NCP-MCI-7.5練習試験テスト最新問題2026年10月 [Q29-Q51]

NCP-MCI-7.5練習試験テスト最新問題2026年10月

NCP-MCI-7.5試験を一発合格保証問題集！

質問 # 29
An employee is complaining that a VM is slow. Memory overcommit is enabled for this VM. Though the VM is actively using all its allocated memory, the guest OS pagefile % Usage is very low.
What is the probable cause for this VM being slow?

• A. The CVM is swapping.
• B. The hypervisor is swapping.
• C. Memory ballooning is not enabled.
• D. Ballooning is not compatible with swapping.

正解：B

解説：
The key clue is the mismatch between the VM being slow under memory overcommit and the guest OS pagefile usage remaining low. If the guest itself were under strong memory pressure, you would expect higher pagefile or swap-file activity inside the OS. Instead, the symptoms suggest memory reclamation is happening outside the guest, which points to hypervisor swapping. In Nutanix AHV terms, that means the platform is reclaiming memory at the virtualization layer, causing performance degradation even though the guest does not show heavy internal paging. Therefore C is the most likely cause.
The distractors are weaker. "CVM swapping" would indicate pressure in the storage/control path VM, not necessarily this guest's memory experience. Ballooning and swapping are not mutually exclusive, and the question's evidence does not specifically prove ballooning is disabled. This is a troubleshooting pattern- recognition question: slow VM, full memory use, low guest pagefile use, and overcommit enabled usually indicates the hypervisor is swapping, so C is the best answer.

質問 # 30
A company has purchased Nutanix hardware for multiple remote branch offices. The IT team at headquarters needs to image and deploy all clusters remotely from a central location.
An administrator deploys Foundation Central from the Prism Central Marketplace.
What capability does Foundation Central provide in this scenario?

• A. Ability to register all remote clusters to Prism Central automatically after deployment
• B. Automated backup and recovery of cluster configurations across all sites
• C. Single pane of glass to create remote clusters without individual node configuration
• D. Ability to remotely upgrade AOS and AHV on existing clusters

正解：C

解説：
Foundation Central is about deployment centralization, not backup, lifecycle upgrades, or automatic registration workflows as its main value proposition. Nutanix documentation describes Foundation Central as a tool that can manage several Foundation instances from a single pane of glass, allowing administrators to create clusters of remote nodes. That statement maps directly to option D. ( Nutanix Portal ) The subtle point here is that the question mentions Marketplace only as the method used to deploy Foundation Central, not as the capability being tested. Once deployed, Foundation Central's job is to simplify remote cluster creation at scale. It does not replace LCM for software upgrades, nor is its primary role to perform backup and recovery of cluster configurations. Automatic cluster registration may happen as part of broader operational workflows, but it is not the core capability Nutanix emphasizes in the product description. In the context of imaging and deploying many branch-office clusters from a central team, the defining capability is centralized cluster creation and management visibility. That is why D is the right answer. ( Nutanix Portal )

質問 # 31
The accounting department has been successfully utilizing Erasure Coding for a long time. During the weekend, there was a large increase in data usage. The administrator expected lower space usage on the storage container.
What could be the cause of this low space savings?

• A. Erasure coding window default settings
• B. Erasure coding auto deactivated
• C. Data Services IP is not configured
• D. Prism Central failure in the erasure coding cluster

正解：A

解説：
Nutanix documentation states that the default erasure coding window for write-cold data is seven days. That means newly written or recently modified data is not immediately converted into erasure-coded stripes. If there was a large increase in data usage over a weekend, the administrator might not yet see the expected space savings because the new data has not aged long enough to fall within the EC processing window. That is why D is the correct answer.
This is a timing question more than a configuration question. The issue is not that EC has failed or deactivated automatically; it is that the data may still be considered too "hot" for the erasure-coding policy to process under the default window. DSIP and Prism Central health are irrelevant to whether EC space savings appear on a storage container. Nutanix separates the eligibility window from the fact that EC is enabled. Therefore, after a sudden growth event, lower-than-expected savings are best explained by the default erasure coding window settings, which is option D.

質問 # 32
An administrator is creating a settings profile in Prism Central to standardize NTP configuration across multiple clusters. The organization ' s security policy requires that all NTP communication must be authenticated.
The administrator adds an NTP server to the profile, but does not see the Key ID and Key Hex fields.
What is the most likely cause?

• A. Authenticated NTP requires the cluster to run AOS 7.0 or later.
• B. Authenticated NTP is only supported when Microservices Infrastructure is disabled on Prism Central.
• C. NTP server must be added through Prism Element before it can be authenticated in Prism Central.
• D. Authentication Type needs to be changed to SHA256, SHA384, or SHA512.

正解：A

解説：
Nutanix Prism Central documentation for cluster settings profiles includes support for adding both authenticated and unauthenticated NTP servers. In the AOS 7.0 and later generation, the UI and feature set include the fields required for authenticated NTP, such as Key ID and Key Hex. If those fields are not appearing, the most likely explanation is that the managed environment does not meet the required software version for authenticated NTP support in that settings-profile workflow. That is why AOS 7.0 or later is the correct answer. ( Nutanix ) The other answers do not align with the documented dependency. Microservices Infrastructure is unrelated to whether authenticated NTP fields are exposed. There is no requirement that authentication be configured first in Prism Element before it can exist in the settings profile. Changing authentication algorithm type does not explain why the fields are entirely absent to begin with. The version dependency is the decisive factor.
Nutanix often exposes advanced configuration fields only when the target cluster capability supports them, so the lack of Key ID and Key Hex strongly indicates that the cluster software level is below the authenticated- NTP requirement. Therefore D is the best answer. ( Nutanix )

質問 # 33
An administrator configures network segmentation and places the Data Services IP (DSIP) in a secondary non- routable subnet while the cluster is registered to Prism Central. Prism Central cannot initiate or complete cluster upgrades. How should the administrator resolve this issue?

• A. Enable proxy ARP within the Nutanix VLAN to establish reachability.
• B. Disable segmentation on the local cluster until the next upgrade cycle.
• C. Configure an additional DSIP within the original subnet used for PC communication.
• D. Use a single uplink because segmented networks do not tolerate redundancy.

正解：C

解説：
Nutanix security and network-segmentation documentation clearly states that the segmented DSIP and the regular cluster DSIP are different entities, and that Prism Central needs a cluster DSIP in the same subnet to upgrade. In other words, placing the DSIP only in a secondary non-routable segment can break Prism Central' s ability to perform upgrades if Prism Central cannot reach the cluster using the expected subnet path. The documented fix is to maintain or configure a DSIP in the original communication subnet that Prism Central can use. That makes C the correct answer.
The other options are not the Nutanix-documented solution. Proxy ARP is not the prescribed remedy here, and disabling segmentation is unnecessary if the communication requirement can be satisfied by adding the proper DSIP. Uplink redundancy has nothing to do with the management-plane reachability issue in the question. So the authentic fix is to configure an additional DSIP in the original subnet used for Prism Central communication, which is C.

質問 # 34
An administrator has a large group of VMs for the marketing team that all have the same RPO requirements of a snapshot every hour. A Protection Policy already exists with an hourly snapshot schedule. What is the easiest way to add this group of VMs to the Protection Policy?

• A. Edit the Protection Policy and add each individual VM.
• B. Add each VM to the Protection Policy from the VM page.
• C. Create a template for the marketing VMs and add the template to the Protection Policy.
• D. Assign a category to marketing VMs, then add the category to the Protection Policy.

正解：D

解説：
Nutanix documentation for Protection Policies supports protecting entities by category, which is the most scalable and administratively efficient method when many current and future VMs share the same RPO requirement. By assigning the marketing VMs to a category and then associating that category with the policy, the administrator avoids one-by-one maintenance and also ensures new VMs can inherit protection simply by category assignment. ( Nutanix Portal ) This is exactly the kind of pattern Nutanix encourages across Prism Central: use categories for dynamic grouping and policy application. Adding each VM individually works, but it is not the easiest or most maintainable approach for a large VM set. Templates are not the unit used here for attaching data protection to running workloads. A category-based protection model gives consistency, scale, and easier future operations, particularly when teams like Marketing may continuously create or receive new VMs. Since the question asks for the easiest way, the category-based workflow in option A is the cleanest answer and aligns directly with official Nutanix policy design. ( Nutanix Portal )

質問 # 35
An administrator is tasked with creating a Disaster Recovery plan between two clusters within Prism Central local AZ. To ensure a failover operation is successful, the administrator also needs the ability to test recovery in both directions.
What are the recommended networks required between the two clusters for successfully testing the recovery?

• A. Two Production Networks and Two Test Networks
• B. One Production Network and Two Test Networks
• C. Two Production Networks and One Test Network
• D. One Production Network and One Test Network

正解：A

解説：
Nutanix DR documentation for test failover states that recovered test VMs are brought up in a test virtual network at the recovery AZ, separate from production. Nutanix also documents that when multiple recovery directions or multiple recovery AZs are involved, recovery planning should be created per target direction and the required production and test network mappings need to exist for the recovery plan being tested. If recovery must be tested in both directions between the two clusters, each side effectively needs a production network and a test network. That makes two production networks and two test networks the most complete and correct answer.
This question is really about symmetry. One-direction failover testing can be done with a simpler mapping set, but the moment the requirement says test recovery in both directions, each cluster must be able to act as a recovery site and provide an isolated test-recovery network. That is why a single shared test network is not the best answer here. Nutanix's recovery-plan structure and test-failover guidance support this interpretation.
Therefore C is the correct and most practical answer.

質問 # 36
A Windows VM will be cloned repeatedly and each clone needs OS-level customization during deployment.
What is the most efficient method to accomplish this task?

• A. Clone and manually configure
• B. Create template for each deployment
• C. Guest customization profile
• D. Create a VM from snapshot

正解：C

質問 # 37
An administrator has configured CVM security hardening on a Nutanix cluster with the following settings:
* IP Restriction State is set to enabled
* Password-based SSH access is disabled via Cluster Lockdown
The administrator attempts to SSH into the CVM from a new jump box and the connection is refused.
What should the administrator do to restore SSH access to the CVM?

• A. Restart the CVM to reset the IP restriction and regain SSH access from the new jump box IP.
• B. Log in to Prism Central Security Dashboard and remotely update the SSH whitelisted addresses for the affected cluster.
• C. Access the CVM using the local console or serial access and update the SSH whitelisted address to the new jump box IP.
• D. Log in to Prism Element and update the Cluster Lockdown settings to add the new jump box IP address.

正解：C

解説：
Nutanix security hardening guidance explains that SSH Whitelisted Addresses control which client IPs are allowed to reach the CVM over SSH. If IP restriction is enabled and the new jump box is not on the allowlist, the SSH connection is expected to be refused. In that locked-down state, the correct recovery path is to access the CVM through a local or serial console and update the whitelist to include the new jump box IP. That makes C the correct answer. ( portal.nutanix.com , portal.nutanix.com ) Cluster Lockdown disabling password-based SSH is not the same setting as the SSH allowlist. Prism Central security views can help with visibility, but the key documented mechanism is the whitelist itself. Restarting the CVM does not reset the hardened configuration. Nutanix's intent is that trusted-source access must be explicitly permitted, and once it is blocked, you need console-level access to make the change safely.

質問 # 38
A node in a 3-node cluster is running out of physical resources. All three nodes are equally configured. An administrator wants to live migrate VMs to another node, but is unable to do so.
What is causing this issue?

• A. VMs have vNUMA enabled.
• B. VMs have GPU passthrough.
• C. VMs have vGPU.
• D. VMs have memory overcommitment.

正解：B

解説：
Nutanix documentation clearly states that guest VMs with GPU passthrough cannot be migrated to other hosts in the cluster. By contrast, Nutanix does support live migration for some vGPU- enabled VMs under supported conditions, but not for passthrough GPUs. That distinction is exactly what this question is testing.
Therefore the correct answer is D. ( portal.nutanix.com , portal.nutanix.com , portal.nutanix.com ) This is a high-value exam distinction: vGPU and GPU passthrough are not interchangeable in migration behavior. Memory overcommitment and vNUMA may affect placement or performance, but they are not the documented hard stop presented here. If a VM uses GPU passthrough, live migration is not supported, so the administrator cannot evacuate it the way they can with ordinary VMs.

質問 # 39
What is the RPO time, in hours, for Prism Central backups?

• A. 0
• B. 1
• C. 2
• D. 3

正解：C

解説：
Nutanix documentation for Prism Central point-in-time backups states that the Recovery Point Objective (RPO) can be configured in values ranging from 1 hour to 24 hours. Since the question asks for the RPO time in hours for Prism Central backups, the expected exam answer is the maximum supported interval of 24 hours, which corresponds to option A.
This is not asking how long recovery takes or how long restore points are retained. Nutanix documents those separately. The RPO defines how often recovery points can be taken, and Prism Central's backup framework allows choices up to a 24-hour interval. That is why values like 36, 48, or 72 hours are not supported answers in the documented PC backup workflow. So for an authentic Nutanix-aligned study sheet, A. 24 is correct.

質問 # 40
An administrator is troubleshooting intermittent network connectivity issues on an AHV host and runs the following command:
ethtool -S eth0 | grep error
Output:
rx_crc_errors: 4389675534
rx_missed_errors: 0
tx_aborted_errors: 0
tx_carrier_errors: 0
tx_window_errors: 0
rx_long_length_errors: 0
rx_short_length_errors: 0
rx_align_errors: 0
rx_errors: 0
tx_errors: 0
rx_length_errors: 0
rx_over_errors: 0
rx_frame_errors: 0
rx_fifo_errors: 0
tx_fifo_errors: 0
tx_heartbeat_errors: 0
The command is executed multiple times and it is observed that the CRC errors are incrementing.
What is the most likely cause of the high rx_crc_errors observed on the interface?

• A. A duplex mismatch between the AHV host NIC and the connected switch port
• B. CPU saturation on the AHV host causing dropped packets
• C. Insufficient MTU configuration causing packet fragmentation
• D. Corruption of packets due to a faulty cable, transceiver, or physical issue

正解：D

解説：
Incrementing rx_crc_errors usually point to a Layer 1 or physical-path problem, not a CPU or memory issue.
CRC errors mean frames are arriving corrupted, and the most common reasons are a faulty cable, damaged transceiver, bad port, or another physical medium issue between the AHV host and the switch. Because the CRC counter is specifically increasing while other counters like missed, FIFO, and general rx errors remain low, this strongly suggests corruption during transmission rather than host overload. That makes B the correct answer.
A duplex mismatch can cause broader link-performance problems, but the pattern of steadily rising CRC errors is much more classically tied to bad physical media. MTU issues usually show fragmentation or packet- handling problems, not CRC corruption itself. CPU saturation does not create on-the-wire checksum corruption. In Nutanix troubleshooting, when CRC counters rise repeatedly, the correct operational response is to inspect and swap the cable or optics, verify switch-port health, and test the NIC path physically. So B is the strongest technical match.

質問 # 41
An administrator has configured a virtual switch with Active-Active bond type with MAC pinning (balance- slb) bond type. The network team enables LACP on the top-of-rack switches connected to the Nutanix nodes.
After the switch change, network throughput degrades.
What is the most likely cause?

• A. Balance-slb requires the virtual switch MTU to be set to 9000 when LACP is active.
• B. Balance-slb requires a minimum of four uplink ports per node when LACP is enabled.
• C. Balance-slb is not supported on the default virtual switch vs0.
• D. Balance-slb must not be used with link aggregation protocols such as LACP.

正解：D

解説：
Nutanix networking guidance makes this distinction very clearly: balance-slb (Active-Active with MAC pinning) is the bond type used when the administrator wants multi-uplink utilization without additional physical-switch configuration. Nutanix also documents that LACP requires Active-Active / balance-tcp, and balance-slb must not be combined with link aggregation protocols such as LACP. If the switch team turns on LACP while the Nutanix side remains in balance-slb, the uplink behavior is mismatched and degraded throughput is the expected result. Therefore D is the correct answer.
This is a classic exam trap because both balance-slb and balance-tcp are Active-Active styles, but they are not interchangeable. One is switch-independent and the other is switch-dependent with LACP. The problem here is not MTU, uplink count, or support for vs0. It is the fact that the switch configuration and AHV bond mode no longer agree. In Nutanix, if LACP is enabled on the switches, the virtual switch must be configured for the LACP-compatible Active-Active mode, not MAC pinning. That is why D is the authentic answer.

質問 # 42
An administrator needs to protect a group of mission-critical virtual machines.
The business requirements are:
* Recovery Point Objective (RPO) must be set to 5 minutes.
* New mission critical VMs should be automatically protected.
Which data protection type supports this configuration?

• A. Protection Domain with NearSync replication
• B. Protection Domain with Asynchronous replication
• C. Protection Policy with Asynchronous replication
• D. Protection Policy with NearSync replication

正解：D

解説：
A required RPO of 5 minutes immediately points to NearSync replication, because Nutanix documents NearSync protection policies as supporting recovery points in 1-15 minute intervals. The second requirement-automatically protect new mission-critical VMs-points to a Protection Policy approach in Prism Central, because protection policies can use categories and policy-based assignment to scale protection dynamically as new matching VMs are added. Combining those two requirements makes Protection Policy with NearSync replication the correct answer. ( Nutanix ) Protection Domains can support NearSync in older or alternate workflows, but the phrase "new mission critical VMs should be automatically protected" is the clue that pushes this question toward policy-based protection rather than manually maintained membership. Asynchronous replication also fails the first requirement because its RPO target is not the 5-minute class represented by NearSync. Nutanix's modern DR design encourages policy-driven protection for scalable, category-based administration. Therefore B is the best fit for both the RPO and automatic-inclusion requirements. ( Nutanix )

質問 # 43
Which interface must be used to create a container with Replication Factor 1?

• A. Self-Service
• B. Marketplace
• C. Prism Central
• D. Prism Element

正解：D

解説：
Nutanix documentation for creating a storage container with Replication Factor 1 shows the workflow in the Prism Element web console. The official steps begin with logging on to Prism Element, navigating to storage, and creating the RF1-enabled container there. This makes A the correct answer.
This question is really about administrative scope. RF1 is a specialized storage-container setting that is managed at the cluster level, and Nutanix documents it in Prism Element rather than Marketplace or Self- Service. Prism Central can manage many cluster-wide resources, but the specific documented RF1 container- creation workflow is rooted in Prism Element. For exam prep, when a question asks which interface is required to create an RF1 container, the safe and documentation-aligned answer is Prism Element. Therefore A is the authentic Nutanix answer.

質問 # 44
An administrator is building a migration plan to Nutanix AHV.
What can Nutanix Move migrate?

• A. AVS to AHV, AVS to AWS, AHV to AWS, AHV to ESXi
• B. AHV to Azure, AWS to AHV, NSX global manager to FNS
• C. VMs, File Shares to Files, NSX local manager to FNS
• D. VMs, NSX Groups, AHV to Hyper-V, Hyper-V to ESXi

正解：C

解説：
Nutanix Move is primarily a migration platform for virtual machines, but Nutanix also documents adjacent migration capabilities around file shares to Nutanix Files and migration of NSX local-manager constructs to Flow Network Security (FNS) in supported scenarios. Among the listed answers, only A aligns with the documented Nutanix migration direction set and product intent. Option A stays within the realistic Nutanix ecosystem patterns rather than inventing broad cloud-to-cloud and hypervisor-to-hypervisor combinations that Nutanix Move is not presented as supporting.
The other options are not credible when compared with Nutanix Move's official scope. AHV-to-Azure or AHV-to-ESXi is not how Nutanix Move is typically documented, and some of the listed items mix unrelated technologies in unsupported ways. This question is testing whether the candidate can distinguish Nutanix's actual migration tooling scope from made-up combinations. Since Nutanix Move is centered on migrating VMs into Nutanix environments and related supported migration paths such as file shares to Files and NSX local manager to FNS, the correct answer is A.

質問 # 45
How many S3 targets are supported for Prism Central point-in-time backups?

• A. 0
• B. 1
• C. 2
• D. 3

正解：D

解説：
Nutanix documentation for Prism Central point-in-time backup states that the system supports one point-in- time backup target at a time. Nutanix further documents that Prism Central can be backed up to registered clusters, Nutanix Objects, AWS S3, or generic S3-compliant storage, but the platform still supports only one active point-in-time backup target concurrently. Therefore the correct answer is A. 1.
This question is easy to overthink because the product supports multiple target types, but that is different from supporting multiple simultaneous configured S3 targets for one Prism Central instance. Nutanix's wording is explicit and leaves little ambiguity: one backup target at a time. That means answers B, C, and D are not consistent with the documented PC backup design. So for a study guide grounded in current official Nutanix documentation, the authentic answer is A.

質問 # 46
An administrator needs to configure OpenLDAP in Prism Central.
Which type of account should the administrator use?

• A. Nutanix Account
• B. Root Account
• C. Service Account
• D. Admin Account

正解：C

解説：
Nutanix security documentation for configuring OpenLDAP authentication in Prism Central clearly states that Prism Central uses a service account to query the OpenLDAP directory and that this service account must have the required read permissions on the directory service. That means the correct account type is not a generic admin, root, or Nutanix local account, but a dedicated service account created for the integration.
Therefore D is the authentic answer.
This is an important design principle in Nutanix authentication integration. A service account is preferred because it supports controlled, non-interactive access with appropriate least-privilege permissions and stable directory lookup behavior. Using a root or broad admin account would be poor security practice and is not how Nutanix documents the setup. The service account's role is not to log into Prism as a user but to let Prism Central query the directory safely and consistently. Because the official documentation names that account type directly, D. Service Account is the correct exam answer.

質問 # 47
An administrator is deploying a new cluster with dense storage. Each node will have 100TB of storage. How many logical cores will be assigned to each CVM?

• A. 0
• B. 1
• C. 2
• D. 3

正解：A

解説：
For storage-dense nodes, Nutanix allocates CVM resources to ensure the Controller VM can handle storage services efficiently. Official Nutanix documentation shows the Controller VM requires a minimum of 12 vCPUs, and Foundation documentation describes CVM vCPU allocation ranges that increase based on platform characteristics and workload needs. In a dense-storage design with 100 TB per node, the exam- aligned answer is 12 logical cores for the CVM. ( Nutanix Portal ) The key concept here is not simply memorizing one number, but understanding why dense storage affects CVM sizing. The CVM runs critical storage-path services, metadata handling, and data services operations.
As node capacity increases, Nutanix expects sufficient CPU to sustain those functions under load. Options 6 and 8 are too small for the documented baseline direction shown in official guidance, while 14 is not the standard answer expected for this scenario. For exam purposes, when the question frames a dense storage node with 100 TB, the supported sizing answer is 12. ( Nutanix Portal )

質問 # 48
Faced with prolonged times for hardware delivery, an administrator is looking for a way to be informed on time when cluster storage capacity is running low. In order for new hard disks to be delivered on time, the administrator needs to get a warning earlier than it is set currently.
Which action should the administrator take to receive a warning about cluster storage capacity running low earlier?

• A. Decrease Storage Pool Capacity Usage Exceeded alert Critical threshold.
• B. Increase frequency of Storage Pool alerts.
• C. Decrease Storage Container Space Usage Exceeded alert Warning threshold.
• D. Enable early warning Storage Container alert.

正解：C

解説：
To receive an alert earlier, the administrator must lower the threshold at which the alert's warning state is triggered. Nutanix alerting works by comparing utilization against configured warning and critical thresholds.
If the threshold is lowered, the system reaches it sooner, which gives the administrator more lead time before the environment becomes capacity-constrained. Among the given options, the one that directly performs that function is decreasing the Storage Container Space Usage Exceeded alert Warning threshold, which is option C.
The other choices are weaker or misaligned. There is no meaningful "increase frequency" adjustment that changes when capacity is considered low; it would only change how often checks occur, not the trigger point.
Changing the critical threshold does not provide earlier warning notice, which is what the question asks for.
The wording also points more naturally to a threshold-based action rather than enabling a different alert family. In Nutanix monitoring, earlier warnings come from making the warning trigger more conservative.
Therefore C is the best answer because it causes the alert to fire at a lower usage percentage and provides earlier operational notice.

質問 # 49
An administrator wants to run a workload at site A, but replicate it to two clusters with different RPOs. Which replication option fits the needs?

• A. Many-to-Many
• B. Two-Way-Mirroring
• C. One-to-Many
• D. Many-to-One

正解：C

解説：
The requirement is straightforward: there is one source site (Site A) and the workload must be replicated to two destination clusters, each with potentially different RPO settings. In Nutanix DR design terminology, that is a one-to-many replication pattern. Nutanix documentation for multisite disaster recovery explains that a single protection policy can include replication schedules to multiple recovery clusters, which is how a source can protect workloads to more than one target with different schedule definitions. That makes D the correct answer.
The other choices describe different topologies. Many-to-One means multiple sources targeting one destination. Many-to-Many is broader bidirectional or multiple-source/multiple-target logic than the question requires. Two-Way-Mirroring is not the correct pattern for one source sending copies outward to two other sites. Nutanix's protection-policy model is specifically flexible enough to define different replication schedules toward separate destinations, which is why this exact scenario is best labeled One-to-Many. So for an exam-aligned and documentation-consistent answer, D is the right choice.

質問 # 50
An administrator needs to change the bond type on an existing virtual switch in a production AHV cluster running critical workloads. The administrator wants to avoid any disruption to running VMs during the change.
How should the administrator complete this task?

• A. Delete the virtual switch and recreate it with a new bond type to avoid a rolling update.
• B. Use the Standard method to migrate VMs and apply changes sequentially to each node.
• C. Use the Quick method to apply changes without putting nodes into maintenance mode.
• D. Place all of the nodes in maintenance mode simultaneously, then apply the bond type change.

正解：B

解説：
Nutanix documentation for updating an existing virtual switch describes both Quick and Standard (Recommended) methods. Nutanix explicitly recommends the Standard method for production-style changes because it applies updates in a controlled rolling manner, typically by migrating workloads and updating nodes sequentially to minimize impact. The Quick method is available only in certain update scenarios and is not the recommended path for critical workloads when avoiding disruption is the priority. That makes A correct. ( portal.nutanix.com , portal.nutanix.com , portal.nutanix.com ) Deleting and recreating the switch would be far more disruptive. Putting all nodes into maintenance mode at once defeats the entire purpose of non-disruptive rolling change. Nutanix's own recommendation in this area is the strongest clue: for production, use the Standard method.

質問 # 51
......

NCP-MCI無料認定試験材料はFast2testが提供された113問題：https://jp.fast2test.com/NCP-MCI-7.5-premium-file.html