Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Dell EMC D-UN-DY-23 Exam - Topic 9 Question 15 Discussion

Actual exam question for Dell EMC's D-UN-DY-23 exam
Question #: 15
Topic #: 9
[All D-UN-DY-23 Questions]

A company has an ESXi host installed with FC HBAs that is connected to a Dell Unity XT storage array. A 500 GB LUN is provisioned to this host from the Unity array and is in production. The VMware administrator has configured a new vSwitch with the NICs on the server intended for iSCSI traffic. The storage administrator is asked to configure software iSCSI and provision a new 1 TB LUN from the storage array using iSCSI.

What is a consideration when satisfying this request?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

The maximum number of drives on a traditional RAID group depends on the RAID type and the drive type. For RAID 5 and RAID 6, the maximum number of drives is 16 for all drive types.For RAID 1/0, the maximum number of drives is 32 for SAS and NL-SAS drives, and 16 for SSD drives.Reference: Dell EMC Unity: Best Practices Guide2, page 17.


by Cherry at May 03, 2024, 12:59 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium D-UN-DY-23 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Marge
4 months ago
Seems like a lot of setup for just one LUN.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alesia
4 months ago
Definitely need that connection established first!
upvoted 0 times
...
Carri
4 months ago
Wait, do we really need two subnets for iSCSI targets?
upvoted 0 times
...
Olive
4 months ago
Totally agree, one protocol only!
upvoted 0 times
...
Doretha
5 months ago
You can't mix protocols on the same host!
upvoted 0 times
...
Ronnie
5 months ago
I think option B sounds right, but I’m not completely confident. It seems like a common practice to stick to one protocol for a host and array.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacqueline
5 months ago
I feel like we discussed the importance of having multiple iSCSI target interfaces, but I can't recall if they need to be on separate subnets.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carey
5 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think there was a practice question about using different protocols for the same host and array. Could that apply?
upvoted 0 times
...
Nicolette
5 months ago
I remember something about needing to establish connections between initiators and targets before provisioning. That might be important here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Renea
5 months ago
Good point, Silvana. I'm leaning towards A as well. We need to make sure the iSCSI interfaces are on separate subnets to ensure proper connectivity.
upvoted 0 times
...
Silvana
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. Wouldn't we also need to consider the subnet configuration for the iSCSI interfaces? I think A might be the right answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Graciela
5 months ago
I'm pretty confident that the answer is C. We need to establish the iSCSI connection first before we can provision the new LUN.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lazaro
5 months ago
Okay, let's think this through step-by-step. We need to configure the iSCSI connection between the host and the storage array, and then provision the new LUN.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lajuana
5 months ago
This question seems straightforward, but I want to make sure I understand the requirements correctly before answering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sina
6 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused here. The file is on the user's desktop, so I'm not sure if changing the access rights is the right solution. Maybe we need to look into a more dynamic way to locate the file.
upvoted 0 times
...
Raylene
6 months ago
If the attachment point is 130% of $2,000,000, that might be $2,600,000, so it seems like we'd need to factor that into what Longview actually pays.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacinta
6 months ago
A good strategy here would be to think through some real-world cloud scenarios and how a successful attack could impact multiple consumers. That should help me arrive at the right answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Trina
10 months ago
Ah, the age-old question of FC vs. iSCSI. It's like the battle of the storage protocols - may the best one win! Or maybe they can just hold hands and share the storage, who knows?
upvoted 0 times
...
Jesusita
10 months ago
I'm going with B. Mixing protocols is like trying to speak French and Spanish at the same time - it's just gonna end in a linguistic disaster.
upvoted 0 times
Audry
10 months ago
A
upvoted 0 times
...
Alona
10 months ago
B
upvoted 0 times
...
Lawana
10 months ago
B
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Scot
11 months ago
Option C seems like the way to go. Gotta establish that connection first before you can provision the new LUN. Otherwise, it's just not gonna work, right?
upvoted 0 times
Quentin
9 months ago
A: Absolutely, without that connection, the new LUN won't be accessible to the host.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tina
9 months ago
B: Agreed, setting up the connection is crucial for the new LUN to work properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Matthew
10 months ago
A: Option C is definitely important. You need that connection in place before adding a new LUN.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Irving
11 months ago
Wait, so we have FC HBAs already connected to the storage array, and now we want to set up iSCSI as well? That sounds a bit overkill, don't you think?
upvoted 0 times
Ettie
9 months ago
A: It's always good to have redundancy and separate networks for different types of traffic.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jeannetta
9 months ago
C: Any single host should connect to any single array using one protocol only.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lilli
10 months ago
B: Two iSCSI target interfaces must be configured with IP addresses from separate subnets.
upvoted 0 times
...
Makeda
10 months ago
A: A connection must be established between the host iSCSI initiators and Unity iSCSI targets before provisioning the new LUN.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Keva
11 months ago
I'm not sure about option A. I think option C might be the correct answer because establishing a connection between the host initiators and Unity targets seems like a necessary step before provisioning the new LUN.
upvoted 0 times
...
Verona
11 months ago
I agree with Lelia. Having separate subnets for the iSCSI target interfaces ensures better network segmentation and avoids any potential issues with routing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nelida
11 months ago
I think option B is the correct answer. Using only one protocol per host is a best practice to simplify management and troubleshooting.
upvoted 0 times
Bev
10 months ago
But wouldn't it be better to establish the connection first before provisioning the new LUN?
upvoted 0 times
...
Bev
10 months ago
I agree, using one protocol per host can definitely simplify things.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lelia
11 months ago
I think option A is the correct answer. Two iSCSI target interfaces must be configured with IP addresses from separate subnets to avoid any network conflicts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashonda
11 months ago
I'm not sure about option A. I think option C might be important too, as establishing a connection between the host initiators and Unity targets seems crucial before provisioning the new LUN.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alyssa
11 months ago
I agree with Rutha. Option A makes sense in this scenario to ensure proper network configuration and avoid any potential conflicts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rutha
12 months ago
I think option A is the correct answer because having separate subnets for the iSCSI target interfaces can help with network segregation and performance optimization.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel