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

Nutanix performance troubleshooting guidelines highlight CPU Ready Time as a key indicator of CPU contention. The documentation explains:

“High CPU Ready Time indicates that vCPUs are waiting to be scheduled on physical cores due to host CPU saturation or CPU overcommitment.”

CPU Ready Time doesnotrelate to storage issues or CVM sizing. Instead, it indicates that the hypervisor cannot schedule VM CPU operations promptly.

Internal extracts clearly describe the next diagnostic step:

“When CPU ready metrics rise, the first step is to check physical host CPU utilization to confirm whether the host is oversubscribed or running at high CPU usage.”

If the host is overloaded, remediation includes distributing VMs across hosts, reducing vCPU count on oversized VMs, or adding compute resources.

Other options are irrelevant:

Memory oversubscription is unrelated to CPU Ready Time.

SSD capacity affects storage latency, not CPU scheduling.

CVM CPU counts do not cause VM CPU Ready Time; CVM resource misconfiguration affects cluster services, not guest VM scheduling.

Thus, reviewing host CPU utilization is the correct next step.

TheBully VMs List (Option C)in Prism Central’sIntelligent OperationsidentifiesVMs consuming excessive CPU, memory, or storage, which negatively affects other VMs.

Option A (Inactive VMs List)is used foridentifying unused VMsbut does not detect performance issues.

Option B (Overprovisioned VMs List)helps identifyVMs with excessive allocated resources, but it does not focus on live performance impact.

Option D (Constrained VMs List)highlightsVMs suffering from resource contention, not those causing it.

Duringfailover in Nutanix Disaster Recovery, VMs retain theirstatic IPsbut maylose DNS settingsif the network configuration at the DR site is different from the primary site.

Option B (Create custom in-guest scripts) is correct:

Custom scriptsallowWindows or Linux VMs to restore DNS settings automaticallyafter failover.

These scripts can be executed usingpost-failover automationin Nutanix DR policies.

Option A (Self-Service Restore) is incorrect:

Self-Service Restore is used forend-user recovery of deleted files, not for network settings.

Option C (nncli tool) is incorrect:

Thenncli toolis used fornetwork troubleshooting, but it does not automatically restore DNS settings.

Option D (Configure a Protection Domain) is incorrect:

Protection Domains definereplication policies, but they do not fix DNS settings after failover.

For NutanixDisaster Recovery (DR) protection policies, thefirst stepis to establish a connection between theProduction cluster and the DR site, which is done by creating anAvailability Zone (AZ) (Option B).

Availability Zones (AZs) define remote sites for replicationand are a requirement for configuring protection domains and disaster recovery plans.

Option A (Installing NGT)is not necessary for setting up replication but is useful for application-consistent snapshots.

Option C (Converting the source cluster to AHV)is not required, as Nutanix supports cross-hypervisor DR betweenESXi and AHV.

Option D (Creating a point-in-time snapshot)is a later step after setting up theAvailability Zone and Protection Policy.

When configuring application-consistent snapshots in a Nutanix protection domain for applications such as SQL, Oracle, and Exchange, it is critical to group all related VMs in the same consistency group within the protection domain. This ensures that the snapshot captures a consistent state of the entire application stack.

From theNutanix Enterprise Cloud Administration (ECA)course materials:

“A consistency group ensures that snapshots across multiple VMs are taken at the same time, maintaining application consistency for distributed applications. This is especially important for multi-tiered applications like SQL, Oracle, and Exchange, where data integrity depends on coordinated snapshot creation.”

Additionally:

“For application-consistent snapshots, leverage guest tools or volume shadow copy services (VSS) in Windows to quiesce applications, and configure the consistency group to include all relevant VMs.”

By creating one consistency group for all VMs comprising an application, the administrator ensures that snapshots represent a consistent state across the application components.

The test_esx_entering_mm_pinned_vms check in an AOS upgrade validates whether there are any pinned VMs on ESXi hosts, which could prevent host maintenance mode transitions.

From theNutanix Enterprise Cloud Administration (ECA)course materials:

“Affinity or anti-affinity rules that pin VMs to specific hosts prevent those VMs from migrating during host maintenance mode entry. This directly triggers a failure in the LCM precheck test_esx_entering_mm_pinned_vms check.”

When the maximum instance count of retained reports is reached, Nutanix automatically deletes the oldest report to accommodate the new one.

From theNutanix Enterprise Cloud Administration (ECA)course materials:

“To ensure storage and performance efficiency, Nutanix reporting limits the number of stored reports. If this maximum is reached, the oldest report instance is automatically deleted to make space for new reports.”

Capacity Runway analytics in Prism Central rely on historical usage data to generate forward-looking projections. Nutanix documentation specifies:

“Capacity runway forecasts require a minimum of 30 days of historical utilization data to build growth rate baselines and trending models.”

The modeling engine uses CPU, memory, and storage trends over time to estimate depletion dates. Insufficient historical data prevents generating meaningful predictions.

Prism Central will display “Not enough data” or simply omit runway metrics until the minimum time window is met.

The 21-day threshold applies to anomaly detection, not runway calculations.

The 3-month and 6-month options refer to optimal historical windows for accuracy but are not required.

Thus, the correct requirement is 30 days of history.

CPU Ready Time indicates how long a VM waits for CPU resources due to contention.

Option B (Review host CPU utilization) is correct:

IfCPU utilization is high, there may beexcessive CPU overcommitment, leading to high CPU Ready Time.

Adding more hostsorreducing vCPU allocationsmay resolve the issue.

Option A (Check CVM vCPUs) is incorrect:

The Controller VM (CVM)does not directly impact application VM performancein this case.

Option C (Assess SSD capacity) is incorrect:

CPU Ready Time is unrelated to storage performance.

Option D (Enable VM memory oversubscription) is incorrect:

Memory oversubscription does not affect CPU contention.

A cluster runway below 365 days does not necessarily indicate an issue if Intelligent Operations determines that workloads are sustainable.

Option B (Because new workloads are sustainable) is correct:

Nutanixanalyzes resource trendsand marks clusters as healthyif new workloads are within projected capacity.

Option A (Storage Runway is still good) is incorrect:

Storage isone component, butCPU and memoryalso affect runway calculations.

Option C (Recommended resources) is incorrect:

Recommendations help optimize capacity, butdo not define cluster health.

Option D (Target is 1 month) is incorrect:

The scenario’s target window does not impact the actual runway calculation.

To create a custom Intelligent Operations report and run it across multiple Prism Central instances, administrators must export the report configuration from one Prism Central instance and then import it into the others. This process leverages the .rpt file format, which encapsulates the report’s configuration details, including data sources, visualization preferences, and thresholds.

From theNutanix Enterprise Cloud Administration (ECA)course materials:

“Administrators can create custom Intelligent Operations reports in Prism Central and export the configuration as a .rpt file. This exported file can then be imported into other Prism Central instances, ensuring consistency across environments without requiring manual recreation of the report’s details.”

Additionally:

“The export/import feature for reports ensures that custom dashboards and reports can be easily migrated or replicated across multiple Prism Central instances, enabling a standardized approach to monitoring and analytics in a multicloud environment.”

This clearly indicates that the recommended and supported method for sharing or replicating custom reports across multiple Prism Central instances is by exporting and importing the report configurations in .rpt format. This approach avoids the need for manual recreation and ensures that the reports maintain their intended configuration and layout across different instances.

Entity Charts in Nutanix Prism Central allow multiple metrics from a single entity (e.g., VM, storage container) to be displayed on a single graph.

Option B (Entity Chart) is correct:

This allows the administrator totrack multiple performance metrics(e.g., read/write bandwidth, IOPS) for aspecific VM.

Option A (Metric Chart) is incorrect:

Metric Charts track a single metric across multiple entities, which does not meet the requirement ofdisplaying multiple metrics for a single VM.

Option C (Hypervisor Performance Chart) is incorrect:

Hypervisor Performance Chartstrack host-level metrics, notVM-specific bandwidth metrics.

Option D (VM Summary Chart) is incorrect:

VM Summary Chartsonly provide an overviewand do not supportcustom multi-metric tracking.

Nutanix Capacity Planning and Runway calculations analyze CPU, memory, and storage growth trends independently. The “Overall Runway” metric reflects the shortest runway across these three resources. The Capacity Planning documentation explains that “the scenario result may show the cluster in a healthy state if the most critical resource remains sufficiently available, even when the overall runway falls below longer-term thresholds.”

Storage is often the dominant factor in determining long-term viability. If the storage runway remains strong, the system may indicate that the environment is in good shape even though the overall runway appears shorter due to CPU or memory projections. Because the question refers to the scenario still indicating a good cluster state, the most accurate interpretation is that storage runway remains healthy, and thus the system does not consider the cluster at risk.

For Disaster Recovery to function correctly, the source and destination storage containers must have identical names.

Option C (Storage container name mismatch) is correct:

If thestorage container name at the DR site does not match, Nutanix cannot mapsnapshots and replication data.

This causesfailover operations to fail, even though data exists.

Option A (NGT not installed) is incorrect:

NGT is needed for application-consistent snapshots, butnot required for crash-consistent snapshots.

Option B (Windows updates) is incorrect:

OS updates do not affect replication availability.

Option D (Storage RF factor mismatch) is incorrect:

Replication works across different RF factors, but performance may vary.

Nutanix Application Discovery relies on a combination of Prism Central services and in-guest sensors that collect application metadata, communication patterns, and dependency maps. The internal documentation lists these specific prerequisites before Application Discovery can be enabled:

“Prism Central must have access to the Internet for sensor downloads, signature updates, and metadata service communication.”Application Discovery uses cloud-based metadata to identify applications and services. Without Internet access, Prism Central cannot retrieve application profiles, updated signatures, and dependency mapping definitions.

“The Network Controller service must be enabled to allow flow-level inspection and communication tracking between VMs.”Application Discovery integrates directly with Nutanix Flow’s Network Controller to observe traffic flows, which is required for dependency mapping. Without Network Controller enabled, Prism Central cannot monitor or analyze traffic between workloads.

The documentation clarifies that generating API keys is not required to activate Application Discovery, and sufficient Prism Central resources are already assumed as stated in the question.

Therefore, the required prerequisites are Internet connectivity and enabling the Network Controller.

When synchronous replication fails immediately between two clusters, it is often due to blocked communication across the required ports (2009 and 2020). These must be open manually if the clusters are in different subnets or if network policies block traffic.

From theNutanix Enterprise Cloud Administration (ECA)course materials:

“Replication communication relies on specific ports, which must be allowed through the firewall. If the clusters are in different subnets or if there are external firewalls, these ports must be explicitly opened.”

“The modify_firewall command is used to open or close ports on cluster nodes. For replication and remote site communication, eth1 is typically used for external replication traffic.”

Since eth1 is typically used for external connectivity and replication traffic, opening ports on this interface using modify_firewall resolves the communication block.

The NCC alert indicates connectivity failure to the remote site. Resolving this involves confirming network connectivity and re-establishing the remote site configuration if necessary.

From theNutanix Enterprise Cloud Administration (ECA)course materials:

“The primary ports used for replication between clusters are 2009 (for Prism Element API) and 2020 (for data replication). Ensuring these ports are open and reachable is critical for remote site connectivity.”

Also:

“If the remote site has been re-imaged or reconfigured, it may have a new cluster incarnation ID. In such cases, the remote site configuration must be recreated to align with the current cluster information.”

Steps like checking ping with MTU 9000 (D) are not directly related to remote site connectivity for replication, and NAT configurations (B) are generally not recommended unless explicitly required.

Scale-out Prism Central deployments consist of multiple nodes running the Prism Central service. Nutanix documentation emphasizes that:

“When deploying multi-node Prism Central, an FQDN backed by DNS can provide request distribution across all Prism Central nodes, enabling load balancing and increased concurrency.”

A Virtual IP in contrast only directs traffic to a single active Prism Central node. Internal behavior notes:

“A VIP is not active-active; it designates one node as primary for all inbound requests.”

“Using an FQDN with DNS round-robin or an external load balancer allows the cluster to distribute workload across all PC nodes.”

The FQDN allows:

distributing API/UI traffic across multiple Prism Central nodes

improving performance under heavy load

enabling parallel query handling

avoiding bottlenecks on the primary node

SSL certificates apply to either VIP or FQDN. Segmentation and resiliency are unrelated to FQDN usage.

Thus, the correct answer is Load Balancing.

Active-Active bonding allows multiple network interfaces to be used simultaneously, improving bandwidth and redundancy.

Option B (Active-Active) is correct:

This mode enablesload balancing across all available adapters, providinghigher throughput and fault tolerance.

Option A (No Uplink Bond) is incorrect:

Without a bond, VMscannot benefit from multiple adapters.

Option C (Active-Active with MAC pinning) is incorrect:

MAC pinningbinds traffic to a single NIC, limiting bandwidth distribution.

Option D (Active-Backup) is incorrect:

This modeonly provides failover, not increased bandwidth.

Nutanix LCM architecture supports firmware, BIOS, BMC, disk controller, and drive updates only when the environment includes multiple nodes that can provide redundancy during the upgrade process. The LCM documentation specifies that firmware upgrades require node evacuation and rolling upgrade sequencing so that workloads remain available. A single-node cluster does not have node-level redundancy and therefore cannot support firmware upgrade operations that require putting a node into maintenance automatically. The guidance clearly states that “firmware upgrades are not supported for single-node clusters because the host cannot be safely placed into a maintenance mode during the LCM workflow.” LCM is supported for software inventory, but not for firmware activation on single-node clusters. This explains why no firmware updates appear in the LCM interface.

Protection Domains (PDs) in Nutanix ensure that entire applications and their associated data are protected during failover.However,Volume Groups (VGs) are not automatically includedunless explicitly configured.

Option A (Select "Auto protect related entities") is correct:

This setting ensures thatassociated Volume Groups, networks, and other dependencies are included in the Protection Domainautomatically.

Without enabling this, only the VM itself would be protected, leading tomissing application data upon failover.

Option B (Manually add Volume Groups to Protected Entities) is correct:

If"Auto protect related entities" is not enabled, the administrator mustmanually add Volume Groups to the Protection Domain.

This ensures that bothVMs and their attached Volume Groupsare replicated and recovered together.

Option C (Place Volume Groups in a separate Protection Domain) is incorrect:

Separating Volume Groups into a different PDdoes not guarantee they failover together with VMs.

It is best practice tokeep related VMs and Volume Groups in the same PD.

Option D (Use application-consistent snapshots) is incorrect:

Whileapplication-consistent snapshots improve data integrity, theydo not fix missing Volume Groups in failover scenarios.

The requirement states:

• Custom apps use Volume Groups

• VM + VG must remain consistent together

• Lowest possible RPO is required (RPO → 0)

• Must survive cluster failure

Nutanix data protection documentation clearly states:

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

Additionally:

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

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

Option analysis:

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

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

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

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

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

Storage Policies in Nutanix are applied through Categories, allowing policy-based automation and enforcement.

Option D (Assign the VM or VG to the same Category as the Storage Policy) is correct:

Nutanixapplies Storage Policies based on VM Categories, enablingflexibility in policy enforcement.

Option A is incorrect:

Storage Policies are not directly assigned at the VM or VG level—they apply through Categories.

Option B is incorrect:

Policies must be assigned toCategories, not directly to individual VMs/VGs.

Option C is incorrect:

Migrating to a storage container does not automatically apply a Storage Policy.

Data-in-Transit Encryption for Prism Central and CVMs requires specific internal communication ports to be open. Nutanix internal component documentation states:

“Port 2020 is used by the Nutanix encryption service for encrypted CVM-to-CVM communication during Data-in-Transit Encryption operations.”

This port is essential for establishing secure tunnels between control-plane services. Ports 2009 and 2010 are used by other CVM services (e.g., Stargate, Curator coordination) but not for transport encryption. Port 9440 is for Prism UI/API traffic, and while it must be accessible for management, it does not enable encrypted back-end service traffic.

Thus, the administrator must ensure that port 2020 is permitted to enable Data-in-Transit Encryption functionality.

Reserved Capacity settings define how much storage is exclusively allocated for a specific container.

Option B (Reserved Capacity is too high) is correct:

If too much space is reserved for a container, it can report "out of space" while the cluster still has free capacity.

Options A, C, and D are incorrect:

Advertised Capacity, Compression, and RF settings do not directly cause storage exhaustion unless misconfigured with Reserved Capacity.

The Intelligent Operations and Analysis Dashboard in Prism Central supports generating ad-hoc reports. These reports are temporary artifacts and are not designed for long-term storage. Internal documentation states, “Generated reports are retained for 24 hours and then automatically purged by the system to prevent report accumulation and data bloat.” This automatic cleanup is part of the reporting subsystem and applies regardless of user role or storage location. The reports are not stored in Prism Element, nor are they archived automatically. Therefore, after the 24-hour retention window, the system removes them, explaining why the user could not find the previously generated report.

Nutanix documentation explains that Reserved Capacity for a storage container allocates a guaranteed amount of physical space exclusively for that container. The internal description is:

“Reserved Capacity is space carved out from the storage pool for guaranteed use by a container. When a container’s reserved allocation approaches exhaustion, alerts are raised even if the overall cluster has ample free space.”

This means that although the physical cluster capacity may be sufficient, the container itself may hit its reserved limit, triggering an out-of-space forecast. Advertised Capacity determines an upper usage limit but does not produce this behavior. Replication Factor affects total usage but cannot explain container-only exhaustion when the cluster is fine. Compression levels influence data reduction but not capacity alerting mechanisms.

Thus, an oversized Reserved Capacity value is responsible for the alert.

Nutanix AHV networking supports multiple bond types that determine how traffic is distributed across physical NICs. The detailed guidance in the AHV networking section states:

“Active-Active bonding provides load distribution of outbound traffic across all interfaces in the bond, allowing aggregate throughput beyond a single physical adapter.”

Active-backup keeps only one NIC active at a time and provides no throughput gain. Active-Active with MAC pinning distributes VMs across NICs but does not aggregate the total throughput for a single VM and is typically used with switch-independent designs.

Because the requirement is to “take advantage of bandwidth beyond a single adapter,” only the standard Active-Active bond type satisfies this, as it truly aggregates available bandwidth.

Therefore, the correct bond type is Active-Active.

The Nutanix data protection guide specifies that NearSync replication provides an RPO between 1 and 15 minutes, which is the lowest RPO available for standard asynchronous-based replication models. The documentation further states that NearSync is the supported method for achieving sub-hour RPO on one- and two-node clusters. Asynchronous replication has a minimum RPO of 60 minutes and therefore cannot be used for lowest RPO requirements. While scheduling intervals such as 1–15 minutes appear similar, Nutanix notes that these intervals are only achievable under the NearSync replication mode. Therefore, selecting NearSync is the required configuration to meet the goal of achieving the lowest RPO.

Nutanix documentation for Cross-Hypervisor Disaster Recovery (CH-DR) specifies that Nutanix Guest Tools (NGT) must be installed on all VMs participating in ESXi to AHV recovery workflows. NGT includes the VM Mobility Drivers, which are required for the VM to interpret AHV device models, storage controllers, and network adapters during recovery. The documentation notes that without NGT installed, VMs may fail to boot or attach devices correctly after being recovered on AHV. Legacy BIOS, RDMs, and delta disks are not listed as prerequisites or contributing factors for CH-DR success. Therefore, installing Nutanix Guest Tools on the source VM is mandatory for successful cross-hypervisor recovery.

Nutanix Multicloud Infrastructure documentation explains that Recovery Plans and Protection Policies are designed to scale using Categories rather than per-VM assignments. Categories provide metadata that allows grouping of VMs by purpose, business unit, application tiers, boot order, and network requirements. The documentation states that Recovery Plans "consume categories so that VMs matching those categories are automatically included in the DR workflow." Categories also allow automatic updates so that when a VM is added, removed, or changed, the DR plan does not require modification. This method is specifically recommended for environments with numerous workloads and variable application tiers. Scripts, naming conventions, and static ratios do not provide the dynamic grouping and automation that categories provide.

The Nutanix ECA course covers the use of Playbooks in Prism Central to automate responses to specific events or conditions, such as VM protection failures. The task requires creating an alert for VMs in theCriticalApps:Alertscategory when a VM Protection Failed Alert is triggered, with notifications sent to on-call personnel.

Extract from Nutanix Enterprise Cloud Administration (ECA) Course Documents:

Module: Automation, Section: Playbooks"Playbooks in Prism Central can be configured with an Alert Matching Criteria trigger to respond to specific alerts, such as VM protection failures. This trigger allows filtering by entity categories, ensuring the Playbook only acts on VMs matching the specified category, and can send notifications to designated personnel."

Module: Intelligent Operations, Section: Alert Management"To create an alert for specific VMs based on a category, use a Playbook with an Alert Matching Criteria trigger. This allows precise targeting of alerts (e.g., VM Protection Failed) for VMs in a category like CriticalApps:Alerts, with actions such as sending email notifications to on-call teams."

Explanation of Options:

A. Create a Playbook with a Manual triggerThis is incorrect. A Manual trigger requires an administrator to manually initiate the Playbook, which does not meet the requirement for automatic alerting when a VM Protection Failed Alert is triggered. The ECA course states:"Manual triggers are used for ad-hoc Playbook execution, not for automated responses to alerts."

B. Create a Playbook with an Alert Matching Criteria triggerThis is the correct answer. An Alert Matching Criteria trigger allows the Playbook to respond automatically to specific alerts, such as VM Protection Failed, and can be filtered to apply only to VMs in theCriticalApps:Alertscategory. The Playbook can then execute an action, such as sending an email notification to on-call personnel. The ECA course highlights this as the most precise method for alert-based automation.

Supporting Extract:"The Alert Matching Criteria trigger enables Playbooks to filter alerts by type and entity category, ensuring targeted responses, such as notifying on-call personnel for VM protection failures in specific categories."

C. Create a Playbook with an Event-based triggerThis is incorrect. Event-based triggers respond to system events (e.g., VM power-on or cluster events) rather than specific alerts like VM Protection Failed. They are less precise for this use case, as they do not allow filtering by alert type or category. The ECA course notes:"Event-based triggers are suited for general system events, not for targeted alert responses like VM protection failures."

D. Create a Playbook with an Alert-based triggerThis is incorrect. The term “Alert-based trigger” is not a standard option in Nutanix Playbooks. The correct terminology isAlert Matching Criteria trigger, which is specifically designed for alert-driven automation. The ECA course does not reference a generic “Alert-based trigger” option.

Additional Context from ECA:

Playbook Configuration: In Prism Central, a Playbook is created underOperations > Playbooks > Create Playbook. Select theAlert Matching Criteriatrigger, specify theVM Protection Failedalert, and filter by theCriticalApps:Alertscategory. Add an action to send an email notification to the on-call team.

Category Filtering: Categories (e.g., CriticalApps:Alerts) are key-value pairs assigned to VMs for organization and policy enforcement, making them ideal for targeting specific VMs in Playbooks.

Supporting Reference from Web Results:

The Nutanix Bible (https://www.nutanix.com/go/the-nutanix-bible) supports: "Playbooks with Alert Matching Criteria triggers allow precise automation for alerts, such as VM protection failures, filtered by VM categories, with actions like sending notifications."