Free VMware 3V0-24.25 Practice Exam with Questions & Answers

When you build Kubernetes-aware policy constructs, “groups” are commonly used to collect objects so you can apply consistent controls (security posture, traffic rules, observability scope, etc.) to a set of endpoints. In VCF 9.0 documentation, the Kubernetes member types that can be used for group-based collection includeKubernetes NodeandKubernetes Serviceas supported member object categories. Nodes represent the worker compute endpoints that run workloads, while Services represent stable networking front-ends for sets of pods (and are often the anchoring object for policy and routing decisions at the Kubernetes layer). Using Node-based grouping helps apply policies to the infrastructure execution points where workloads run, and Service-based grouping helps apply policies consistently to application entry points and east-west communication targets, regardless of pod churn. This combination is especially useful in Kubernetes-centric operational models because it aligns policy scope with both (1) where workloads execute (nodes) and (2) how workloads are exposed and discovered (services).

Harbor is used as aprivate registry serviceto store and distribute container artifacts for Kubernetes consumption, which is exactly what’s needed for a multi-tenant platform where multiple teams require isolated repositories. The VMware documentation treats Harbor as aVMware Tanzu Harbor Registry service, including governance around who can operate it and how teams are separated intoprojects(a key multi-tenancy boundary). For example, vSphere privileges explicitly cover the ability tocreate or delete a Harbor registryand tocreate, delete, or purge Harbor registry projects, reinforcing that Harbor is operated as a managed registry with project-scoped administration and access control.

In practice for regulated environments, the registry role is not just storage—Harbor is commonly used to enforce enterprise controls likepolicy-driven access (RBAC), and it supports security capabilities such asimage vulnerability scanningandimage trust/signing, which directly address the requirement to prevent unsafe images from being promoted or deployed.

In VCF 9.0, VKS cluster provisioning and lifecycle management is built around Kubernetes-native, declarative APIs. The VMware documentation describes thatCluster API provides declarative, Kubernetes-style APIs for cluster creation, configuration, and management, and that its inputs include the cluster definition plus the resources describing the virtual machines and “cluster add-ons.” This is why Cluster API is the component associated withprovisioning(creating and managing) workload clusters in the VKS model.

By contrast,cert-manageris typically used to automate certificate issuance/renewal for in-cluster components, andCarvelis a set of tools often used to package, configure, and install Kubernetes software, but neither is the core provisioning controller for creating the clusters themselves. The VCF documentation is explicit that Cluster API is the API layer responsible for cluster creation/configuration/management, making it the correct answer for provisioning VKS workload clusters (including those intended to run service mesh capabilities).

The problem describes demand spikes where capacity exists, but the application cannot meet demand—this typically indicates the cluster needs toscale out(more nodes/pods) automatically when load increases. In VCF 9.0, VKS supportsCluster Autoscaleras an optional package and specifically calls out improvements: “Cluster Autoscaler supports scaling from zero or to zero… You must have the autoscaler standard package installed.” This directly supports optionA(install cluster autoscaling) as the mechanism to dynamically add capacity during peak events and reduce it afterward, optimizing cost and operations while meeting bursts. A load balancer (including Foundation Load Balancer) helps distribute traffic acrossexistingendpoints, but it does not create new compute capacity when pods are pending due to insufficient nodes. Similarly, installing Contour relates to ingress (routing inbound traffic) and is not, by itself, a capacity scaling solution. Oversubscription is a risky workaround that can degrade performance and does not provide targeted, policy-driven elasticity. Therefore, enablingcluster autoscalingis the correct way to address burst demand when underlying resources are available.

In VCF 9.0, ingress is described as part ofVKS cluster networking. The documentation’s VKS Cluster Networking table lists“Cluster ingress”and identifies its role asrouting inbound pod traffic. It further clarifies that this function is delivered by athird-party ingress controller, and explicitly namesContouras an example (“you can use any third-party ingress controller, such as Contour”).

That mapping is exactly what optionAdescribes: Contour is deployed to provideingresscapabilities so that inbound requests from outside the cluster can be routed to Kubernetes services and pods according to ingress rules. In other words, Contour is not a storage component (that would align to CSI/CNS/pvCSI), not a node lifecycle manager (that is handled by VKS/Cluster API/VM Service), and not an infrastructure health monitoring tool (that would be metrics/observability tooling). VCF 9.0 positions Contour specifically within theingresspart of the networking feature set, makingAthe correct answer.

In VMware Cloud Foundation 9.0 and vSphere Supervisor architectures, the decision to deploy aSingle-Zoneor aMulti-ZoneSupervisor is made at the time ofinitial enablement. A Single-Zone Supervisor is tied to a specific vSphere Cluster. A Multi-Zone Supervisor requires a minimum of three vSphere Zones (each mapped to a cluster) to be defined before the Supervisor is deployed so that the Control Plane VMs can be distributed for high availability.

Currently, there is no supported "in-place" migration path to convert a deployed Single-Zone Supervisor into a Multi-Zone Supervisor by simply adding zones later. If an organization requires the high availability provided by a three-zone architecture, the administrator must decommission the existing Single-Zone Supervisor and then re-enable the Supervisor Service using the Multi-Zone configuration wizard. This design ensures that the underlying Kubernetes Control Plane components are correctly instantiated with the necessary quorum and anti-affinity rules that can only be established during the initial "Workload Management" setup phase.

Configuration Sequence (in order):

Deactivate the service.

Confirm uninstallation.

Delete the service.

Confirm deletion.

Uninstalling a Supervisor Service cleanly follows a “stop/remove/cleanup” pattern to avoid orphaned components and to ensure the Supervisor isn’t still reconciling the service while you remove it. First, youDeactivate the serviceso the Supervisor stops managing and running the Harbor service components. This prevents new service resources from being created while you are attempting to remove them and allows the platform to transition the service into a non-operational state safely.

Next, youConfirm uninstallationto initiate the removal workflow. This step acknowledges that the service’s deployed components (such as pods, controllers, and any associated objects) will be removed from the Supervisor-managed environment. After the uninstall workflow is initiated and the service is no longer active, you proceed toDelete the serviceto remove the Harbor service registration/entry from the Supervisor Services list, ensuring it is no longer available to namespaces or consumers. Finally, youConfirm deletionas the last safeguard, since deletion is typically destructive and removes the service definition from the environment’s available services catalog.

VCF 9.0 design guidance for theSupervisor NSX Load Balancer modelstates that theNSX load balancers run on NSX Edges, and sets explicit sizing requirements at theEdge nodelevel. In the “NSX Load Balancer Design Requirements,” VCF 9.0 requires that theNSX Edge cluster must be deployedbecause “NSX Load Balancers run on NSX Edges.” It further requires that“NSX Edge nodes must be deployed with a minimum of Large form factor”because NSX load balancers havefixed resource allocations on NSX Edge nodes, and the Large form factor is needed to accommodate basic system and workload needs.

This directly ties “deployment size” of the load balancer service capacity to theEdge node form factor(Small/Medium/Large, etc.) rather than the number of pods or the number of clusters. The document also notes that if additional load balancers are required, NSX Edges can bescaled up or out, again reinforcing that sizing is anEdge nodesizing decision.

Istio is available in VCF 9.0 as an optional package that can be installed for VKS clusters. The VCF 9.0 documentation explicitly lists “Istio” among the optional packages that “can be optionally installed” for the vSphere Kubernetes Service (VKS). In Kubernetes platforms, Istio is a service mesh that secures and manages service-to-service (east-west) traffic by establishing authenticated and encrypted connections between workloads. The encryption mechanism it provides for inter-service communication ismutual TLS (mTLS), which means both ends (client and server workloads) authenticate each other and negotiate encrypted transport for every service call—meeting the requirement to “encrypt the transport and communications between services.” This is distinct from host-level mechanisms like IPsec/IKEv2 (network-layer) or “AES-256” (an algorithm, not the service-to-service transport model). Enabling Istio Service Mesh is therefore aligned to deliver encrypted, identity-aware service communications across the cluster at the application service layer.

In VCF 9.0 Workload Management, avSphere Namespaceis the construct that “sets the resource boundaries” for workloads running on a Supervisor, includingCPU, memory, and storage. The documentation explicitly states that a vSphere Namespace “sets the resource boundaries forCPU, memory, storage, and also the number of Kubernetes objects that can run within the namespace.” In the operational procedure “Set Resource Limits to a vSphere Namespace,” VMware further lists the configurable limits as:CPU(“set a limit to the CPU consumption”),Memory(“set a limit to the memory consumption”), andStorage(“set a limit on the storage consumption… per storage policy that is used”).

By contrast,Containersare not a namespace “resource limit” category; VMware documents “Container Defaults” separately (defaults for container CPU/memory requests and limits) rather than a top-level resource limit type. Similarly,Servicesare governed under “Object Limits” (how many Kubernetes objects like Services can exist), which is distinct from resource limits. Therefore, the three resource limitations defined on a vSphere Namespace areCPU, Memory, and Storage.