Note: This question is part of a series of questions that present the same scenario. Each question in the series contains a unique solution that might meet the stated goals. Some question sets might…

Question

Options

• AYes
• BNo

• A
  83% (19)
• B
  17% (4)

Explanation

Option A (Yes) is correct because the solution uses sp_set_database_firewall_rule, which creates database-level firewall rules that apply specifically to individual databases rather than the entire SQL server. By running the rule on DB1 with the Branch1 IP range (131.107.10.0–131.107.10.255) and on DB2 with the Branch2 IP range (131.107.11.0–131.107.11.255), each database is independently restricted to its respective branch's users only.

Option B is incorrect because the commands are valid and precisely meet the requirements - database-level firewall rules are the correct tool here, as they allow granular, per-database access control rather than blanket server-wide rules.

Key distinction to remember: sp_set_database_firewall_rule = database-level firewall (run while connected to a specific database), whereas sp_set_firewall_rule = server-level firewall (affects all databases). If the question had used sp_set_firewall_rule, it would NOT meet the goal because a server-level rule cannot restrict access to individual databases separately.

Memory Tip: Think "DB rule = DataBase-level" - when you need to isolate access per database, always use the command with "database" in its name (sp_set_**database**_firewall_rule).

No community discussion yet for this question.