Microsoft AZ-700  Designing and Implementing Microsoft Azure Networking Solutions Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 1 Q1-20

Visit here for our full Microsoft AZ-700 exam dumps and practice test questions.

Question 1:

You are designing a multi-region Azure VNet architecture with centralized security requirements. Each spoke VNet must route all internet-bound traffic through a central firewall and communicate with on-premises via VPN. Direct VNet-to-VNet peering is prohibited due to regulatory isolation. Which design meets these requirements while providing dynamic route propagation?

A) Deploy VNet peering between all VNets and configure static routes
B) Use Azure Virtual WAN secured hubs with forced tunneling
C) Implement a hub-and-spoke model with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway
D) Deploy individual VPN Gateways in each VNet with static routes

Answer: C) – Implement a hub-and-spoke model with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke topology with Azure Firewall in the hub ensures centralized inspection of all traffic, while spokes remain isolated to comply with regulatory requirements. Using BGP on the VPN Gateway enables dynamic route propagation between Azure and on-premises, eliminating the need for manual route updates whenever prefixes change. Option A is incorrect because direct VNet peering violates isolation policies, and managing static routes across multiple VNets is error-prone and does not provide centralized inspection. Option B, Azure Virtual WAN, simplifies global connectivity but may allow branch-to-branch traffic by default and does not offer the same granular centralized inspection capabilities as a dedicated hub with Azure Firewall. Option D requires multiple VPN Gateways with static routes, which increases cost, complexity, and management overhead. A hub-and-spoke approach with BGP ensures dynamic learning of routes from on-premises and allows new VNets to connect to the hub without reconfiguring existing routes. User-defined routes (UDRs) are applied in spokes to force all internet-bound traffic through Azure Firewall, enabling logging, threat intelligence, TLS inspection, and compliance monitoring. This approach balances security, regulatory compliance, operational efficiency, and scalability. Administrators can monitor BGP session health and routing tables to quickly troubleshoot connectivity issues. The model supports future expansion by adding VNets or regions with minimal configuration changes. Forced tunneling ensures that all egress traffic is inspected, meeting enterprise security and auditing requirements. High availability is achieved by deploying VPN Gateways in active-active mode with multiple firewall instances. Using this design, organizations can centralize policy enforcement, optimize routing, reduce operational overhead, and maintain regulatory compliance while providing dynamic hybrid connectivity across multiple regions. Network segmentation is preserved, security inspection is enforced, and routing is automated via BGP propagation, fulfilling all stated requirements.

Question 2:

Your organization is deploying Network Virtual Appliances (NVAs) in Azure VNets to perform deep packet inspection. NVAs must dynamically learn Azure routes and advertise their own learned routes back to Azure without manually updating UDRs. Which solution satisfies this requirement?

A) Configure static UDRs in each subnet pointing to NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP
C) Use VNet peering with propagate gateway routes enabled
D) Deploy Azure Firewall Manager with forced transit

Answer: B) – Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP

Explanation

Azure Route Server is designed for seamless dynamic route exchange between NVAs and Azure. When NVAs establish BGP sessions with the Route Server, they can advertise learned routes from on-premises or internal protocols back to Azure and receive system routes automatically, eliminating the need for manual UDRs. Option A, using static UDRs, is error-prone, time-consuming, and cannot adapt dynamically to changes in network topology or on-premises routing. Option C, VNet peering with propagated gateway routes, allows some route propagation but does not facilitate bidirectional BGP-based route advertisement between NVAs and Azure, limiting flexibility. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, centralizes firewall policy management and enables forced transit but does not provide general-purpose route exchange for NVAs. Using Route Server reduces operational overhead, ensures route consistency, and allows NVAs to react dynamically to topology changes. Administrators can configure route filtering, monitor BGP session health, and ensure security controls remain intact while simplifying NVA management. Route Server’s managed architecture offers high availability, seamless integration, and scalability. It also supports coexistence with user-defined routes, provided UDR precedence is carefully managed. This approach is ideal for large-scale deployments requiring advanced inspection, dynamic routing, and low operational complexity. The system ensures routes are always updated, reduces configuration errors, and maintains centralized control of network traffic. NVAs benefit from knowing Azure routes automatically, and Azure receives the learned prefixes for inspection or routing purposes. By leveraging Route Server, organizations achieve reliable, scalable, and maintainable hybrid and multi-region connectivity while enforcing inspection policies and dynamic routing.

Question 3:

A company needs all outbound internet traffic from multiple Azure VNets to pass through a single centralized firewall for monitoring. Each VNet must remain isolated from others. Which design satisfies these requirements efficiently?

A) Use VNet peering between all VNets and route through NVAs
B) Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and UDRs in spokes pointing to the hub
C) Deploy individual Azure Firewalls in each VNet
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN with multiple unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and UDRs in spokes pointing to the hub

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke topology with Azure Firewall in the hub enables centralized monitoring and inspection of all outbound traffic while maintaining isolation between VNets. VNet peering (option A) would allow direct VNet-to-VNet communication, violating isolation policies. Deploying individual firewalls in each VNet (option C) increases cost and management complexity and does not provide centralized logging or policy enforcement. Azure Virtual WAN with unsecured hubs (option D) simplifies connectivity but does not guarantee inspection or centralized compliance. Using UDRs in each spoke pointing to the hub ensures that all traffic flows through Azure Firewall, supporting threat detection, TLS inspection, and logging. This architecture is scalable because new VNets can be added by connecting them to the hub without modifying existing configurations. Centralized inspection reduces operational overhead, enforces compliance, and allows efficient network monitoring. Administrators can apply threat intelligence policies, log analytics, and alerting centrally. This design balances security, operational efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and compliance.

Question 4:

You are implementing a multi-region Azure VNet environment with a need for on-premises connectivity via VPN and centralized inspection for egress traffic. The company wants dynamic route propagation for hybrid connectivity. Which solution is optimal?

A) Deploy individual VPN Gateways per VNet with static routes
B) Use hub-and-spoke with a central VPN Gateway, BGP, and Azure Firewall
C) Peer VNets across regions and rely on system routes
D) Deploy Azure Virtual WAN with multiple unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Use hub-and-spoke with a central VPN Gateway, BGP, and Azure Firewall

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke design with a central VPN Gateway enables dynamic routing through BGP, centralizes inspection via Azure Firewall, and provides connectivity to on-premises environments. Option A is inefficient because multiple gateways with static routes require manual updates and increase operational complexity. Option C, peering VNets and relying on system routes, does not provide centralized inspection or forced tunneling. Option D simplifies connectivity, but unsecured hubs do not enforce inspection, logging, or compliance policies. Using BGP ensures automatic route propagation between Azure and on-premises, eliminating manual configuration when prefixes change. User-defined routes in spokes force egress traffic through the central firewall, allowing TLS inspection, threat detection, and centralized logging. This architecture is scalable, compliant, and operationally efficient, enabling future expansion by adding VNets to the hub without modifying existing UDRs or firewall policies. High availability is achieved through active-active VPN Gateways and multiple firewall instances. Monitoring of BGP sessions and route propagation ensures network reliability. This design satisfies centralized inspection, hybrid connectivity, dynamic routing, scalability, and regulatory compliance.

Question 5:

Your organization needs VNets to communicate with on-premises datacenters while maintaining isolated spoke VNets and centralized outbound inspection. You also want automatic route propagation without manual UDR updates. Which solution is recommended?

A) Deploy VNet peering between all VNets and static routes
B) Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway
C) Deploy individual NVAs per spoke with static routing
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN with default hubs

Answer: B) – Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke topology with a central Azure Firewall and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway enables centralized egress inspection, hybrid connectivity, and dynamic route propagation. VNet peering with static routes (option A) violates isolation and requires manual route updates. NVAs per spoke (option C) increase operational complexity and cost, and static routing does not allow dynamic propagation. Azure Virtual WAN default hubs (option D) simplify connectivity but may bypass centralized inspection. Using BGP in the hub VPN Gateway ensures that on-premises routes and Azure system routes propagate automatically to spokes, eliminating manual route management. UDRs in spokes direct all outbound traffic to the central firewall, enabling TLS inspection, logging, threat detection, and policy enforcement. This architecture is scalable, supports future expansion, maintains regulatory compliance, and reduces operational overhead. Administrators can monitor BGP sessions, route propagation, and firewall policies to ensure reliability, security, and compliance. This approach balances cost, scalability, and operational efficiency while maintaining network isolation and centralized control over outbound traffic.

Question 6:

Your company plans to implement a multi-region Azure VNet architecture with centralized egress inspection. Each VNet must remain isolated, but on-premises connectivity via VPN is required. You want routes to propagate dynamically without manually updating UDRs. Which solution should you implement?

A) Peer all VNets and configure static UDRs pointing to NVAs
B) Deploy hub-and-spoke architecture with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway
C) Use Azure Virtual WAN with unsecured hubs
D) Deploy individual VPN Gateways in each VNet with static routes

Answer: B) – Deploy hub-and-spoke architecture with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke architecture with Azure Firewall in the hub and a BGP-enabled VPN Gateway provides centralized outbound inspection, hybrid connectivity, and dynamic routing. This design satisfies the requirement for regulatory isolation between VNets because spokes do not directly peer with each other. Using BGP ensures automatic route propagation from on-premises to Azure VNets and vice versa, eliminating the need for manual configuration of UDRs, which reduces operational overhead and mitigates the risk of misconfigurations. Option A is less suitable because peering all VNets violates isolation requirements, and static UDRs require manual updates whenever network prefixes change, increasing complexity. Option C, Azure Virtual WAN with unsecured hubs, simplifies global connectivity but does not enforce centralized inspection, leaving traffic unmonitored and potentially non-compliant. Option D, deploying individual VPN Gateways in each VNet with static routes, increases cost and operational burden, and makes scaling difficult as each gateway must be updated whenever routes change. In the recommended solution, user-defined routes in spokes are configured to direct all outbound traffic through the Azure Firewall in the hub. The firewall enforces security policies, logs traffic, provides threat intelligence, and supports TLS inspection for compliance. High availability is achieved by deploying active-active VPN Gateways and multiple firewall instances, ensuring resilience against failures. This design allows seamless expansion as new VNets or regions are added by connecting them to the hub with minimal configuration changes. Administrators can monitor BGP sessions, route propagation, and firewall performance to ensure network reliability. Forced tunneling ensures all internet-bound traffic is inspected while traffic to on-premises is dynamically routed using BGP, maintaining operational efficiency. The architecture balances cost-effectiveness, compliance, security, and scalability, providing centralized control over network traffic while preserving VNet isolation. It is also aligned with Microsoft AZ-700 best practices for hybrid connectivity and centralized egress monitoring, supporting both large-scale multi-region deployments and operational simplicity. By leveraging BGP and hub-and-spoke topology, organizations can reduce errors, improve security posture, and maintain efficient route management across complex networks. The combination of centralized inspection, dynamic routing, and isolation ensures a scalable, manageable, and compliant Azure networking environment.

Question 7:

You are designing an Azure network with multiple VNets that host Network Virtual Appliances (NVAs) for advanced packet inspection. NVAs must dynamically learn Azure routes and advertise learned routes back without manual UDR configuration. Which solution meets this requirement?

A) Configure static UDRs in each subnet pointing to NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP
C) Use VNet peering with propagate gateway routes enabled
D) Deploy Azure Firewall Manager with forced transit

Answer: B) – Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP

Explanation

Azure Route Server provides a fully managed BGP service enabling NVAs to dynamically learn Azure routes and advertise their own routes back to Azure without the need for manual UDR configuration. This two-way BGP route exchange ensures NVAs are always aware of reachable Azure prefixes and can forward traffic accordingly while Azure’s routing table receives updated routes from the NVAs. Option A, static UDRs, is error-prone and does not scale because manual updates are required whenever routes change. Option C, VNet peering with propagated gateway routes, does not provide bidirectional BGP route exchange for NVAs and cannot replace the Route Server for dynamic route propagation. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, centralizes firewall policy and transit but does not support dynamic route propagation for third-party NVAs. Using Azure Route Server reduces operational overhead and complexity, ensures route consistency, and allows NVAs to respond dynamically to topology changes, such as additions of VNets or on-premises prefixes. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, configure route filtering to avoid accidental propagation of incorrect prefixes, and maintain compliance with security policies. Route Server also supports coexistence with user-defined routes, provided the route priority is managed appropriately to avoid conflicts. High availability is inherent in Azure Route Server, ensuring NVAs continue to receive routing updates even during partial service outages. This design simplifies network operations, improves reliability, and enables rapid adaptation to network changes, which is critical for large-scale enterprise deployments. It supports centralized inspection, automated routing, and hybrid connectivity while maintaining operational efficiency and security compliance in alignment with AZ-700 best practices. By leveraging BGP and Route Server, organizations can implement scalable, manageable, and automated route propagation, reducing errors and ensuring all traffic is appropriately routed through inspection points while maintaining network segmentation and control.

Question 8:

Your organization needs centralized egress inspection for multiple VNets while preserving isolation between spokes. All internet-bound traffic should be inspected, and routing must adapt dynamically to on-premises changes. Which solution is recommended?

A) Deploy individual Azure Firewalls in each VNet
B) Use hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and UDRs in spokes pointing to the hub
C) Peer VNets and rely on default system routes
D) Implement Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Use hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and UDRs in spokes pointing to the hub

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke topology with a centralized Azure Firewall ensures that all internet-bound traffic passes through a single inspection point while spokes remain isolated, satisfying regulatory and compliance requirements. UDRs in the spokes are configured to route all outbound traffic to the firewall, ensuring TLS inspection, logging, and threat monitoring. Option A, deploying individual firewalls per VNet, increases cost, complexity, and operational overhead without centralizing logging or inspection. Option C, relying on system routes and peering, does not enforce centralized inspection and may violate isolation requirements. Option D, Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs, provides connectivity but lacks centralized inspection and does not ensure compliance. Using a hub-and-spoke approach with UDRs allows scalability, as new spokes can connect to the hub without changes to existing VNets. Administrators can monitor traffic, enforce security policies centrally, and adapt to network topology changes without manual updates. Centralized inspection also supports auditing and threat intelligence integration. High availability is achieved by deploying multiple firewall instances and configuring failover. Dynamic route propagation using BGP ensures that routes from on-premises are automatically learned and updated in Azure VNets, further reducing administrative effort. This design balances security, operational efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and compliance, meeting all enterprise requirements while aligning with AZ-700 best practices for hybrid and multi-region Azure networking.

Question 9:

You are designing a multi-region VNet deployment with on-premises connectivity. Each spoke VNet must remain isolated, but all internet-bound traffic must pass through a central firewall. Routes must adapt dynamically to changes in on-premises prefixes. Which design is optimal?

A) Deploy multiple VPN Gateways with static routes
B) Implement hub-and-spoke with central VPN Gateway, Azure Firewall, and BGP
C) Peer VNets across regions and rely on default system routes
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN with default hubs

Answer: B) – Implement hub-and-spoke with central VPN Gateway, Azure Firewall, and BGP

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke topology with a central VPN Gateway using BGP ensures dynamic route propagation between Azure VNets and on-premises, reducing manual configuration and minimizing errors. Azure Firewall in the hub enforces centralized inspection for all internet-bound traffic, supporting TLS inspection, logging, and threat monitoring. Option A, deploying multiple VPN Gateways with static routes, increases operational complexity and does not scale easily when network prefixes change. Option C, peering VNets, does not provide centralized inspection and may violate isolation requirements. Option D, Azure Virtual WAN default hubs, simplifies connectivity but may bypass centralized inspection, leaving traffic unmonitored. User-defined routes in spokes ensure forced tunneling to the firewall, and BGP automatically updates routes when on-premises prefixes change, ensuring network consistency. The hub-and-spoke model also allows future expansion, adding new spokes with minimal configuration changes. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, firewall logs, and route tables to ensure reliability, compliance, and security. High availability is achieved by deploying active-active VPN Gateways and multiple firewall instances. This design aligns with AZ-700 best practices, balancing scalability, security, operational efficiency, and compliance while maintaining spoke isolation and centralized control over outbound traffic.

Question 10:

Your company wants VNets to communicate with on-premises datacenters while maintaining spoke isolation and centralized outbound inspection. Routes must propagate dynamically without manual UDR updates. Which solution is recommended?

A) Peer VNets and configure static routes
B) Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway
C) Deploy NVAs per spoke with static routing
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN with default hubs

Answer: B) – Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke design with Azure Firewall in the hub and a BGP-enabled VPN Gateway provides centralized inspection, hybrid connectivity, and dynamic route propagation. Peering VNets with static routes (option A) violates isolation and requires manual updates. NVAs per spoke (option C) increase operational overhead and costs, and do not support automatic route propagation. Azure Virtual WAN default hubs (option D) simplify connectivity but do not guarantee centralized inspection or compliance. BGP in the hub VPN Gateway ensures on-premises and Azure routes are propagated automatically to spokes, eliminating manual route management. UDRs in spokes direct all outbound traffic to the firewall, enabling TLS inspection, threat detection, logging, and centralized policy enforcement. High availability is achieved through active-active gateways and multiple firewall instances. This design supports scalability, regulatory compliance, and operational efficiency while maintaining spoke isolation, centralized control, and dynamic routing, aligning fully with AZ-700 best practices.

Question 11:

You are designing a hub-and-spoke network in Azure with multiple spoke VNets. The company requires that all outbound internet traffic be inspected centrally and that on-premises networks receive dynamically updated routes from Azure VNets. Which solution best satisfies these requirements?

A) Deploy Azure Firewall in each spoke and configure static UDRs
B) Deploy a central hub with Azure Firewall and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, and apply UDRs in spokes pointing to the hub
C) Use VNet peering between all VNets with system routes
D) Deploy individual VPN Gateways per spoke with static routing

Answer: B) – Deploy a central hub with Azure Firewall and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, and apply UDRs in spokes pointing to the hub

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke architecture with a central Azure Firewall and a BGP-enabled VPN Gateway ensures centralized inspection, dynamic route propagation, and spoke isolation. All internet-bound traffic from spokes is forced through the firewall using user-defined routes (UDRs), ensuring TLS inspection, logging, and threat monitoring. Option A, deploying Azure Firewall in each spoke with static UDRs, increases cost and operational complexity without providing centralized logging and inspection. Option C, peering VNets with system routes, does not enforce centralized inspection and may violate isolation requirements. Option D, deploying individual VPN Gateways per spoke with static routing, increases operational overhead and does not scale easily for multi-region deployments. Using BGP allows dynamic propagation of on-premises routes to Azure VNets and vice versa, eliminating manual updates. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, validate route propagation, and configure route filtering to prevent accidental leaks. High availability is ensured by deploying active-active VPN Gateways and multiple firewall instances. This design supports scalability, as new VNets or regions can be added without reconfiguring existing UDRs. Centralized inspection also enables compliance reporting and threat intelligence integration. Forced tunneling ensures that all traffic leaving Azure passes through the firewall, meeting security requirements. By combining hub-and-spoke topology with Azure Firewall and BGP, organizations achieve operational efficiency, maintain regulatory compliance, and enforce network security consistently. The architecture aligns with Microsoft AZ-700 best practices for hybrid and multi-region Azure networking. Dynamic route propagation simplifies management, reduces configuration errors, and ensures that on-premises and Azure VNets maintain consistent routing, which is critical for enterprise-scale deployments. This approach balances cost-effectiveness, operational efficiency, security, and scalability while maintaining full control over outbound traffic and preserving spoke isolation.

Question 12:

Your company deploys Network Virtual Appliances (NVAs) in Azure to inspect traffic for multiple VNets. NVAs must learn Azure system and user routes dynamically and advertise their own routes back without manual UDR configuration. Which solution should you implement?

A) Configure static UDRs for each NVA
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP
C) Enable VNet peering with propagate gateway routes
D) Use Azure Firewall Manager with forced transit

Answer: B) – Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP

Explanation

Azure Route Server provides managed BGP route propagation between NVAs and Azure VNets, enabling bidirectional dynamic route exchange. NVAs advertise learned prefixes from on-premises or internal routing protocols back to Azure, while automatically learning system and user routes from Azure without manual UDR updates. Option A, static UDRs, is inefficient, error-prone, and does not scale in dynamic network environments. Option C, VNet peering with propagate gateway routes, allows some route propagation but does not enable bidirectional learning or advertisement between NVAs and Azure.

Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, centralizes firewall policies but does not provide general-purpose BGP route exchange for third-party NVAs. Using Azure Route Server reduces operational overhead, improves consistency, and ensures that NVAs and Azure remain synchronized. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, configure route filtering to prevent route leaks, and maintain compliance. Route Server supports coexistence with UDRs, provided route priorities are configured carefully. High availability is inherent in the managed Route Server service, ensuring continuous route propagation even during partial outages. This solution aligns with AZ-700 best practices by simplifying NVA integration, enabling dynamic routing, supporting hybrid connectivity, and ensuring operational efficiency. It allows enterprise-scale deployments to maintain centralized inspection, automated routing, and consistent network topology while minimizing manual configuration and potential errors. 

Organizations benefit from scalable, reliable, and secure routing infrastructure, reducing management complexity and ensuring all traffic is properly inspected and routed. Route Server with BGP provides automated, secure, and efficient network operations across multiple VNets and hybrid connectivity scenarios.

Question 13:

Your company wants multiple Azure VNets to have centralized outbound inspection and dynamic routing with on-premises networks while maintaining isolation between spokes. Which design meets these requirements with minimal management overhead?

A) Deploy individual firewalls per spoke with static routes
B) Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, with UDRs in spokes
C) Peer VNets and rely on system routes
D) Deploy Azure Virtual WAN with unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, with UDRs in spokes

Explanation

Hub-and-spoke architecture centralizes outbound inspection while preserving isolation between spokes. Using BGP with a VPN Gateway in the hub allows dynamic route propagation to on-premises and Azure VNets, removing the need for manual UDR updates. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling through Azure Firewall for all internet-bound traffic, enabling TLS inspection, logging, and threat monitoring. Option A, firewalls per spoke with static routes, increases cost and complexity, and lacks centralized logging. Option C, VNet peering, violates isolation and bypasses centralized inspection. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, simplifies connectivity but does not provide enforced inspection. Hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall and BGP enables scalable, compliant, and operationally efficient networking. Administrators can monitor BGP sessions, route propagation, and firewall performance.

High availability is ensured with active-active VPN Gateways and multiple firewall instances. New VNets can be added easily to the hub without impacting existing configurations. This design aligns with AZ-700 best practices, maintaining spoke isolation, centralized control, dynamic routing, and centralized inspection. Operational efficiency, compliance, and scalability are all achieved while minimizing management overhead. Centralized inspection ensures security policies, threat intelligence, and auditing are consistently applied across all traffic, meeting enterprise security and compliance objectives.

Question 14:

A company requires NVAs to dynamically exchange routes with Azure VNets without manual updates. NVAs must advertise learned routes from on-premises and receive Azure system and user routes automatically. Which solution should be implemented?

A) Configure static UDRs for NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP
C) Enable VNet peering with propagated gateway routes
D) Use Azure Firewall Manager

Answer: B) – Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP

Explanation

Azure Route Server is the recommended solution for enabling dynamic bidirectional route propagation between NVAs and Azure VNets. NVAs can advertise learned on-premises routes while automatically learning system and user routes from Azure. Option A, static UDRs, is manually intensive, error-prone, and cannot scale. Option C, VNet peering with gateway propagation, does not provide bidirectional learning and advertisement for NVAs. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, focuses on centralized firewall management and does not provide BGP route exchange for NVAs. Route Server reduces operational overhead, improves reliability, and ensures network consistency. Administrators can configure route filters, monitor BGP sessions, and maintain compliance. High availability is built in, ensuring continuous propagation. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices for hybrid and multi-region networking, providing scalable, efficient, and secure dynamic routing and centralized inspection with minimal manual intervention. Route Server integration ensures all traffic is appropriately inspected and routed, while network segmentation is maintained.

Question 15:

Your organization requires centralized internet egress inspection for multiple VNets while maintaining isolation between spokes. Routes must propagate dynamically to reflect on-premises changes. Which solution meets these requirements?

A) Deploy individual firewalls per spoke
B) Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, with UDRs in spokes
C) Peer VNets and rely on system routes
D) Deploy Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, with UDRs in spokes

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke architecture with Azure Firewall in the hub centralizes outbound inspection while maintaining isolation between spokes. BGP-enabled VPN Gateway in the hub provides dynamic route propagation between on-premises and Azure VNets, reducing manual updates. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling through the firewall, enabling TLS inspection, logging, and threat detection. Option A, firewalls per spoke, increases cost and management overhead. Option C, VNet peering with system routes, bypasses centralized inspection and violates isolation requirements. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, simplifies connectivity but does not enforce inspection. Hub-and-spoke design is scalable, operationally efficient, and compliant. Administrators can monitor BGP sessions, route propagation, and firewall performance, ensuring reliability, security, and compliance. High availability is ensured through active-active VPN Gateways and multiple firewall instances. New VNets can be added without impacting existing configurations. This design aligns with AZ-700 best practices for multi-region and hybrid connectivity, maintaining isolation, centralized control, dynamic routing, and operational efficiency. Centralized inspection ensures security policies and auditing are consistently applied, providing a secure, scalable, and compliant Azure network architecture.

Question 16:

You are designing a multi-region Azure network with centralized inspection for all outbound internet traffic. Each spoke VNet must remain isolated, and on-premises connectivity must dynamically update routing as prefixes change. Which solution is recommended?

A) Deploy individual Azure Firewalls in each spoke with static UDRs
B) Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, and apply UDRs in spokes pointing to the hub
C) Use VNet peering across all VNets with default system routes
D) Deploy Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, and apply UDRs in spokes pointing to the hub

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke topology with Azure Firewall in the hub ensures that all outbound internet traffic passes through a centralized inspection point while maintaining isolation between spokes. By deploying a BGP-enabled VPN Gateway in the hub, route propagation between on-premises and Azure VNets is automated, eliminating the need for manual updates and ensuring a dynamic response to network changes. UDRs in spokes force internet-bound traffic through the hub firewall, enabling TLS inspection, logging, threat monitoring, and compliance enforcement. Option A, deploying firewalls per spoke with static UDRs, increases operational complexity, management overhead, and cost without providing centralized logging or inspection. Option C, VNet peering with system routes, does not enforce centralized inspection and allows direct VNet-to-VNet communication, violating isolation requirements. Option D, unsecured Azure Virtual WAN hubs, provides simplified connectivity but does not guarantee centralized inspection or policy enforcement, potentially compromising compliance. The recommended design is scalable because new VNets can connect to the hub without modifying existing configurations. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, validate route propagation, and apply route filtering to prevent accidental leaks. High availability is achieved through active-active VPN Gateways and multiple firewall instances. This architecture aligns with AZ-700 best practices by combining dynamic routing, centralized inspection, scalability, and operational efficiency while maintaining network security, regulatory compliance, and operational control. Forced tunneling ensures all outbound traffic passes through the firewall for inspection. By integrating BGP, Azure Firewall, and hub-and-spoke design, organizations achieve efficient hybrid connectivity, centralized monitoring, threat intelligence enforcement, and minimal manual overhead. The model reduces configuration errors, supports multi-region deployments, and simplifies future expansions while preserving isolation and centralized control.

Question 17:

Your organization deploys NVAs in multiple Azure VNets to perform advanced traffic inspection. NVAs must dynamically exchange routing information with Azure, including learning system and user routes and advertising on-premises learned routes. Which solution should be implemented?

A) Configure static UDRs for NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP
C) Enable VNet peering with propagate gateway routes
D) Use Azure Firewall Manager with forced transit

Answer: B) – Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP

Explanation

Azure Route Server provides a managed BGP platform that allows NVAs to dynamically learn Azure system and user routes and advertise learned prefixes back to Azure without manual UDR configuration. This bidirectional route exchange ensures NVAs are always aware of reachable prefixes and can forward traffic appropriately while Azure receives updates from NVAs. Option A, static UDRs, is inefficient, error-prone, and does not scale in dynamic network environments. Option C, VNet peering with propagate gateway routes, allows limited route propagation but does not provide full bidirectional learning for NVAs. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, focuses on centralized firewall policy management and does not enable dynamic route propagation for NVAs. Deploying a Route Server reduces operational overhead, ensures route consistency, and supports scalability. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, configure route filtering to prevent route leaks, and maintain compliance with security policies. Route Server provides high availability, ensuring continuous route propagation even during partial failures. By using Route Server, organizations maintain centralized inspection, dynamic routing, and hybrid connectivity efficiently. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices by reducing manual configuration, improving operational efficiency, maintaining security compliance, and enabling enterprise-scale routing automation. The combination of Route Server and BGP allows NVAs to adapt automatically to network changes, ensures correct routing to on-premises environments, and centralizes route management while maintaining network segmentation. Organizations achieve scalable, reliable, and secure dynamic routing across multiple VNets and hybrid networks.

Question 18:

You need to design a multi-region Azure network where all internet-bound traffic must pass through a central inspection point, and routing should dynamically update based on on-premises changes. VNets must remain isolated. Which solution is recommended?

A) Deploy individual firewalls per VNet with static UDRs
B) Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, applying UDRs in spokes
C) Peer VNets across regions with system routes
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN with unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Implement hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in the hub and BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, applying UDRs in spokes

Explanation

Hub-and-spoke topology with Azure Firewall in the hub centralizes inspection and maintains isolation between spokes. BGP-enabled VPN Gateway ensures dynamic route propagation from on-premises to Azure VNets, eliminating manual route updates and minimizing configuration errors. UDRs in spokes force all internet-bound traffic through the firewall for TLS inspection, logging, threat monitoring, and compliance. Option A increases cost and complexity without providing centralized monitoring. Option C violates isolation requirements and does not provide centralized inspection. Option D simplifies connectivity but does not enforce centralized inspection or security policies. High availability is achieved via active-active VPN Gateways and multiple firewall instances. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, route propagation, and firewall performance for reliability and compliance. This design supports scalability, operational efficiency, and regulatory compliance, and aligns with AZ-700 best practices. Forced tunneling ensures all egress traffic is inspected, and BGP ensures dynamic route updates in response to changes in on-premises networks. New VNets can be added easily without modifying existing UDRs, preserving operational simplicity. The hub-and-spoke model balances security, efficiency, and compliance in multi-region deployments while maintaining centralized control and minimal management overhead.

Question 19:

You are designing a hybrid network using multiple Azure VNets and NVAs. NVAs must automatically learn Azure routes and advertise their own learned routes back without manual updates. Which solution provides this capability?

A) Static UDRs pointing to NVAs
B) Azure Route Server with BGP peering to NVAs
C) VNet peering with propagated gateway routes
D) Azure Firewall Manager

Answer: A) – Static UDRs pointing to NVAs

Explanation

Azure Route Server provides dynamic, bidirectional BGP route propagation between NVAs and Azure VNets. NVAs can advertise learned prefixes from on-premises and learn system and user routes automatically. Option A, static UDRs, is manual and error-prone. Option C provides limited route propagation and does not support bidirectional learning for NVAs. Option D manages firewall policies but does not propagate routes. Route Server reduces operational overhead, ensures consistency, and supports scalability. Administrators can configure route filtering, monitor BGP sessions, and maintain compliance. High availability ensures continued propagation during failures. Route Server aligns with AZ-700 best practices for dynamic, hybrid, multi-region routing. NVAs remain aware of reachable prefixes, Azure VNets automatically receive updated routes, and the network remains segmented and compliant. This design provides automated route propagation, centralized inspection, and hybrid connectivity with minimal manual intervention, improving operational efficiency, reliability, and security.

Question 20:

Your organization requires centralized outbound inspection for multiple VNets while maintaining isolation. Routes must dynamically propagate to reflect on-premises changes. Which solution is optimal?

A) Deploy individual firewalls per spoke
B) Hub-and-spoke with Azure Firewall in hub, BGP-enabled VPN Gateway, and UDRs in spokes
C) Peer VNets and rely on system routes
D) Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: A) – Deploy individual firewalls per spoke

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke design with Azure Firewall centralizes inspection, maintains spoke isolation, and uses BGP-enabled VPN Gateway for dynamic route propagation. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling, ensuring all internet-bound traffic passes through the firewall for TLS inspection, logging, and threat monitoring. Option A increases cost and operational complexity. Option C bypasses centralized inspection and violates isolation. Option D lacks inspection enforcement. High availability is achieved with active-active VPN Gateways and multiple firewall instances. Dynamic BGP route propagation reduces manual updates, supports hybrid connectivity, and ensures consistency across VNets. Administrators can monitor firewall performance, BGP session health, and route propagation. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices for scalable, compliant, secure, and efficient multi-region Azure networking. Centralized inspection ensures security policies and auditing are consistently applied. The design balances cost-effectiveness, operational efficiency, scalability, and compliance while maintaining isolation and control over outbound traffic. Forced tunneling guarantees inspection of all egress traffic, and BGP ensures dynamic adaptation to on-premises network changes.