Free and Premium MuleSoft MCPA-Level-1 Dumps Questions Answers

Explanation

Correct Answer: Drive consumption as much as production of assets; this enables developers to discover and reuse assets from other projects and encourages standardization

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

>> The main motto of the new IT Operating Model that MuleSoft recommends and made popular is to change the way that they are delivered from a production model to a production + consumption model, which is done through an API strategy called API-led connectivity.

>> The assets built should also be discoverable and self-serveable for reusablity across LOBs and organization.

>> MuleSoft's IT operating model does not talk about SDLC model (Agile/ Lean etc) or MDM at all. So, options suggesting these are not valid.

References:

Explanation

Correct Answer: The FQDNs are determined by the application name chosen, IRRESPECTIVE of the region

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

>> When deploying applications to Shared Worker Cloud, the FQDN are always determined by application name chosen.

>> It does NOT matter what region the app is being deployed to.

>> Although it is fact and true that the generated FQDN will have the region included in it (Ex: exp-salesorder-api.au-s1.cloudhub.io), it does NOT mean that the same name can be used when deploying to another CloudHub region.

>> Application name should be universally unique irrespective of Region and Organization and solely determines the FQDN for Shared Load Balancers.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Anypoint Runtime Fabric

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

>> When a customer is already having an Azure environment, It is not at all an ideal approach to go with hybrid model having some Mule Runtimes hosted on Azure and some on MuleSoft. This is unnecessary and useless.

>> CloudHub is a Mulesoft-hosted Runtime plane and is on AWS. We cannot customize to point CloudHub to customer's Azure environment.

>> Anypoint Platform for Pivotal Cloud Foundry is specifically for infrastructure provided by Pivotal Cloud Foundry

>> Anypoint Runtime Fabric is right answer as it is a container service that automates the deployment and orchestration of Mule applications and API gateways. Runtime Fabric runs within a customer-managed infrastructure on AWS, Azure, virtual machines (VMs), and bare-metal servers.

-Some of the capabilities of Anypoint Runtime Fabric include:

-Isolation between applications by running a separate Mule runtime per application.

-Ability to run multiple versions of Mule runtime on the same set of resources.

-Scaling applications across multiple replicas.

-Automated application fail-over.

-Application management with Anypoint Runtime Manager.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Data on past API invocations to help identify anomalies and usage patterns across various APIs

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

API Invocation metrics provided by Anypoint Platform:

>> Does NOT provide any Return Of Investment (ROI) related information. So the option suggesting it is OUT.

>> Does NOT provide any information w.r.t how APIs are reused, whether there is effective usage of APIs or not etc...

>> Does NOT prodive any prediction information as such to help us proactively identify any future policy violations.

So, the kind of data/information we can get from such metrics is on past API invocations to help identify anomalies and usage patterns across various APIs.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Traffic between Mule applications deployed to an Anypoint VPC and on-premises systems can stay within a private network

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

>> The private IP address range of an Anypoint VPC is NOT automatically chosen by CloudHub. It is chosen by us at the time of creating VPC using thr CIDR blocks.

CIDR Block: The size of the Anypoint VPC in Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) notation.

For example, if you set it to 10.111.0.0/24, the Anypoint VPC is granted 256 IP addresses from 10.111.0.0 to 10.111.0.255.

Ideally, the CIDR Blocks you choose for the Anypoint VPC come from a private IP space, and should not overlap with any other Anypoint VPC’s CIDR Blocks, or any CIDR Blocks in use in your corporate network.

that each CloudHub environment requires a separate Anypoint VPC. Once an Anypoint VPC is created, we can choose a same VPC by multiple environments. However, it is generally a best and recommended practice to always have seperate Anypoint VPCs for Non-Prod and Prod environments.

>> We use Anypoint VPN to link the underlying AWS VPC to an on-premises (non AWS) private network. NOT VPC Peering.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Separate Experience APIs for the mobile and web app, but a common Process API that invokes separate System APIs created for the database and CRM system

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

As per MuleSoft's API-led connectivity:

>> Experience APIs should be built as per each consumer needs and their experience.

>> Process APIs should contain all the orchestration logic to achieve the business functionality.

>> System APIs should be built for each backend system to unlock their data.

Explanation

Correct Answer: The number of API specifications in RAML or OAS format published to Anypoint Exchange

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

>> The success of C4E always depends on their contribution to the number of reusable assets that they have helped to build and publish to Anypoint Exchange.

>> It is NOT due to any factors w.r.t # of outages, Manual vs CI/CD deployments or Publicly accessible HTTP endpoints

>> Anypoint Platform APIs helps us to quickly run and get the number of published RAML/OAS assets to Anypoint Exchange. This clearly depicts how successful a C4E team is based on number of returned assets in the response.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Search Anypoint exchange for a suitable existing fallback API, and then implement invocations to this fallback API in addition to the order API

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

>> It is not ideal and good approach, until unless there is a pre-approved agreement with the API clients that they will receive a HTTP 3xx temporary redirect status code and they have to implement fallback logic their side to call another API.

>> Creating separate entry of same Order API in API manager would just create an another instance of it on top of same API implementation. So, it does NO GOOD by using clone od same API as a fallback API. Fallback API should be ideally a different API implementation that is not same as primary one.

>> There is NO option currently provided by Anypoint HTTP Connector that allows us to invoke a fallback API when we receive certain HTTP status codes in response.

The only statement TRUE in the given options is to Search Anypoint exchange for a suitable existing fallback API, and then implement invocations to this fallback API in addition to the order API.

Explanation

Correct Answer: A higher number of discoverable API-related assets in the application network.

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

>> We do NOT get faster response times in fine-grained approach when compared to coarse-grained approach.

>> In fact, we get faster response times from a network having coarse-grained APIs compared to a network having fine-grained APIs model. The reasons are below.

Fine-grained approach:

1. will have more APIs compared to coarse-grained

2. So, more orchestration needs to be done to achieve a functionality in business process.

3. Which means, lots of API calls to be made. So, more connections will needs to be established. So, obviously more hops, more network i/o, more number of integration points compared to coarse-grained approach where fewer APIs with bulk functionality embedded in them.

4. That is why, because of all these extra hops and added latencies, fine-grained approach will have bit more response times compared to coarse-grained.

5. Not only added latencies and connections, there will be more resources used up in fine-grained approach due to more number of APIs.

That's why, fine-grained APIs are good in a way to expose more number of resuable assets in your network and make them discoverable. However, needs more maintenance, taking care of integration points, connections, resources with a little compromise w.r.t network hops and response times.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Manually provisioned customer-hosted runtime plane and customer-hosted control plane

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

There are two key factors that are to be taken into consideration from the scenario given in the question.

>> Company requires both data and metadata to be resided within the corporate firewall

>> Company would like to go with customer-hosted infrastructure.

Any deployment model that is to deal with the cloud directly or indirectly (Mulesoft-hosted or Customer's own cloud like Azure, AWS) will have to share atleast the metadata.

Application data can be controlled inside firewall by having Mule Runtimes on customer hosted runtime plane. But if we go with Mulsoft-hosted/ Cloud-based control plane, the control plane required atleast some minimum level of metadata to be sent outside the corporate firewall.

As the customer requirement is pretty clear about the data and metadata both to be within the corporate firewall, even though customer wants to move to production as quickly as possible, unfortunately due to the nature of their security requirements, they have no other option but to go with manually provisioned customer-hosted runtime plane and customer-hosted control plane.

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: 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: 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: Invoke the system API deployed to the primary environment; add timeout and retry logic to the process API to avoid intermittent failures; if it still fails, invoke the system API deployed to the DR environment

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

There is one important consideration to be noted in the question which is - System API in DR environment provides only 20% of the rate limiting offered by the primary environment. So,comparitively, very less calls will be allowed into the DR environment API opposed to its primary environment. With this in mind, lets analyse what is the right and best fault-tolerant invocation strategy.

1. Invoking both the system APIs in parallel is definitely NOT a feasible approach because of the 20% limitation we have on DR environment. Calling in parallel every time would easily and quickly exhaust the rate limits on DR environment and may not give chance to genuine intermittent error scenarios to let in during the time of need.

2. Another option given is suggesting to add timeout and retry logic to process API while invoking primary environment's system API. This is good so far. However, when all retries failed, the option is suggesting to invoke the copy of process API on DR environment which is not right or recommended. Only system API is the one to be considered for fallback and not the whole process API. Process APIs usually have lot of heavy orchestration calling many other APIs which we do not want to repeat again by calling DR's process API. So this option is NOT right.

3. One more option given is suggesting to add the retry (no timeout) logic to process API to directly retry on DR environment's system API instead of retrying the primary environment system API first. This is not at all a proper fallback. A proper fallback should occur only after all retries are performed and exhausted on Primary environment first. But here, the option is suggesting to directly retry fallback API on first failure itself without trying main API. So, this option is NOT right too.

This leaves us one option which is right and best fit.

- Invoke the system API deployed to the primary environment

- Add Timeout and Retry logic on it in process API

- If it fails even after all retries, then invoke the system API deployed to the DR environment.

Explanation

Correct Answer: SLA-based rate limiting

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

>> Client Id enforement policy is a "Compliance" related NFR and does not help in maintaining the "Quality of Service (QoS)". It CANNOT and NOT meant for protecting the backend systems from scalability challenges.

>> IP Whitelisting and OAuth 2.0 token enforcement are "Security" related NFRs and again does not help in maintaining the "Quality of Service (QoS)". They CANNOT and are NOT meant for protecting the backend systems from scalability challenges.

Rate Limiting, Rate Limiting-SLA, Throttling, Spike Control are the policies that are "Quality of Service (QOS)" related NFRs and are meant to help in protecting the backend systems from getting overloaded.

Explanation

Correct Answer: IP whitelist

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

>> OAuth 2.0 access token and Client ID enforcement policies are VERY common to apply on Experience APIs as API consumers need to register and access the APIs using one of these mechanisms

>> JSON threat protection is also VERY common policy to apply on Experience APIs to prevent bad or suspicious payloads hitting the API implementations.

>> IP whitelisting policy is usually very common in Process and System APIs to only whitelist the IP range inside the local VPC. But also applied occassionally on some experience APIs where the End User/ API Consumers are FIXED.

>> When we know the API consumers upfront who are going to access certain Experience APIs, then we can request for static IPs from such consumers and whitelist them to prevent anyone else hitting the API.

However, the experience API given in the question/ scenario is intended to work with a consumer mobile phone or tablet application. Which means, there is no way we can know all possible IPs that are to be whitelisted as mobile phones and tablets can so many in number and any device in the city/state/country/globe.

So, It is very LEAST LIKELY to apply IP Whitelisting on such Experience APIs whose consumers are typically Mobile Phones or Tablets.

Explanation

Correct Answer: The test runs immediately after the Mule application has been compiled and packaged

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

>> Integration tests are the last layer of tests we need to add to be fully covered.

>> These tests actually run against Mule running with your full configuration in place and are tested from external source as they work in PROD.

>> These tests exercise the application as a whole with actual transports enabled. So, external systems are affected when these tests run.

So, these tests do NOT run immediately after the Mule application has been compiled and packaged.

FYI... Unit Tests are the one that run immediately after the Mule application has been compiled and packaged.

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

>> Application Network is a disposable architecture.

>> Which means, it can be altered without disturbing entire architecture and its components.

>> It bends as per requirements or design changes but does not break

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: They must be deployed to Anypoint Platform runtime planes that are managed by Anypoint Platform control planes, with both planes in the same Jurisdiction.

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

>> As per legal regulations, all data processing to be performed within a certain jurisdiction. Meaning, the data in USA should reside within USA and should not go out. Same way, the data in EU should reside within EU and should not go out.

>> So, just encrypting the data in transit and at rest does not help to be compliant with the rules. We need to make sure that data does not go out too.

>> The data that we are talking here is not just about the messages that are published to Anypoint MQ. It includes the apps running, transaction states, application logs, events, metric info and any other metadata. So, just replacing Anypoint MQ with a locally hosted ActiveMQ does NOT help.

>> The data that we are talking here is not just about the key/value pairs that are stored in Object Store. It includes the messages published, apps running, transaction states, application logs, events, metric info and any other metadata. So, just avoiding using Object Store does NOT help.

>> The only option left and also the right option in the given choices is to deploy application on runtime and control planes that are both within the jurisdiction.

Explanation

Correct Answer: The CloudHub shared load balancer

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

The scenario in this question can be split as below:

>> There are 3 CloudHub workers (So, there are already good number of workers to handle high volume of requests)

>> The workers are not using static IP addresses (So, one CANNOT use customer load-balancing solutions without static IPs)

>> Looking for most cost-effective component to load balance the client requests among the workers.

Based on the above details given in the scenario:

>> Runtime autoscaling is NOT at all cost-effective as it incurs extra cost. Most over, there are already 3 workers running which is a good number.

>> We cannot go for a customer-hosted load balancer as it is also NOT most cost-effective (needs custom load balancer to maintain and licensing) and same time the Mule App is not having Static IP Addresses which limits from going with custom load balancing.

>> An API Proxy is irrelevant there as it has no role to play w.r.t handling high volumes or load balancing.

So, the only right option to go with and fits the purpose of scenario being most cost-effective is - using a CloudHub Shared Load Balancer.

Explanation

Correct Answer: The visibility level of the API instances of that API that need to be publicly accessible should be set to public visibility.

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

Explanation

Correct Answer: Create a bounded-context model for the system layer to closely match the backend data model, and add an anti-corruption layer to let the different bounded contexts cooperate across the system and process layers

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

>> Canonical models are not an option here as the organization has already put in efforts and created bounded-context models for Experience and Process APIs.

>> Anti-corruption layers for ALL APIs is unnecessary and invalid because it is mentioned that experience and process APIs share same bounded-context model. It is just the System layer APIs that need to choose their approach now.

>> So, having an anti-corruption layer just between the process and system layers will work well. Also to speed up the approach, system APIs can mimic the backend system data model.

Explanation

Correct Answers:

1. Each modern API must be treated like a product and designed for a particular target audience (for instance mobile app developers)

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

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Explanation

Correct Answer: The client ID and secret obtained from Anypoint Exchange for the API instance in the STAGING environment

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

>> We CANNOT use the client ID and secret of Anypoint Platform account or any individual environments for accessing the APIs

>> As the type of policy that is enforced on the API in question is "Client ID Enforcment Policy", OAuth token based access won't work.

Right way to access the API is to use the client ID and secret obtained from Anypoint Exchange for the API instance in a particular environment we want to work on.

References:

Managing API instance Contracts on API Manager

nt-id-based-policies