What is a typical result of using a fine-grained rather than a coarse-grained API deployment model to implement a given business process?
A.
A decrease in the number of connections within the application network supporting the business process
B.
A higher number of discoverable API-related assets in the application network
C.
A better response time for the end user as a result of the APIs being smaller in scope and complexity
D.
An overall tower usage of resources because each fine-grained API consumes less resources
A higher number of discoverable API-related assets in the application network
Explanation: 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 finegrained
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.
A Platform Architect inherits a legacy monolithic SOAP-based web service that performs a number of tasks, including showing all policies belonging to a client. The service connects to two back-end systems — a life-insurance administration system and a general-insurance administration system — and then queries for insurance policy information within each system, aggregates the results, and presents a SOAP-based response to a user interface (UI). The architect wants to break up the monolithic web service to follow API-led conventions. Which part of the service should be put into the process layer?
A. Combining the insurance policy information from the administration systems
B. Presenting the SOAP-based response to the UI
C. Authenticating and maintaining connections to each of the back-end administration systems
D. Querying the data from the administration systems
Explanation:
In the API-led connectivity approach, each layer (System, Process, and
Experience) has a distinct purpose:
An API implementation is being designed that must invoke an Order API, which is known to
repeatedly experience downtime.
For this reason, a fallback API is to be called when the Order API is unavailable.
What approach to designing the invocation of the fallback API provides the best resilience?
A.
Search Anypoint Exchange for a suitable existing fallback API, and then implement
invocations to this fallback API in addition to the Order API
B.
Create a separate entry for the Order API in API Manager, and then invoke this API as a
fallback API if the primary Order API is unavailable
C.
Redirect client requests through an HTTP 307 Temporary Redirect status code to the
fallback API whenever the Order API is unavailable
D.
Set an option in the HTTP Requester component that invokes the Order API to instead
invoke a fallback API whenever an HTTP 4xx or 5xx response status code is returned from
the Order API
Search Anypoint Exchange for a suitable existing fallback API, and then implement
invocations to this fallback API in addition to the Order API
Explanation: 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.
An Order API must be designed that contains significant amounts of integration logic and
involves the invocation of the Product API.
The power relationship between Order API and Product API is one of "Customer/Supplier",
because the Product API is used heavily throughout the organization and is developed by a
dedicated development team located in the office of the CTO.
What strategy should be used to deal with the API data model of the Product API within the
Order API?
A.
Convince the development team of the Product API to adopt the API data model of the Order API such that the integration logic of the Order API can work with one consistent internal data model
B.
Work with the API data types of the Product API directly when implementing the integration logic of the Order API such that the Order API uses the same (unchanged) data types as the Product API
C.
Implement an anti-corruption layer in the Order API that transforms the Product API data
model into internal data types of the Order API
D.
Start an organization-wide data modeling initiative that will result in an Enterprise Data
Model that will then be used in both the Product API and the Order API
Implement an anti-corruption layer in the Order API that transforms the Product API data
model into internal data types of the Order API
Explanation: Explanation
Correct Answer: Convince the development team of the product API to adopt the API data
model of the Order API such that integration logic of the Order API can work with one
consistent internal data model
*****************************************
Key details to note from the given scenario:
>> Power relationship between Order API and Product API is customer/supplier
So, as per below rules of "Power Relationships", the caller (in this case Order API) would
request for features to the called (Product API team) and the Product API team would need
to accomodate those requests.
A company is building an application network using MuleSoft's recommendations for various API layers. What is the main (default) role of a process API in an application network?
A. To secure and optimize the data synchronization processing of large data dumps between back-end systems
B. To manage and process the secure direct communication between a back-end system and an end-user client of mobile device in the application network
C. To automate parts of business processes by coordinating and orchestrating the invocation of other APIs in the application network
D. To secure, Manage, and process communication with specific types of end-user client applications or devices in the application network
Explanation:
What is a key performance indicator (KPI) that measures the success of a typical C4E that is immediately apparent in responses from the Anypoint Platform APIs?
A.
The number of production outage incidents reported in the last 24 hours
B.
The number of API implementations that have a publicly accessible HTTP endpoint and are being managed by Anypoint Platform
C.
The fraction of API implementations deployed manually relative to those deployed using a CI/CD tool
D.
The number of API specifications in RAML or OAS format published to Anypoint
Exchange
The number of API specifications in RAML or OAS format published to Anypoint
Exchange
Explanation: 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.
Reference: https://help.mulesoft.com/s/question/0D52T00004mXSTUSA4/how-should-acompany-
measure-c4e-success
A company deploys Mule applications with default configurations through Runtime Manager to customer-hosted Mule runtimes. Each Mule application is an API implementation that exposes RESTful interfaces to API clients. The Mule runtimes are managed by the MuleSoft-hosted control plane. The payload is never used by any Logger components. When an API client sends an HTTP request to a customer-hosted Mule application, which metadata or data (payload) is pushed to the MuleSoft-hosted control plane?
A. Only the data
B. No data
C. The data and metadata
D. Only the metadata
An organization has several APIs that accept JSON data over HTTP POST. The APIs are
all publicly available and are associated with several mobile applications and web
applications.
The organization does NOT want to use any authentication or compliance policies for these
APIs, but at the same time, is worried that some bad actor could send payloads that could
somehow compromise the applications or servers running the API implementations.
What out-of-the-box Anypoint Platform policy can address exposure to this threat?
A.
Shut out bad actors by using HTTPS mutual authentication for all API invocations
B.
Apply an IP blacklist policy to all APIs; the blacklist will Include all bad actors
C.
Apply a Header injection and removal policy that detects the malicious data before it is used
D.
Apply a JSON threat protection policy to all APIs to detect potential threat vectors
Apply a JSON threat protection policy to all APIs to detect potential threat vectors
Explanation: Explanation
Correct Answer: Apply a JSON threat protection policy to all APIs to detect potential threat
vectors
*****************************************
>> Usually, if the APIs are designed and developed for specific consumers (known
consumers/customers) then we would IP Whitelist the same to ensure that traffic only
comes from them.
>> However, as this scenario states that the APIs are publicly available and being used by
so many mobile and web applications, it is NOT possible to identify and blacklist all
possible bad actors.
>> So, JSON threat protection policy is the best chance to prevent any bad JSON payloads
from such bad actors.
| Page 1 out of 19 Pages |
Contact Us - Privacy Policy ... Copyright © - All Rights Reserved