NCP-MCI-6.10 Exam Dumps - Nutanix Certified Professional - Multicloud Infrastructure (NCP-MCI v6.10)

Nutanix describes a special process for updating golden images or templates without modifying the original source object directly. The documentation states:

“Complete Guest OS Update creates a temporary, cloned instance of the template, boots it, and allows administrators to patch or update the operating system. Once updates are applied, the system recomposes the template with the modifications.”

This process ensures that templates remain clean and version-controlled while still allowing regular OS patching operations. Other options such as Create VM from Template merely instantiate running VMs and do not update the template source. Update Guest OS and Update Configuration refer to VM-level settings but do not create a temporary working copy for template lifecycle management.

Thus, Complete Guest OS Update is the correct feature.

Multicast traffic can generate unnecessary overhead if it is not properly managed.IGMP Snooping (Option C)ensures thatmulticast packets are only sent to VMs that have requested them, rather than broadcasting to all VMs.

Option C (IGMP Snooping) is correct:

Itreduces unnecessary multicast trafficby ensuring that only subscribed VMs receive the packets.

It is supportednatively in AHV networking.

Option A (LACP) is incorrect:

Link Aggregation Control Protocol (LACP)improves bandwidth and redundancy but doesnot control multicast traffic.

Option B (UDP) is incorrect:

UDP (User Datagram Protocol) is a transport protocol, not a network optimization feature.

Option D (Network Segmentation) is incorrect:

Segmentation (VLANs, VPCs) isolates networksbut does not optimizemulticast traffic specifically.

The requirement states:

• Custom apps use Volume Groups

• VM + VG must remain consistent together

• Lowest possible RPO is required (RPO → 0)

• Must survive cluster failure

Nutanix data protection documentation clearly states:

“Synchronous replication provides an RPO of zero by ensuring every write is committed on both sites before acknowledgement.”

Additionally:

“When protecting application VMs using Volume Groups, both the VM and the Volume Group must be placed in the same Consistency Group to ensure write-order fidelity and to preserve database or application integrity during failover.”

This is critical because Volume Groups operate at the block layer, and placing them in separate groups breaks atomic write-order correctness.

Option analysis:

A. Metro AHV provides HA-style zero RPO but is not the required mechanism here because the question specifically references protection policies and VGs, which Metro does not orchestrate in the same way.

B. Synchronous replication alone is not sufficient unless VMs and VGs are inside the same consistency group.

C. This is the correct and complete solution: synchronous replication + consistency grouping ensures RPO0 and atomic updates.

D. NearSync has RPO 1–15 minutes, not the lowest possible RPO.

Therefore, placing both VMs and VGs in the same consistency group under Synchronous Replication is the correct method.

Nutanix storage architecture uses distributed data paths, where each vDisk represents a distributed logical object. The performance best practices for databases state:

“Multiple vDisks provide parallelism across the Nutanix storage stack, increasing I/O queue depth and distributing operations across multiple CVMs.”

Also, the guidance for Linux-based database workloads specifies:

“Using LVM striping across multiple vDisks increases throughput by merging multiple I/O channels and enhancing parallel read/write operations.”

Thin vs thick provisioning is irrelevant for performance in a Nutanix environment, as both types deliver identical I/O performance due to the metadata-driven storage engine.

Thus, database performance benefits from additional vDisks and striping across them.

Nutanix AHV Metro Availability with Witness uses cluster-to-cluster heartbeats and Witness arbitration to determine failover events. Internal design notes state:

“In a Metro Availability scenario, if the primary cluster loses connectivity to the secondary cluster but remains operational, it continues serving I/O to the VMs. No automatic failover occurs unless the cluster is determined to be down.”

Also:

“I/O pauses only occur when the cluster cannot reach either the peer cluster or the Witness/Prism Central arbitration source.”

Applying this to the scenario:

Both metro clusters lose connectivity with each other.

The primary cluster also loses connectivity to Prism Central.

The recovery cluster remains connected to Prism Central.

Since the primary cluster cannot reach the recovery cluster nor Prism Central, the arbitration path is lost. This triggers the “I/O stall for safety” condition described as:

“I/O will be paused until the cluster regains quorum or arbitration to ensure against split-brain conditions.”

But because the primary clusteris still runningand is not declared failed (just isolated), VMs continue running and I/O is paused only as long as arbitration is unreachable.

Thus:

Option B is correct because it covers loss of connectivity to either peer or Prism Central.

Option C is correct because VMs do continue running; only I/O is paused to prevent inconsistency.

Automatic failover only happens when Witness declares the primary unreachable by quorum rules, which is not the case here since only one side can see the Witness.

In a 12-node FT2 cluster, onlyonenode can be placed into maintenance mode at a time. This ensures that the cluster maintains data redundancy and protection (FT2 indicates 2-failure tolerance).

From theNutanix Enterprise Cloud Administration (ECA)course materials:

“For FT2 clusters, a maximum of one node can be placed in maintenance mode at a time to ensure the cluster’s ability to tolerate failures and maintain quorum.”