MuleSoft MCPA-Level-1-Maintenance Dumps

Explanation

Correct Answer: Set a timeout of 100ms; that leaves 400ms for other two downstream APIs to complete

*****************************************

Key details to take from the given scenario:

>> Upstream API's designed SLA is 500ms (median). Lets ignore maximum SLA response times.

>> This API calls 3 downstream APIs sequentially and all these are of similar complexity.

>> The first downstream API is offering median SLA of 100ms, 80th percentile: 500ms; 95th percentile: 1000ms.

Based on the above details:

>> We can rule out the option which is suggesting to set 50ms timeout. Because, if the median SLA itself being offered is 100ms then most of the calls are going to timeout and time gets wasted in retried them and eventually gets exhausted with all retries. Even if some retries gets successful, the remaining time wont leave enough room for 2nd and 3rd downstream APIs to respond within time.

>> The option suggesting to NOT set a timeout as the invocation of this API is mandatory and so we must wait until it responds is silly. As not setting time out would go against the good implementation pattern and moreover if the first API is not responding within its offered median SLA 100ms then most probably it would either respond in 500ms (80th percentile) or 1000ms (95th percentile). In BOTH cases, getting a successful response from 1st downstream API does NO GOOD because already by this time the Upstream API SLA of 500 ms is breached. There is no time left to call 2nd and 3rd downstream APIs.

>> It is NOT true that no timeout is possible to meet the upstream APIs desired SLA.

As 1st downstream API is offering its median SLA of 100ms, it means MOST of the time we would get the responses within that time. So, setting a timeout of 100ms would be ideal for MOST calls as it leaves enough room of 400ms for remaining 2 downstream API calls.

Explanation

Correct Answer: When the response time of API invocations exceeds a threshold

*****************************************

>> Alerts can be setup for all the given options using the default Anypoint Platform functionality

>> However, the question insists on an alert whose conditions depend on the end-to-end request processing of the API implementation.

>> Alert w.r.t "Response Times" is the only one which requires end-to-end request processing of API implementation in order to determine if the threshold is exceeded or not.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Guarding against Denial of Service attacks

*****************************************

>> Backend system overloading can be handled by enforcing "Spike Control Policy"

>> Logging HTTP requests and responses can be done by enforcing "Message Logging Policy"

>> Credentials can be tamper-proofed using "Security" and "Compliance" Policies

However, unfortunately, there is no proper way currently on Anypoint Platform to guard against DOS attacks.

Explanation

Correct Answer: The remaining capacity allowed by the API implementation.

*****************************************

>> Reference:

Explanation

Correct Answer: Apply a basic authentication - LDAP policy; the internal Active Directory will be configured as the LDAP source for authenticating users.

*****************************************

>> IP Whitelisting does NOT fit for this purpose. Moreover, the users workstations may not necessarily have static IPs in the network.

>> OAuth 2.0 enforcement requires a client provider which isn't in the organizations system components.

>> It is not an effective approach to let every user create separate client credentials and configure those for their usage.

The effective way it to apply a basic authentication - LDAP policy and the internal Active Directory will be configured as the LDAP source for authenticating users.

Explanation

Correct Answer: At the API proxy

*****************************************

>> API Policies can be enforced at two places in Mule platform.

>> One - As an Embedded Policy enforcement in the same Mule Runtime where API implementation is running.

>> Two - On an API Proxy sitting in front of the Mule Runtime where API implementation is running.

>> As the deployment scenario in the question has API Proxy involved, the policies will be enforced at the API Proxy.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Use a horizontal CloudHub autoscaling policy that triggers on CPU utilization greater than 70%

*****************************************

The scenario in the question is very clearly stating that the usual traffic in the year is pretty well handled by the existing worker configuration with CPU running well below 70%. The problem occurs only "sometimes" occasionally when there is spike in the number of orders coming in.

So, based on above, We neither need to permanently increase the size of each worker nor need to permanently increase the number of workers. This is unnecessary as other than those "occasional" times the resources are idle and wasted.

We have two options left now. Either to use horizontal Cloudhub autoscaling policy to automatically increase the number of workers or to use vertical Cloudhub autoscaling policy to automatically increase the vCore size of each worker.

Here, we need to take two things into consideration:

1. CPU

2. Order Submission Rate to JMS Queue

>> From CPU perspective, both the options (horizontal and vertical scaling) solves the issue. Both helps to bring down the usage below 90%.

>> However, If we go with Vertical Scaling, then from Order Submission Rate perspective, as the application is still being load balanced with two workers only, there may not be much improvement in the incoming request processing rate and order submission rate to JMS queue. The throughput would be same as before. Only CPU utilization comes down.

>> But, if we go with Horizontal Scaling, it will spawn new workers and adds extra hand to increase the throughput as more workers are being load balanced now. This way we can address both CPU and Order Submission rate.

Hence, Horizontal CloudHub Autoscaling policy is the right and best answer.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Allow System APIs to return data that is NOT currently required by the identified Process or Experience APIs.

*****************************************

>> All customizations for the end-user application should be handled in "Experience API" only. Not in Process API

>> We should use tiered approach but NOT always by creating exactly one API for each of the 3 layers. Experience APIs might be one but Process APIs and System APIs are often more than one. System APIs for sure will be more than one all the time as they are the smallest modular APIs built in front of end systems.

>> Process APIs can call System APIs as well as other Process APIs. There is no such anti-design pattern in API-Led connectivity saying Process APIs should not call other Process APIs.

So, the right answer in the given set of options that makes sense as per API-Led connectivity principles is to allow System APIs to return data that is NOT currently required by the identified Process or Experience APIs. This way, some future Process APIs can make use of that data from System APIs and we need NOT touch the System layer APIs again and again.

Explanation

Correct Answer: When a new required field is added to the method called by the API client

*****************************************

>> Generally, the logic on API clients need to be updated when the API contract breaks.

>> When a new method or a child method is added to an API , the API client does not break as it can still continue to use its existing method. So these two options are out.

>> We are left for two more where "datatype of the response if changed" and "a new required field is added".

>> Changing the datatype of the response does break the API contract. However, the question is insisting on the "invocation" logic and not about the response handling logic. The API client can still invoke the API successfully and receive the response but the response will have a different datatype for some field.

>> Adding a new required field will break the API's invocation contract. When adding a new required field, the API contract breaks the RAML or API spec agreement that the API client/API consumer and API provider has between them. So this requires the API client invocation logic to also be updated.

Explanation

Correct Answer: API Consumer

*****************************************

>> API clients are piece of code or programs that use the client credentials of API consumer but does not directly interact with Anypoint Exchange to get the access

>> API consumer is the one who should get registered and request access to API and then API client needs to use those client credentials to hit the APIs

So, API consumer is the one who needs to request access on the API from Anypoint Exchange