###BeginCaseStudy###
Case Study: 1
Contoso Ltd
Overview
Contoso, Ltd., is a healthcare company in Europe that has 2,000 users. The company is
migrating to Windows Server 2012.
The company has two main offices and two branch offices. The main offices are located in
Paris and Amsterdam. One of the branch offices is a sales office located in Berlin. The other
branch office is a research office located in Brussels.
The offices connect to each other by using a WAN link.
Current Environment
Active Directory
The network contains an Active Directory forest named contoso.com. An Active Directory
site exists for each office.
The forest contains a child domain named research.contoso.com.
The functional level of both the domains is Windows Server 2008.
In each site, there are two domain controllers for the contoso.com domain and two domain
controllers for the research.contoso.com domain. The domain controllers run Windows
Server 2008 R2.
All of the domain controllers are global catalog servers.
The FSMO roles were not moved since the domains were deployed.
Network Infrastructure
All servers run Windows Server 2008 R2.
Each user has a laptop computer that runs Windows 7.
The company has 10 print servers. Each print server contains several shared printers.
The company has 10 file servers that have the following disk configurations:
• A simple volume named C that is the System and Boot volume and is formatted
NTFS
• A mounted virtual hard disk (VHD) named DATA that is formatted NTFS
• A simple volume named D that is formatted FAT32
• A simple volume named E that is formatted NTFS
• A Clustered Shared Volume (CSV)
The Paris office contains a server named PA1. The Amsterdam office contains a server
named AM1. Both servers have the following server roles installed:
• DNS Server
• DHCP Server
• Remote Access
The DNS servers are configured to use the DNS servers of the company’s Internet Service
Provider (ISP) as forwarders.
Users often work remotely. The users access the internal network by using an SSTP-based
VPN connection.
Requirements
Planned Changes
The company plans to implement the following changes:
• Create a child domain named sales.contoso.com. Only the domain controllers in
sales.contoso.com will host a zone for the sales.contoso.com domain. The domain controllers
in sales.contoso.com will run Windows Server 2012. The client computers in
sales.contoso.com will use the sales.contoso.com domain controllers as their DNS servers.
• Implement two servers in the Amsterdam office and two servers in the Paris office to
replace PA1 and AMI. These new servers will run Windows Server 2012 and will not have
shared storage.
• Decommission the research.contoso.com domain. All of the users and the Group
Policy objects (GPOs) in research.contoso.com will be migrated to contoso.com.
• Migrate the existing print queues to virtualized instances of Windows Server 2012.
• Migrate the file servers to new servers that run Windows Server 2012.
• Implement RADIUS authentication for VPN connections.
• Deploy Windows Server 2012 to all new servers.
Technical Requirements
The company identifies following technical requirements:
• All changes to Group Policies must be logged.
• Network Access Protection (NAP) policies must be managed centrally.
• Core networking services in each office must be redundant if a server fails.
• The possibility of IP address conflicts during the DHCP migration must be
minimized.
• A central log of the IP address leases and the users associated to those leases must be
created.
• All of the client computers must be able to resolve internal names and internet names.
• Administrators in the Paris office need to deploy a series of desktop restrictions to the
entire company by using Group Policy.
• The new sales.contoso.com domain will contain a web application that will access
data from a Microsoft SQL Server located in the contoso.com domain. The web application
must use integrated Windows authentication. Users’ credentials must be passed from the web
applications to the SQL Server.
###EndCaseStudy###
You need to recommend a fault-tolerant solution for the VPN. The solution must meet the
technical requirements.
What should you include in the recommendation?
A.
Network adapter teaming
B.
Network Load Balancing (NLB)
C.
Failover Clustering
D.
DirectAccess
Explanation:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh831698.aspx
NLB is not fault tolerant.
If a NLB node goes down, all requests to that node will be unanswered.
Right answer should be Failover clustering. This is the fundamental difference between the two clustertypes what they are asking for.
It looks to me like NLB can be fault tolerant:
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc786264(v=ws.10).aspx
The link of Erik triggered me to do more research and in this case it is nlb. stateless applications with short term connections typically connect to NLB.
VPN is a typical example like ftp web connections etc.
@Pipo,
Still it does not offer any redudancy.
But then again, M$ still points out the a NLB Cluster is the way to go for any fault-tolerant.
So,, I think the correct answer will be NLB
Of course NLB is fault tolerant, wtf? How did you get to this point, if you wonder, whether NLB provides FT?!? It doesn’t provide high-availability, but without that stated and explicitly asked for, NLB provides fault tolerance with short interruptions. The question asks for physical redundancy, should one node fails. In this case, any sort of NLB should do, including DA.
http://www.exam-labs.com/exam/70-413 Q5 T1
http://www.pass4suredumps.net/passed-microsoft-70-413-exam-with-pass4sure-and-lead2pass-pdf-vce-41-50.html Q50
https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-T91P0ncquofHWiZm/(New%20Version)%20Pass%2070-413%20Exam%20With%20Passleader%20Free%2070-413%20PDF%20Brain%20Dumps%20(1-20)_djvu.txt Q20
In this case all versions of the question point towards NLB. I would consider DA too, since it has embedded NLB functionalities too, but with all the evidence, I guess NLB it is here…