How should the Global Managers (GMs) and Local Managers (LMs) be distributed to ensure high availability and optimal performance in a multi-site NSX Federation deployment comprised of three sites?…

Question

Options

• AEach NSX site must have its own LM cluster that reports to the GM.
• BLMs are only needed on the primary site. Secondary sites can manage their local data plane
• CLMs should only be deployed as single nodes to reduce overhead.
• DThe GM cluster should be deployed across three sites.
• EThe GM should be a single appliance placed in a central cloud environment to simplify

• A
  80% (45)
• B
  2% (1)
• C
  5% (3)
• E
  13% (7)

Explanation

In a VMware Cloud Foundation (VCF) Federation deployment across multiple sites, the management architecture is designed to provide "Global Visibility" while maintaining "Local Autonomy." This is achieved through the coordinated distribution of Global Managers (GMs) and Local Managers (LMs). For a three-site deployment, NSX Federation best practices mandate that each site maintains its own Local Manager (LM) Cluster (Option A). The LM is responsible for the site-specific control plane, communicating with local Transport Nodes (ESXi and Edges) to program the data plane. If the connection to the GM is lost, the LM ensures the local site continues to function normally. For production environments, these must be clusters (typically 3 nodes) rather than single nodes to ensure local management remains available. To protect the Global Manager itself--which is the source of truth for all global networking and security policies--the GM cluster should be stretched across the three sites (Option D). In a standard 3-node GM cluster, placing one node at each site ensures that the Federation management plane can survive the complete failure of an entire site. This "stretched" cluster configuration provides a high level of resilience and ensures that an administrator can still manage global policies from any surviving location.

No community discussion yet for this question.