Pass Your Microsoft AZ-700 Exam Easy!

Two actions meet their requirements, but action 2 misses this need: weighted DNS routing can steer new resolver answers without providing layer-7 application transformations.

Two actions meet their requirements, but action 3 misses this need: a DNS traffic manager does not terminate HTTP/TLS connections or inspect request payloads.

Two actions meet their requirements, but action 1 misses this need: DNS-based failover cannot immediately replace a connection that relies on an already cached address.

For this finding, front Door's global edge and origin selection differ from Azure's regional Application Gateway footprint.

Adjusting Front Door caching behavior and implementing a controlled purge or cache-bypass path for freshness-sensitive responses would not configure Front Door origin groups and routes with appropriate priority and latency-based traffic distribution.

Deploying an appropriate Azure Front Door profile with routes, origin groups, endpoints, and health probes would not configure Front Door origin groups and routes with appropriate priority and latency-based traffic distribution.

Resolving the address overlap would not investigate subnet IP assignments and available CIDR capacity independently from DNS resolver configuration.

Checking supported global or cross-region load-balancing constructs and separating regional address identities where required would not investigate subnet IP assignments and available CIDR capacity independently from DNS resolver configuration.

Here, name resolution settings do not increase the number of assignable private addresses in a subnet.

Here, physical provider and peering diversity address failures that redundant gateway instances on one circuit cannot.

For this finding, physical provider and peering diversity address failures that redundant gateway instances on one circuit cannot.

For this question, physical provider and peering diversity address failures that redundant gateway instances on one circuit cannot.

Two actions meet their requirements, but action 2 misses this need: azure virtual network gateways rely on the specially named GatewaySubnet, not an arbitrary application segment.

Two actions meet their requirements, but action 3 misses this need: a delegated subnet grants a compatible platform service authority over subnet operations and may limit colocated services.

Two actions meet their requirements, but action 1 misses this need: subnet capacity and reserved addresses must be planned for service-specific requirements rather than consumed opportunistically.

For this finding, an Application Gateway still depends on documented networking prerequisites, including compatible routing through its subnet.

For this question, an Application Gateway still depends on documented networking prerequisites, including compatible routing through its subnet.

Here, an Application Gateway still depends on documented networking prerequisites, including compatible routing through its subnet.

Reviewing listener and rule priorities and verifying path-match precedence would not correct backend hostname and trusted certificate settings and retest the Application Gateway health probe.

Configuring HTTPS backend settings with appropriate certificate trust and end-to-end TLS validation would not correct backend hostname and trusted certificate settings and retest the Application Gateway health probe.

For this finding, backend TLS validation depends on the expected name and chain, not just a responding TCP port.

Two actions meet their requirements, but action 3 misses this need: microsoft peering is not a substitute for Azure private peering to VNet private address space.

Two actions meet their requirements, but action 2 misses this need: provisioning the circuit itself does not automatically connect a VNet's routing domain to the private peering.

Two actions meet their requirements, but action 1 misses this need: expressRoute uses private connectivity arrangements distinct from encrypted internet VPN tunnels.

This plan leaves out a required action: Select an appropriate Azure Firewall Premium tier after validating required advanced security features. The remaining action alone does not satisfy the situation.

A correctly configured firewall cannot inspect traffic that never traverses its private data-path endpoint.

Azure Firewall SKUs differ in supported advanced inspection and security capabilities.

Creating a narrowly scoped inbound NSG rule with the specific source, destination, protocol, port, and appropriate priority would not meet the need for supported Application Security Groups for member NICs and reference those groups in appropriate NSG rules.

Here, aSGs allow logically grouped network interfaces to be controlled without manually tracking each private address.

Checking effective NSG rules across subnet and NIC scopes would not meet the need for supported Application Security Groups for member NICs and reference those groups in appropriate NSG rules.

Configuring probes with the intended host header and path and validating the origin's virtual host behavior would not set the backend HTTP port and probe destination correctly rather than changing the public HTTPS listener.

Updating backend pool membership and probe configuration and verifying traffic distribution from client requests would not set the backend HTTP port and probe destination correctly rather than changing the public HTTPS listener.

Here, frontend and backend ports are independent settings in an application-layer proxy.