2V0-15.25 Dumps With Exact Questions and Answers

In VMware Cloud Foundation 9.0, VCF Operations (vROps-based) usespoliciesto control which alerts, symptoms, and metrics are evaluated for a given object. Creating an alert definition and symptom alone is not sufficient; the alert must beassociated with and enabled in a policythat is actively applied to the target object (in this case, a Virtual Machine). The documentation shows that when you create an alert definition, there is an explicitPolicies step, where you select the policy (for example, the default policy) so that the alert becomes active for objects governed by that policy.

The metric “Read Latency (ms)” is valid for virtual-machine–related objects: VCF Operations documents Read Latency metrics at the VM disk and VM–datastore link level (for Disk and Datastore metrics on Virtual Machines). Therefore, option B (metric not applicable) is incorrect. No requirement exists that such a performance alert must be forwarded from VCF Operations for Logs (D); log-based alerts are a separate alert type.

If the alert definition is not enabled in the effective policy for that VM, VCF Operations will not evaluate the symptom or generate the alert, and it will not appear in the alert pane—even though the definition technically exists. This matches optionCexactly.

In vSAN Express Storage Architecture (ESA),Auto-Policy Managementdetermines which default storage policies can be used based on the number of hosts in the cluster. RAID-5 and RAID-6 policies require a minimum number of hosts to satisfy fault domain and component placement rules.

ForvSAN ESA, the minimum hosts required are:

RAID-1 (FTT=1)→ minimum3 hosts

RAID-5 (FTT=1)→ minimum4 hosts

RAID-6 (FTT=2)→ minimum6 hosts

In this scenario, the administrator deployed athree-host ESA cluster. Since RAID-5 requires at leastfourESA-capable hosts, vSAN Auto-Policy Managementautomatically falls back to RAID-1, the highest level of resilience possible with the available cluster size. This results insignificantly higher storage consumption, which matches exactly what the administrator observed.

Option A is incorrect because RAID-5 is fully supported on ESA—but only with enough hosts.

Option C (Force Provisioning) does not change the default policy selected.

Option D (Host Rebuild Reserve) does not control RAID policy selection.

In VMware Cloud Foundation 9.0, aProvider Gatewayin VCF Automation is always backed by anexisting Tier-0 or Tier-0 VRF gatewayin NSX. When the administrator launches theCreate Provider Gatewayworkflow and no Tier-0 gateways appear for assignment, this indicates that VCF Automation cannot discover any valid Tier-0 gateways in the associated region.

The VMware Cloud Foundation 9.0 documentation explicitly states thatbefore adding a Provider Gateway, an administratormust first create an Active-Standby Tier-0 Gateway in NSX Manager. The Provider Gateway workflow only lists Tier-0 gateways that already exist and are properly configured in NSX. If none are present, the list will be empty.

From the documentation:“To add a provider gateway, first you must create an Active Standby tier-0 gateway in the NSX Manager associated with the region to back it.”. Provider gateways in VCF Automationare discovered from these preexisting Tier-0 gatewaysand cannot be created until they exist.

Creating a Tier-1 gateway (Option B) does not satisfy the requirement because Provider Gateways must map specifically toTier-0, not Tier-1. Retrying the workflow (Option D) will not resolve the issue because the Tier-0 backing resource is missing. Creating a new region (Option A) is unnecessary unless required for other organizational reasons, and it still would not produce a Tier-0 gateway.

Therefore, the correct and verified solution is tolog in to NSX Manager and create the required Tier-0 gateway, after which it will appear in the Provider Gateway creation workflow.