An enterprise is configuring Pensando PSM to enhance network security. They need to isolate various departments' network traffic while ensuring central management of policies. Which approach will…

Question

Options

• AConfigure VLANs for each department
• BCreate a single firewall policy for all departments
• CApply VRF-based segmentation with centralized policies
• DEnable QoS for traffic management

• A
  8% (3)
• B
  3% (1)
• C
  77% (30)
• D
  13% (5)

Explanation

VRF-based segmentation (C) is correct because it provides true network-level traffic isolation between departments at Layer 3, while Pensando PSM's centralized policy engine lets administrators define and enforce security policies across all VRFs from a single control plane - directly satisfying both requirements simultaneously.

Why the distractors fail:

• A (VLANs): VLANs isolate traffic at Layer 2 only and don't integrate with Pensando PSM's policy framework for centralized security management.
• B (Single firewall policy): A single policy collapses all departments into one security domain, eliminating the isolation requirement entirely.
• D (QoS): QoS manages traffic priority and bandwidth, not security isolation - it's a performance tool, not a segmentation tool.

Memory tip: Think "VRF = Virtual Routing Fence" - each department gets its own fence (isolated routing table), and PSM is the security guard who manages the rules for all fences from one booth. When you see "isolate and centrally manage," VRF + centralized policy is the pattern to reach for.

No community discussion yet for this question.