Microsoft AZ-700 Designing and Implementing Microsoft Azure Networking Solutions Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 9 Q161-180

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

Question 161:

Your organization wants to ensure all traffic between spoke VNets and on-premises networks is inspected through hub NVAs, with automatic route propagation for new prefixes. Which design should you implement?

A) Deploy NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs
B) Hub-and-spoke topology with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server
C) Peer VNets with default system routes
D) Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke topology with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server

Explanation

A hub-and-spoke topology centralizes traffic inspection while maintaining isolation between spokes. NVAs in the hub serve as inspection points for security, compliance, and logging. Azure Route Server uses BGP to dynamically propagate routes between NVAs, Azure VNets, and on-premises networks, eliminating the need for manual UDR configuration. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling, ensuring all traffic passes through the hub NVAs. Option A, deploying NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs, increases operational complexity and cost while lacking centralized monitoring. Option C, VNet peering with system routes, bypasses inspection and violates spoke isolation. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provide connectivity but do not enforce inspection or routing policies. High availability is achieved with active-active VPN Gateways and multiple NVAs. Dynamic routing ensures adaptation to changes in on-premises networks, reducing misconfiguration risk. Centralized inspection supports auditing, threat intelligence integration, and policy enforcement. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices by providing operational efficiency, scalability, security, and centralized control while allowing new spokes to be added without manual route updates.

Question 162:

Your organization wants NVAs to dynamically learn routes from on-premises networks and propagate them to Azure VNets automatically. Which solution should you implement?

A) Configure static routes for NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and configure BGP peers with NVAs
C) Use VNet peering with system routes
D) Use Azure Firewall Manager

Answer: B) – Deploy Azure Route Server and configure BGP peers with NVAs

Explanation

Azure Route Server enables NVAs to learn and advertise routes using BGP, eliminating manual route configuration. Option A, static routes, is prone to errors and does not scale for dynamic or hybrid environments. Option C, VNet peering with system routes, offers limited propagation and does not support bidirectional learning for NVAs. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, manages firewall policies but does not propagate routes. Route Server ensures consistent route distribution, reduces operational overhead, and supports large-scale deployments. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, configure route filters, and maintain compliance with corporate and regulatory standards. High availability ensures continuous propagation during failures. Dynamic routing maintains correct traffic flow through NVAs, supports segmentation, and reduces misconfiguration risks. NVAs are aware of reachable prefixes, Azure VNets automatically receive updates, and on-premises learned routes propagate efficiently. Route Server coexists with UDRs when configured with priorities, offering flexible route control. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices by supporting hybrid networks, centralized inspection, operational efficiency, and scalable automated routing. Organizations benefit from reduced errors, secure connectivity, and simplified operations.

Question 163:

Your organization requires that all outbound traffic from multiple VNets be inspected via hub NVAs and dynamically adapt to changes in on-premises network routes. Which architecture is recommended?

A) Deploy NVAs in each spoke with static routes
B) Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server
C) VNet peering using system routes only
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server

Explanation

Hub-and-spoke topology centralizes outbound traffic inspection through hub NVAs while preserving spoke isolation. NVAs monitor traffic for security, compliance, and operational purposes. Azure Route Server propagates routes dynamically via BGP between hub NVAs, Azure VNets, and on-premises networks, eliminating manual UDR updates. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling to ensure all traffic is inspected. Option A, NVAs in each spoke with static routes, increases operational complexity, cost, and lacks centralized monitoring. Option C, VNet peering using system routes, bypasses inspection and violates isolation. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provide connectivity but do not enforce inspection or routing policies. High availability is achieved using multiple NVAs and active-active VPN Gateways. Dynamic routing ensures adaptation to on-premises network changes, reducing errors and misconfiguration risks. Forced tunneling guarantees inspection of all egress traffic. Centralized inspection supports auditing, threat intelligence integration, and policy enforcement. This architecture aligns with AZ-700 best practices, providing operational efficiency, security, scalability, and centralized control, while new spokes can be added without manual route updates.

Question 164:

Your organization wants NVAs to automatically learn and advertise routes between Azure VNets and on-premises networks, reducing manual configuration. Which solution should you implement?

A) Configure static routes for NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP
C) VNet peering with system routes only
D) Manage routes through Azure Firewall Manager

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

Explanation

Azure Route Server enables NVAs to dynamically advertise learned routes and learn prefixes from Azure VNets using BGP. Static routes (Option A) are prone to human error, labor-intensive, and do not scale in dynamic hybrid environments. Option C, VNet peering with propagated system routes, provides limited propagation and does not support bidirectional learning for NVAs. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, manages firewall policies but does not propagate routes. Route Server reduces operational overhead, ensures routing consistency, and supports scalable deployments. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, configure route filters, and maintain compliance. High availability ensures continuous propagation during partial failures. Dynamic routing ensures correct traffic flow through NVAs, reduces misconfiguration risk, and maintains network segmentation. NVAs remain aware of reachable prefixes, Azure VNets receive updates automatically, and on-premises learned routes propagate efficiently. Route Server coexists with UDRs when priorities are configured, offering flexible route control. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices, supporting hybrid networks, centralized inspection, operational efficiency, and scalable network management. Organizations gain automated routing, reduced errors, secure connectivity, and simplified operational management.

Question 165:

Your organization requires centralized inspection of outbound traffic through NVAs while maintaining spoke isolation. Routes must dynamically adapt to on-premises network changes. Which architecture is optimal?

A) Deploy NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs
B) Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in the spokes
C) Peer VNets using system routes
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in the spokes

Explanation

Hub-and-spoke architecture centralizes outbound traffic inspection via hub NVAs while preserving spoke isolation. Azure Route Server dynamically propagates BGP routes between NVAs, Azure VNets, and on-premises networks, eliminating manual UDR updates. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling to ensure all traffic passes through hub NVAs for inspection, logging, threat monitoring, and regulatory compliance. Option A, NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs, increases operational complexity, cost, and reduces centralized monitoring. Option C, VNet peering using system routes, bypasses inspection and violates isolation. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provide connectivity but do not enforce security policies. High availability is achieved using multiple NVAs and active-active VPN Gateways. Administrators can monitor route propagation, BGP session health, and NVA performance to maintain operational efficiency and compliance. Forced tunneling guarantees inspection of all egress traffic, and BGP ensures dynamic adaptation to on-premises network changes. This architecture aligns with AZ-700 best practices, delivering secure, scalable, compliant, and operationally efficient multi-region deployments. New VNets can be added without modifying UDRs. Centralized inspection supports auditing, threat intelligence integration, policy enforcement, and regulatory compliance while providing centralized control, operational simplicity, and reduced management overhead.

Question 166:

Your organization wants all outbound traffic from multiple VNets to be inspected through centralized NVAs while maintaining spoke isolation. Routes must dynamically adapt to on-premises network changes. Which architecture is recommended?

A) Deploy NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs
B) Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, applying UDRs in spokes
C) Peer VNets using system routes
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, applying UDRs in spokes

Explanation

The hub-and-spoke topology centralizes outbound traffic inspection while maintaining isolation between spoke VNets. Hub NVAs inspect traffic for security, compliance, threat detection, and operational monitoring. Azure Route Server dynamically propagates BGP routes between NVAs, Azure VNets, and on-premises networks, eliminating manual configuration of UDRs. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling, ensuring that all traffic passes through the hub NVAs for inspection. Option A, deploying NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs, increases operational complexity, cost, and monitoring overhead. Option C, peering VNets using system routes, bypasses inspection and violates spoke isolation. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provide connectivity but do not enforce inspection or routing policies. High availability is achieved with active-active VPN Gateways and multiple NVAs. Dynamic routing ensures traffic adapts automatically to changes in on-premises networks, reducing misconfiguration risk. Centralized inspection supports auditing, threat intelligence integration, and policy enforcement. This design aligns with AZ-700 best practices, providing operational efficiency, centralized control, security, and scalability while allowing new spokes to be added without manual route updates.

Question 167:

Your organization requires NVAs to dynamically learn routes from on-premises networks and advertise them to Azure VNets automatically. Which solution should you implement?

A) Configure static routes for NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and configure BGP peers with NVAs
C) Use VNet peering with system routes
D) Use Azure Firewall Manager

Answer: B) – Deploy Azure Route Server and configure BGP peers with NVAs

Explanation

Azure Route Server allows NVAs to dynamically learn and advertise routes using BGP, removing the need for manual route configuration. Option A, static routes, is error-prone and not scalable for dynamic hybrid environments. Option C, VNet peering with system routes, offers limited propagation and does not support bidirectional learning for NVAs. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, manages firewall policies but does not propagate routes. Route Server ensures routing consistency, reduces operational overhead, and supports scalable deployments. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, apply route filters, and maintain compliance with corporate and regulatory standards. High availability ensures continuous propagation during failures. Dynamic routing ensures correct traffic flow through NVAs, supports proper network segmentation, and reduces misconfiguration risk. NVAs are aware of reachable prefixes, Azure VNets automatically receive updates, and on-premises learned routes propagate efficiently. Route Server coexists with UDRs when configured with priorities, offering flexible route control. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices, supporting hybrid networks, centralized inspection, operational efficiency, and scalable network management. Organizations gain automated routing, reduced errors, secure connectivity, and simplified operations.

Question 168:

Your organization deploys multiple VNets and requires centralized inspection of outbound traffic via NVAs while maintaining spoke isolation. Routes must dynamically reflect changes in on-premises networks. Which architecture is recommended?

A) Deploy NVAs in each spoke with static routes
B) Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in spokes
C) Peer VNets with propagated system routes
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in spokes

Explanation

Hub-and-spoke topology centralizes inspection through NVAs in the hub while preserving spoke isolation. NVAs monitor traffic for security, compliance, and operational needs. Azure Route Server dynamically propagates BGP routes between hub NVAs, Azure VNets, and on-premises networks, eliminating manual UDR configuration. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling to route all traffic through hub NVAs for inspection, logging, and compliance. Option A, NVAs in each spoke with static routes, increases complexity, operational overhead, and lacks centralized monitoring. Option C, VNet peering with system routes, bypasses inspection and compromises isolation. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provides connectivity but not inspection or routing enforcement. High availability is maintained using multiple NVA instances and active-active VPN Gateways. Dynamic routing allows automatic adaptation to on-premises network changes, reducing misconfiguration risks. Forced tunneling ensures inspection of all egress traffic. Centralized inspection supports auditing, threat intelligence integration, and policy enforcement. This architecture aligns with AZ-700 best practices by providing centralized control, operational efficiency, security, scalability, and simplified management while allowing new spokes to be added without manual UDR updates.

Question 169:

Your organization wants NVAs to automatically learn and advertise routes between Azure VNets and on-premises networks, reducing manual configuration. Which solution should you implement?

A) Configure static routes for NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP
C) Use VNet peering with propagated system routes only
D) Manage routes through Azure Firewall Manager

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

Explanation

Azure Route Server allows NVAs to dynamically advertise learned routes and learn prefixes from Azure VNets using BGP. Static routes (Option A) are error-prone, labor-intensive, and do not scale in hybrid environments. Option C, VNet peering with propagated system routes, provides limited propagation and does not enable bidirectional learning for NVAs. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, manages firewall policies but does not propagate routes. Route Server reduces operational overhead, ensures consistent routing, and supports scalable deployments. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, configure route filters, and maintain compliance. High availability ensures continuous route propagation during partial failures. Dynamic routing maintains correct traffic flow through NVAs, reduces misconfiguration risks, and maintains proper network segmentation. NVAs remain aware of reachable prefixes, Azure VNets receive updates automatically, and on-premises learned routes propagate efficiently. Route Server coexists with UDRs when configured with priorities, offering flexible route control. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices, supporting hybrid networks, centralized inspection, operational efficiency, and scalable network management. Organizations gain automated routing, reduced errors, secure connectivity, and simplified management.

Question 170:

Your organization requires centralized inspection of outbound traffic through NVAs while maintaining spoke isolation. Routes must dynamically adapt to on-premises network changes. Which architecture is optimal?

A) Deploy NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs
B) Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in the spokes
C) Peer VNets using system routes
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in the spokes

Explanation

Hub-and-spoke architecture centralizes outbound traffic inspection via NVAs in the hub while maintaining spoke isolation. Azure Route Server propagates BGP routes dynamically between NVAs, Azure VNets, and on-premises networks, removing manual UDR updates. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling, ensuring all traffic passes through hub NVAs for inspection, logging, threat monitoring, and compliance. Option A, NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs, increases operational complexity, cost, and reduces centralized monitoring. Option C, VNet peering using system routes, bypasses inspection and violates isolation. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provide connectivity but do not enforce security policies. High availability is achieved using multiple NVA instances and active-active VPN Gateways. Administrators can monitor route propagation, BGP session health, and NVA performance to maintain operational efficiency and compliance. Forced tunneling guarantees inspection of all egress traffic, and dynamic BGP routing ensures adaptation to on-premises network changes. This architecture aligns with AZ-700 best practices, delivering secure, scalable, compliant, and operationally efficient deployments. New VNets can be added without manual UDR updates. Centralized inspection supports auditing, threat intelligence integration, policy enforcement, and regulatory compliance while maintaining centralized control, operational simplicity, and reduced management overhead.

Question 171:

Your organization wants all outbound traffic from multiple VNets to be inspected through centralized NVAs while maintaining spoke isolation. Routes must automatically adapt to changes in on-premises networks. Which architecture is recommended?

A) Deploy NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs
B) Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, applying UDRs in spokes
C) Peer VNets using system routes
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, applying UDRs in spokes

Explanation

Hub-and-spoke architecture centralizes outbound traffic inspection while maintaining isolation between spoke VNets. Hub NVAs act as inspection points for security, compliance, logging, threat monitoring, and regulatory auditing. Azure Route Server uses BGP to dynamically propagate routes between NVAs, Azure VNets, and on-premises networks, eliminating the need for manual UDR updates. UDRs in spoke VNets enforce forced tunneling, ensuring all outbound traffic passes through hub NVAs for inspection and monitoring. Option A, deploying NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs, increases operational complexity, cost, and monitoring overhead while lacking centralized control. Option C, peering VNets with system routes, bypasses inspection and compromises spoke isolation. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provide connectivity but do not enforce inspection or routing policies. High availability is achieved with multiple NVAs and active-active VPN Gateways. Dynamic routing ensures automatic adaptation to on-premises network changes, reducing misconfiguration risks. Centralized inspection supports auditing, threat intelligence integration, and policy enforcement. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices by providing operational efficiency, centralized control, security, scalability, and the ability to add new spokes without manual route configuration.

Question 172:

Your organization requires NVAs to dynamically learn routes from on-premises networks and propagate them to Azure VNets automatically. Which solution should you implement?

A) Configure static routes for NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and configure BGP peers with NVAs
C) Use VNet peering with system routes
D) Use Azure Firewall Manager

Answer: B) – Deploy Azure Route Server and configure BGP peers with NVAs

Explanation

Azure Route Server enables NVAs to dynamically learn and advertise routes using BGP, removing the need for manual route configuration. Option A, static routes, is error-prone and difficult to scale for dynamic hybrid networks. Option C, VNet peering with system routes, provides limited propagation and does not enable bidirectional learning for NVAs. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, manages firewall policies but does not propagate BGP routes. Route Server ensures consistent route distribution, reduces operational overhead, and supports large-scale deployments. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, configure route filters, and maintain compliance with corporate and regulatory standards. High availability ensures continuous propagation even during partial failures. Dynamic routing guarantees correct traffic flow through NVAs, supports proper network segmentation, and reduces misconfiguration risk. NVAs are aware of reachable prefixes, Azure VNets automatically receive updates, and on-premises learned routes propagate efficiently. Route Server coexists with UDRs when priorities are configured, providing flexible route control. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices by supporting hybrid networks, centralized inspection, operational efficiency, and scalable network management. Organizations benefit from automated routing, reduced errors, secure connectivity, and simplified operational management.

Question 173:

Your organization deploys multiple VNets and requires centralized inspection of outbound traffic via NVAs while maintaining spoke isolation. Routes must dynamically adapt to on-premises network changes. Which architecture is recommended?

A) Deploy NVAs in each spoke with static routes
B) Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in spokes
C) Peer VNets with propagated system routes
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in spokes

Explanation

The hub-and-spoke topology centralizes inspection through NVAs in the hub while preserving spoke isolation. NVAs inspect traffic for security, compliance, logging, and operational monitoring. Azure Route Server dynamically propagates BGP routes between hub NVAs, Azure VNets, and on-premises networks, eliminating manual UDR configuration. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling to ensure all traffic passes through hub NVAs for inspection, monitoring, and compliance. Option A, NVAs in each spoke with static routes, increases operational complexity, cost, and lacks centralized monitoring. Option C, VNet peering with system routes, bypasses inspection and compromises isolation. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provide connectivity but do not enforce inspection or routing policies. High availability is maintained with multiple NVA instances and active-active VPN Gateways. Dynamic routing allows automatic adaptation to on-premises network changes, reducing misconfiguration risks. Forced tunneling ensures inspection of all egress traffic. Centralized inspection supports auditing, threat intelligence integration, and policy enforcement. This architecture aligns with AZ-700 best practices by providing centralized control, operational efficiency, security, scalability, and simplified management while allowing new spokes to be added without manual route updates.

Question 174:

Your organization wants NVAs to automatically learn and advertise routes between Azure VNets and on-premises networks, reducing manual configuration. Which solution should you implement?

A) Configure static routes for NVAs
B) Deploy Azure Route Server and peer NVAs using BGP
C) Use VNet peering with propagated system routes only
D) Manage routes through Azure Firewall Manager

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

Explanation

Azure Route Server enables NVAs to dynamically advertise learned routes and learn prefixes from Azure VNets using BGP. Static routes (Option A) are error-prone, labor-intensive, and do not scale in hybrid environments. Option C, VNet peering with propagated system routes, provides limited propagation and does not support bidirectional learning for NVAs. Option D, Azure Firewall Manager, manages firewall policies but does not propagate routes. Route Server reduces operational overhead, ensures routing consistency, and supports scalable deployments. Administrators can monitor BGP session health, configure route filters, and maintain compliance. High availability ensures continuous route propagation during failures. Dynamic routing maintains correct traffic flow through NVAs, reduces misconfiguration risk, and maintains proper network segmentation. NVAs remain aware of reachable prefixes, Azure VNets receive updates automatically, and on-premises learned routes propagate efficiently. Route Server coexists with UDRs when priorities are configured, offering flexible route control. This aligns with AZ-700 best practices, supporting hybrid networks, centralized inspection, operational efficiency, and scalable network management. Organizations benefit from automated routing, reduced errors, secure connectivity, and simplified operational management.

Question 175:

Your organization requires centralized inspection of outbound traffic through NVAs while maintaining spoke isolation. Routes must dynamically adapt to on-premises network changes. Which architecture is optimal?

A) Deploy NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs
B) Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in the spokes
C) Peer VNets using system routes
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server, using UDRs in the spokes

Explanation

Hub-and-spoke architecture centralizes outbound traffic inspection via NVAs in the hub while maintaining spoke isolation. Azure Route Server dynamically propagates BGP routes between NVAs, Azure VNets, and on-premises networks, eliminating manual UDR updates. UDRs in spokes enforce forced tunneling, ensuring all traffic passes through hub NVAs for inspection, logging, threat monitoring, and regulatory compliance. Option A, NVAs in each spoke with static UDRs, increases operational complexity, cost, and reduces centralized monitoring. Option C, VNet peering using system routes, bypasses inspection and violates isolation. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provide connectivity but do not enforce security policies. High availability is maintained using multiple NVAs and active-active VPN Gateways. Administrators can monitor route propagation, BGP session health, and NVA performance to maintain operational efficiency and compliance. Forced tunneling guarantees inspection of all egress traffic, and BGP ensures dynamic adaptation to on-premises network changes. This architecture aligns with AZ-700 best practices, delivering secure, scalable, compliant, and operationally efficient deployments. New VNets can be added without manual UDR updates. Centralized inspection supports auditing, threat intelligence integration, policy enforcement, and regulatory compliance while maintaining centralized control, operational simplicity, and reduced management overhead.

Question 176:

Your organization wants to allow direct VNet-to-VNet traffic between two VNets in the same region while minimizing latency and avoiding the use of NVAs. Which solution should you implement?

A) Deploy NVAs in both VNets
B) Use hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub
C) Peer the VNets with VNet peering
D) Use Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: C) – Peer the VNets with VNet peering

Explanation

VNet peering enables direct, high-speed connectivity between VNets in the same region (or across regions with Global VNet Peering) without the need for NVAs. It allows resources in one VNet to communicate with resources in another as if they are on the same network. Peering maintains low latency, high throughput, and uses Microsoft’s backbone infrastructure. Option A, deploying NVAs in both VNets, adds unnecessary cost and complexity for direct connectivity. Option B, hub-and-spoke with NVAs, is suitable for centralized inspection but is unnecessary when simple VNet-to-VNet communication is required. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, provide global connectivity but introduce more complexity and are designed for multiple branch-to-Azure connectivity, not simple VNet-to-VNet traffic. Peering automatically propagates routes between VNets (unless manually restricted with gateway transit or route filters). Security can still be enforced using Network Security Groups (NSGs) on subnets or NICs, while traffic flows directly across the Microsoft backbone with no extra hops. This aligns with AZ-700 objectives regarding connectivity optimization, cost efficiency, and minimal latency. Peering is highly available, supports both IPv4 and IPv6, and allows transitive routing through gateway transit if configured. Administrators can monitor traffic using Azure Network Watcher, ensuring visibility and performance monitoring.

Question 177:

You need to connect an on-premises network to multiple Azure VNets in different regions, while minimizing management overhead and enabling central security enforcement. Which solution is most appropriate?

A) Deploy site-to-site VPNs to each VNet individually
B) Use hub-and-spoke with NVAs and Azure Route Server
C) Deploy a single Virtual WAN hub and configure VPN connections to on-premises
D) Peer VNets directly and use local gateways

Answer: C) – Deploy a single Virtual WAN hub and configure VPN connections to on-premises

Explanation

Azure Virtual WAN provides a centralized hub for connecting multiple VNets and on-premises sites efficiently. By deploying a single Virtual WAN hub, organizations can simplify management, enforce central security policies (via Azure Firewall Manager if required), and scale connectivity without configuring multiple individual VPNs. Option A, deploying individual site-to-site VPNs to each VNet, increases operational complexity, management overhead, and troubleshooting effort. Option B, hub-and-spoke with NVAs and Route Server, is ideal for inspection but less optimized for global connectivity at scale. Option D, peering VNets and using local gateways, can work but requires manual route configuration and does not centralize traffic management. Virtual WAN supports automatic route propagation, transitive connectivity between VNets and branch locations, and enables integration with Azure Firewall or third-party NVAs for security enforcement. It also supports both static and dynamic routing and provides global reach using Microsoft’s backbone infrastructure. Monitoring and auditing are simplified using Network Watcher and Azure Monitor integration. This aligns with AZ-700 objectives around scalable hybrid connectivity, centralized security enforcement, and simplified management across multiple regions.

Question 178:

Your organization requires that only specific traffic from a VNet to on-premises passes through an NVA, while other traffic uses the default system routes. Which approach should you implement?

A) Configure User-Defined Routes (UDRs) with specific prefixes to direct traffic to the NVA
B) Enable Azure Route Server for all traffic
C) Use VNet peering with propagated system routes
D) Deploy Virtual WAN unsecured hubs

Answer: A) – Configure User-Defined Routes (UDRs) with specific prefixes to direct traffic to the NVA

Explanation

User-Defined Routes allow precise control over which traffic is routed through NVAs while leaving other traffic to follow default system routes. By defining specific address prefixes in a UDR and pointing them to the NVA’s IP as the next hop, only selected traffic is inspected or processed by the NVA. Option B, enabling Azure Route Server, propagates all routes dynamically but cannot restrict inspection to specific prefixes. Option C, VNet peering with system routes, does not provide granular control over which traffic passes through NVAs. Option D, unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, offer connectivity but not selective routing through inspection points. Using UDRs ensures operational flexibility, reduces unnecessary inspection costs, and enforces traffic policies on a per-prefix basis. Combined with NSGs or Azure Firewall policies, administrators can implement fine-grained security control. This approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices for designing selective inspection, efficient route management, and secure hybrid network connectivity. High availability and dynamic adaptation are maintained by configuring multiple NVA instances and failover routing if needed. Traffic monitoring is achieved through Network Watcher and flow logs, enabling auditing and compliance reporting.

Question 179:

Your organization wants all internet-bound traffic from VNets to pass through a cloud-based firewall for inspection, logging, and policy enforcement. Which solution is recommended?

A) Configure system default routes only
B) Deploy NVAs in each VNet
C) Implement forced tunneling with UDRs to Azure Firewall
D) Use Virtual WAN unsecured hubs without NVAs

Answer: C) – Implement forced tunneling with UDRs to Azure Firewall

Explanation

Forced tunneling with UDRs allows organizations to redirect all internet-bound traffic from VNets through Azure Firewall or third-party NVAs. By applying UDRs on subnets with the next hop pointing to the firewall, outbound traffic is inspected, logged, and subject to policy enforcement. Option A, using system default routes, sends traffic directly to the Internet, bypassing inspection. Option B, deploying NVAs in each VNet, increases operational overhead and complexity compared to a centralized firewall. Unsecured Virtual WAN hubs, as described in Option D, provide basic global connectivity but do not deliver the inspection, visibility, or policy enforcement required for enterprise-grade security. Without integrated security services, traffic flows between branches, VNets, and the internet without passing through a centralized inspection point. This exposes organizations to unmonitored traffic patterns, inconsistent policy application, and potential compliance violations. In contrast, architectures that enforce forced tunneling ensure that all outbound and inter-VNet traffic flows through a centralized firewall or NVA, allowing consistent enforcement of security rules regardless of the origin or destination of the traffic. Forced tunneling also ensures that administrators can maintain visibility into all egress traffic, apply filtering, and enforce both corporate and regulatory requirements.

When forced tunneling is combined with dynamic route propagation through Azure Route Server or VNet peering, the environment gains both security and flexibility. Route Server ensures that NVAs remain aware of all reachable prefixes, including those learned from on-premises via BGP. This creates an adaptive routing environment in which new VNets, subnets, or hybrid connections automatically propagate their routes through the system. Administrators do not need to manually maintain large sets of UDRs, reducing human error and simplifying long-term management. This is especially beneficial in organizations with frequent network expansions or hybrid designs using SD-WAN appliances.

High availability is another critical component of secure and scalable Azure network design. Deploying multiple firewall instances in an active-active configuration ensures that inspection continues even if one appliance fails or becomes unreachable. BGP convergence and dynamic routing allow traffic to automatically reroute to the remaining active appliance without interruption. This is a substantial improvement over static routing models, where failover may require manual intervention or scripted logic.

Centralized monitoring tools such as Azure Monitor, NSG flow logs, Azure Firewall logs, and traffic analytics provide administrators with detailed visibility into traffic flows, anomalies, and security events. These insights support auditing efforts, regulatory compliance, forensic investigations, and capacity planning. Organizations gain a unified view of network activity rather than fragmented datasets from individual VNets or appliances. This level of observability is essential for meeting AZ-700 design principles, which emphasize secure connectivity, centralized inspection, and operational efficiency.

Overall, this approach aligns with AZ-700 best practices because it ensures centralized egress inspection, dynamic routing, consistent policy application, high availability, and scalable management across large environments. By combining forced tunneling, NVAs or Azure Firewall, Azure Route Server, and comprehensive monitoring, organizations achieve a robust security posture while maintaining agility and performance.

Key supporting points
• Centralized inspection ensures consistent security enforcement
• Forced tunneling enables logging, threat detection, and compliance
• Dynamic routes propagate automatically through Azure Route Server
• High availability through active-active NVAs improves resiliency
• Administrators gain full visibility using Azure Monitor and flow logs
• Reduces manual work by eliminating static routing updates
• Enhances scalability for large hub-and-spoke or multi-region designs
• Meets AZ-700 objectives for secure, efficient, and compliant architectures

Question 180:

Your organization wants VNets in different regions to communicate securely while enforcing centralized inspection of traffic. Which design is most suitable?

A) VNet peering between all VNets without inspection
B) Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server for dynamic route propagation
C) Direct site-to-site VPNs between VNets
D) Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs without NVAs

Answer: B) – Hub-and-spoke with NVAs in the hub and Azure Route Server for dynamic route propagation

Explanation

For secure inter-VNet communication across regions while enforcing centralized traffic inspection, a hub-and-spoke design with NVAs in the hub is ideal. Azure Route Server enables dynamic BGP route propagation between the hub NVAs, VNets, and on-premises networks. This ensures traffic is inspected, logged, and policy-compliant without manual route updates. Option A, peering all VNets without inspection, allows connectivity but bypasses centralized security controls. Option C, direct site-to-site VPNs between VNets, is operationally complex, difficult to scale, and lacks centralized inspection. Option D, Virtual WAN unsecured hubs, provides connectivity but not enforced inspection. Using hub-and-spoke reduces complexity, centralizes security enforcement, supports scalability, and ensures compliance. Administrators can monitor traffic flow, NVA performance, and BGP propagation using Azure Monitor and Network Watcher. Forced tunneling ensures all relevant traffic is inspected, and high availability is maintained through multiple NVAs and active-active configurations. This aligns with AZ-700 best practices for designing secure, centralized, scalable multi-region VNet connectivity with traffic inspection and dynamic routing.

Option B, the hub-and-spoke architecture with NVAs placed in the hub and Azure Route Server providing dynamic route propagation, is the most scalable and operationally efficient design for enterprise networks that require centralized inspection, hybrid connectivity, and dynamic routing updates. By deploying NVAs in the hub, all spoke VNets benefit from a shared security and inspection layer without needing dedicated appliances in every VNet. This reduces cost, simplifies management, and ensures consistent enforcement of security policies. Azure Route Server enhances this architecture by allowing NVAs to exchange routes dynamically using BGP, improving routing accuracy and eliminating the need for manual User-Defined Route updates. This ensures smooth routing convergence when network changes occur, whether in Azure or on-premises.

In hybrid environments where connectivity relies on VPN or ExpressRoute, Azure Route Server enables NVAs to automatically learn new prefixes from the datacenter. This ensures that the inspection layer always understands the full topology and can forward traffic appropriately. Likewise, Azure Route Server advertises Azure VNet routes back to the NVAs, allowing them to maintain real-time awareness of the entire environment. This bidirectional learning capability is essential for environments with dynamic workloads, multi-region deployments, or SD-WAN architectures where routing paths may change frequently.

The hub-and-spoke model also supports strong segmentation. Spokes remain isolated, while traffic routing through the hub ensures consistent inspection and monitoring. Because all flows pass through a central NVA cluster, organizations maintain visibility into east-west and north-south communication patterns. This visibility is crucial for compliance, incident response, and threat detection. The architecture supports scalability because new VNets can be added as spokes without redesigning the routing layer. As long as they are peered to the hub, they automatically benefit from the existing NVAs and Route Server setup.

Key points for Option B
• Centralizes all inspection and security enforcement in the hub
• Reduces operational overhead by avoiding NVAs in each spoke VNet
• Enables dynamic routing using Azure Route Server and BGP
• Automatically learns on-premises routes via VPN or ExpressRoute
• Ensures NVAs always have current routing information
• Allows Azure VNets to receive routing updates without manual UDR changes
• Supports large-scale hybrid and multi-region deployments
• Improves failover through BGP convergence when NVAs become unavailable
• Simplifies troubleshooting by centralizing routing and inspection paths
• Enhances security by keeping workload segmentation intact

Option A, VNet peering between all VNets without inspection, fails to provide security governance or centralized control. Traffic flows freely, bypassing inspection and making it unsuitable for enterprise-grade environments. This option introduces risk by allowing unrestricted east-west communication and offers no routing intelligence beyond what Azure provides by default.

Key limitations of Option A
• No centralized inspection
• No traffic filtering or monitoring
• Poor segmentation
• Not suitable for regulated environments

Option C, direct site-to-site VPNs between VNets, introduces unnecessary complexity and does not follow a scalable architecture. Managing multiple S2S tunnels leads to operational burden and routing inconsistencies. It also provides no centralized security enforcement and becomes difficult to maintain as the environment expands.

Key limitations of Option C
• Complex to configure and maintain
• Hard to scale beyond a few VNets
• No shared inspection layer
• Redundant tunnels increase cost and overhead

Option D, Azure Virtual WAN unsecured hubs, provides connectivity but no centralized security or inspection. Unsecured hubs do not integrate NVAs or Azure Firewall, making them insufficient for organizations that need traffic inspection, segmentation, and compliance controls.

Key limitations of Option D
• No integrated NVAs
• No security inspection capability
• Not suitable for enterprise security standards