscaling to handle traffic spikes. Which load balancer is most suitable?

A) Regional External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
C) TCP Proxy Load Balancer
D) Internal HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Correct Answer: B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Explanation

SaaS applications with a global user base require low-latency access, high availability, and scalable performance. Users expect fast response times regardless of location. Key requirements include a single global IP for simplicity, SSL termination at the edge to offload encryption from backend servers, health-based routing to direct traffic to the nearest healthy backend, and autoscaling to handle traffic surges. Evaluating Google Cloud load balancing options identifies the most suitable solution.

The first approach, regional external HTTP(S) load balancing, distributes traffic within a single region. SSL termination and autoscaling are supported within that region, but users outside the region may experience higher latency because traffic cannot automatically route to the nearest backend in other regions. Multi-region failover is not automatic, reducing reliability for global users. While suitable for regional deployments, it does not meet global SaaS application requirements.

The third approach, TCP Proxy Load Balancing, provides global routing at the TCP layer. It can direct traffic to the nearest healthy backend, but lacks application-layer features such as edge SSL termination and content-based routing. SaaS applications typically rely on HTTP(S), and edge SSL termination is critical to reduce backend load, improve performance, and simplify certificate management. TCP Proxy alone cannot satisfy application-layer requirements.

The fourth approach, internal HTTP(S) load balancing, is designed for private workloads within a VPC. It does not provide a public IP for external access and cannot handle global traffic. SSL termination and autoscaling are limited to internal workloads, making this solution unsuitable for public-facing SaaS applications.

The second approach, global external HTTP(S) load balancing, provides a single public IP address accessible worldwide. Traffic is automatically routed to the nearest healthy backend to minimize latency. SSL termination occurs at the edge, reducing backend workload. Autoscaling dynamically adjusts backend capacity across regions, ensuring uninterrupted service during traffic surges. Multi-region failover ensures high availability; if a backend in one region fails, traffic automatically reroutes to the nearest healthy backend. Centralized monitoring and logging provide operational oversight, performance optimization, and troubleshooting. This solution fully meets the requirements of a global SaaS deployment: low-latency access, edge SSL termination, health-based routing, and autoscaling for variable traffic.

Question 117

A healthcare organization needs internal applications to access multiple Google Cloud managed services privately. Requirements include private IP connectivity, centralized access management, and support for multiple service producers. Which solution should be implemented?

A) VPC Peering with each service
B) Private Service Connect endpoints
C) Assign external IPs and restrict access via firewall rules
D) Individual VPN tunnels for each service

Correct Answer: B) Private Service Connect endpoints

Explanation

Healthcare organizations must protect sensitive patient data and comply with strict privacy regulations when accessing cloud services. Internal applications require private connectivity to Google Cloud managed services to avoid exposure over the public internet. Key requirements include private IP connectivity, centralized access management for consistent policy enforcement, and support for multiple service producers to simplify operational management and reduce administrative complexity. Evaluating connectivity options identifies the most appropriate solution.

The first approach, VPC Peering with each service, provides private connectivity but does not scale efficiently for multiple services. Each managed service requires a separate peering connection. Overlapping IP ranges are unsupported, and centralized access management is limited because policies must be applied individually per peering. Operational complexity grows as the number of services increases, making this solution impractical for large healthcare organizations.

The third approach, assigning external IPs and using firewall rules, exposes services to the public internet, even if access is restricted. Firewall rules can limit connections to authorized users, but centralized access management is difficult to enforce. Multiple service producers require separate configurations, increasing the administrative burden. This approach does not fully meet healthcare privacy and regulatory requirements.

The fourth approach, individual VPN tunnels for each service, provides encrypted connectivity but introduces high operational overhead. Each tunnel must be configured, monitored, and maintained independently. Scaling to multiple services or teams is cumbersome. Centralized access management is difficult because each VPN operates independently. Operational complexity and administrative burden are significant without efficient scalability.

The second approach, Private Service Connect endpoints, provides private IP access to multiple managed services without using public IPs. Multiple service producers can be accessed through a single framework, reducing administrative overhead. Centralized access management ensures consistent policy enforcement across teams. Multi-region support allows seamless scaling without redesigning the network architecture. Integrated logging and monitoring facilitate auditing and operational oversight. Private Service Connect is secure, scalable, and operationally efficient, meeting privacy, compliance, and operational requirements for healthcare organizations.

Considering private IP connectivity, centralized access management, support for multiple service producers, and regulatory compliance, Private Service Connect is the optimal solution for healthcare organizations accessing multiple Google Cloud managed services securely.

Question 118

A global logistics company needs to securely connect its on-premises warehouses to Google Cloud. Requirements include high bandwidth, low latency, dynamic route propagation, automatic failover, and centralized route management. Which solution is most appropriate?

A) Cloud VPN Classic
B) Cloud Interconnect Dedicated with Cloud Router
C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router
D) Manually configured static routes

Correct Answer: C) Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router

Explanation

Global logistics operations require a network that can efficiently support real-time communication between on-premises warehouses and cloud-based applications, such as inventory management systems, shipment tracking, and supply chain analytics. High bandwidth is crucial to accommodate large volumes of operational and transactional data, particularly during peak activity periods. Low latency ensures that real-time operations, such as order processing or inventory updates, occur without delay. Dynamic route propagation is important to minimize manual network configuration, especially as new warehouses are added or network topology changes occur. Automatic failover guarantees continuous operations if a network path or device fails, and centralized route management simplifies monitoring, logging, and overall operational control.

Cloud VPN Classic, the first approach, provides secure IPsec tunnels over the public internet. While it ensures encryption and basic connectivity, it cannot guarantee predictable bandwidth or low latency due to internet variability. Routing is primarily static, requiring manual configuration for each warehouse. Failover is manual or requires complex redundant tunnels. Scaling VPNs across multiple warehouses significantly increases operational overhead and introduces potential misconfiguration risks. VPNs are typically suitable for small deployments or as a backup solution, but they do not meet the performance and reliability requirements of a global logistics network.

The second approach, Cloud Interconnect Dedicated with Cloud Router, offers private high-bandwidth connections with low latency and predictable performance. However, a dedicated interconnect requires managing physical infrastructure, and while Cloud Router enables dynamic route propagation, coordinating failover across multiple locations requires additional operational effort. This setup can meet throughput and latency requirements but introduces higher complexity, particularly for a geographically distributed logistics network.

Manually configured static routes, the fourth approach, are highly inefficient for large-scale networks. Each warehouse must have routes configured individually, and any network changes require updates across all locations. Failover is not automated, and traffic cannot dynamically adapt for performance optimization. Operational complexity and the likelihood of errors grow exponentially as the network expands, making static routing unsuitable for a distributed logistics environment.

Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router, the third approach, combines high bandwidth, low latency, dynamic route propagation, automatic failover, and centralized route management. Partner interconnect provides reliable performance without the organization managing physical infrastructure. Cloud Router automatically propagates routes, reducing manual effort and administrative overhead. Redundant connections allow automatic failover, ensuring continuous operations during link or device failures. Centralized management facilitates monitoring, logging, auditing, and policy enforcement, enhancing operational efficiency. This solution addresses all requirements: predictable throughput, low latency, dynamic routing, failover automation, and centralized control, making it ideal for global logistics connectivity.

Considering bandwidth, latency, failover, scalability, and operational efficiency, Cloud Interconnect Partner with Cloud Router is the optimal solution for connecting multiple warehouses to Google Cloud securely and efficiently.

Question 119

A SaaS provider wants to deliver its application globally with a single public endpoint. Requirements include SSL termination at the edge, health-based routing to the nearest healthy backend, and automatic scaling for variable traffic. Which load balancer should they use?

A) Regional External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer
C) TCP Proxy Load Balancer
D) Internal HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Correct Answer: B) Global External HTTP(S) Load Balancer

Explanation

Global SaaS applications require low-latency access, high availability, and the ability to scale automatically during traffic spikes. Users expect consistent performance regardless of geographic location. Key requirements include a single global IP address for simplicity, SSL termination at the edge to reduce the computational load on backends, health-based routing to direct users to the nearest available and healthy backend, and autoscaling to handle unpredictable traffic levels efficiently. Analyzing Google Cloud load balancer options clarifies the optimal choice.

Regional external HTTP(S) load balancing distributes traffic within a single region and supports SSL termination and autoscaling. However, users outside that region experience increased latency since traffic cannot automatically route to the nearest backend in other regions. Multi-region failover is not automatic, limiting global availability. While suitable for regional deployments, it does not meet global SaaS application requirements.

TCP Proxy Load Balancing operates at the TCP layer and can route traffic globally to healthy backends. However, it lacks application-layer features such as edge SSL termination and HTTP(S)-specific routing. SaaS applications rely heavily on HTTP(S), and terminating SSL at the edge is crucial for reducing backend load, improving latency, and simplifying certificate management. TCP Proxy alone cannot meet these application-layer needs.

Internal HTTP(S) load balancing is designed for private workloads within a VPC. It does not provide a public IP for external users and cannot route traffic globally. SSL termination and autoscaling are restricted to internal workloads, making this solution unsuitable for a public-facing SaaS application.

Global external HTTP(S) load balancing provides a single public IP address accessible worldwide. Traffic is automatically routed to the nearest healthy backend to minimize latency. SSL termination occurs at the edge, reducing backend processing requirements. Autoscaling dynamically adjusts backend capacity across multiple regions, ensuring uninterrupted service during traffic spikes. Multi-region failover guarantees high availability; if a backend in one region fails, traffic automatically reroutes to the nearest healthy backend. Centralized monitoring and logging simplify operational oversight, performance optimization, and troubleshooting. This solution fully satisfies global SaaS requirements: low-latency access, edge SSL termination, health-based routing, and autoscaling to accommodate traffic variability.

Considering global reach, low latency, edge SSL termination, health-based routing, and autoscaling, global external HTTP(S) load balancing is the optimal solution for SaaS providers serving worldwide users.

Question 120

A) VPC Peering with each service
B) Private Service Connect endpoints
C) Assign external IPs and use firewall rules
D) Individual VPN tunnels for each service

Correct Answer: B) Private Service Connect endpoints

Explanation

Healthcare organizations must ensure strict data privacy and regulatory compliance when accessing cloud services. Internal applications require private connectivity to Google Cloud managed services to avoid exposure over the public internet. Critical requirements include private IP connectivity to isolate traffic, centralized access control for consistent policy enforcement, and support for multiple service producers to simplify operational management and reduce administrative complexity. Evaluating connectivity options identifies the most appropriate solution.

VPC Peering with each service provides private connectivity, but does not scale efficiently for multiple services. Each managed service requires a separate peering connection. Overlapping IP ranges are unsupported, and centralized access control is limited because policies must be applied individually per peering. Operational complexity grows as the number of services increases, making this solution impractical for large healthcare organizations.

Assigning external IPs and using firewall rules exposes services to the public internet, even if access is restricted. Firewall rules can limit connections to authorized users, but centralized access management is difficult to enforce. Multiple service producers require separate configurations, increasing administrative complexity. This approach does not fully meet healthcare privacy and regulatory requirements.

Individual VPN tunnels for each service provide encrypted connectivity but introduce high operational overhead. Each tunnel must be configured, monitored, and maintained independently. Scaling to multiple services or teams is cumbersome. Centralized access management is difficult because each tunnel is independent. Operational complexity and administrative burden increase significantly without efficient scalability.

Private Service Connect endpoints provide private IP access to multiple managed services without using public IPs. Multiple service producers can be accessed through a single framework, reducing administrative overhead. Centralized access management ensures consistent policy enforcement across teams. Multi-region support allows seamless scaling without redesigning the network. Integrated logging and monitoring facilitate auditing and operational oversight. Private Service Connect is secure, scalable, and operationally efficient, meeting privacy, compliance, and operational requirements for healthcare organizations.

Google Professional Cloud Network Engineer Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 8 Q106-120

Related posts: