VMware 3V0-24.25 Dumps

cert-manager addresses the operational risk described (manual creation/renewal causing outages) by making certificate lifecycle management anative, declarative Kubernetes workflow. Instead of treating TLS certificates as manually managed files, cert-manager extends the Kubernetes API with custom resources such asCertificate,Issuer, andClusterIssuer, so certificates and their issuing policies become first-class objects that can be version-controlled and automatically reconciled. This directly satisfies the requirement to usetrusted certificates issued through the corporate CA, because an Issuer/ClusterIssuer can represent that corporate CA integration and define how certificate requests are fulfilled. Once configured, cert-manager continuously monitors certificate validity andautomatically renews and rotatescertificates before expiration, then updates the referenced Kubernetes Secrets so Ingress endpoints remain protected without human intervention. In a vSphere Supervisor / VKS environment, VMware also uses cert-manager on the Supervisor for automated certificate rotation in platform integrations (for example, rotating certificates used by monitoring components), reinforcing the model of automated rotation rather than manual certificate handling.

In a vSphere Kubernetes Service (VKS) environment, resource management follows aDeclarative Model. When an administrator uses kubectl edit deployment to manually scale a running workload from 5 to 10 replicas, they are modifying thelive stateof the deployment. However, thesource of truthfor a Tanzu Kubernetes cluster in VCF 9.0 is theCluster YAML specificationmaintained by the Cluster API (CAPI) provider within the Supervisor.

If the administrator redeploys the cluster or if the Supervisor’s controller performs a reconciliation loop, it refers back to the original configuration file. If that cluster YAML file still defines the replica count as 5, the Supervisor will terminate the 5 "extra" pods to match the desired state defined in the configuration. This is a common administrative pitfall; for changes to be persistent across redeployments or updates in VCF 9.0, the underlying manifest (the "Desired State") must be updated. Manually editing the live object only provides a temporary change that will be overwritten during the next synchronization or lifecycle event because the cluster YAML file was not updated to reflect the requested increase.

VCF 9.0 describesCloud Native Storage (CNS) on vCenteras the component that implements “provisioning and lifecycle operations for persistent volumes.” When provisioning persistent volumes, CNS “interacts with the vSphere First Class Disk functionality to create virtual disks that back the volumes,” and it “communicates with Storage Policy Based Management to guarantee a required level of service to the disks.” This is exactly the storage-policy-to-backed-virtual-disk relationship the question is testing: storage policies (via policy-based management) define requirements, and CNS is the vCenter-side service that applies those requirements while creating and managing the backing storage objects.

In contrast,CSI(including Supervisor CNS-CSI and VKS pvCSI) is the Kubernetes-facing interface/driver used to request and consume storage, but it does not “provide” the vSphere storage policy system; rather, it relies on CNS/CNS-CSI and vCenter services to fulfill provisioning requests. Therefore,vSphere Cloud Native Storage (CNS)is the correct choice.

VCF 9.0 documentation explicitly indicates thatvCenter upgrades and the Supervisor/cluster (Workload Management) upgrade are distinct, noting that “if you have only upgraded vCenter and not the cluster” then DevOps engineers have reduced permissions until the cluster is upgraded. This supports the stated standard that VKS/Workload Management lifecycle can be treated separately from vCenter. For the private registry requirement, VCF 9.0 provides an operational mechanism to authenticate and pull artifacts from private registries: “Registry secrets allow package and repository consumers to authenticate to and pull images from private registries,” implemented via a standard Kubernetes Secret of type kubernetes.io/dockerconfigjson.

Taken together, the standard implies (1)asynchronoushandling (separate lifecycle from vCenter) and (2)privatesourcing (images pulled from an internal registry with registry secrets). Therefore, selectingAsynchronous Privatebest matches both requirements in a single configuration choice, aligning with the documented separation of upgrades and the documented need to use authenticated access to private registries.

VCF 9.0 explicitly lists thecomponents that run in a VKS clusterand groups them into areas such as authentication/authorization, storage integration, pod networking, and load balancing. In that list, the documentation names:“Container Storage Interface Plugin”(a paravirtual CSI plug-in that integrates with CNS through the Supervisor),“Container Network Interface Plug-in”(a CNI plugin that provides pod networking), and“Cloud Provider Implementation”(supports creating Kubernetes load balancer services).

These three items map directly to the answer choicesD (Container Storage Interface),F (Container Network Interface), andA (Cloud Provider Implementation). The same VCF 9.0 section also mentions an authentication webhook, but that component is not offered as a selectable option in this question, so the best three matches among the provided choices are the CSI, CNI, and cloud provider implementation entries that the document explicitly states are present inside a VKS cluster.

VMware Cloud Foundation 9.0 documents a dedicated backup-and-restore approach forWorkload Managementwhere different components use different tools. Forworkloadsrunning on vSphere Supervisor–based Kubernetes (bothvSphere PodsandVKS cluster workloads), the documented solution isVelero, specifically theVelero Plugin for vSphereinstalled and configured on the Supervisor. The “Considerations for Backing Up and Restoring Workload Management” table explicitly lists: “Backup and restore vSphere Pods — Velero Plugin for vSphere” and “Backup stateless and stateful workloads on a VKS cluster and restore to a cluster provisioned by VKS — Velero Plugin for vSphere.”

The same section also clarifies thatSupervisor backups(via vCenter file-based backup) are for restoring theSupervisor control plane/stateand VKS node VMs—not for restoring workloads themselves—so workloads must be backed up separately.

Therefore, the correct tool for backing up and restoring workloads on clusters provisioned by vSphere Supervisor isVelero (using the Velero Plugin for vSphere).

VCF 9.0 describes VKS as providing self-service, declarative lifecycle management for Kubernetes clusters and explicitly identifiesCluster APIas the mechanism that enables Kubernetes-style lifecycle automation. The documentation states that “The Cluster API provides declarative, Kubernetes-style APIs for cluster creation, configuration, and management,” and that its inputs include resources describing “the virtual machines that make up the cluster” plus “cluster add-ons.” This directly maps to automated lifecycle management: a desired-state YAML is reconciled by controllers that create, update, and maintain the control plane and worker node resources without manual, imperative procedures.

The same VCF 9.0 content also notes VKS exposes “three layers of controllers” for lifecycle management and lists Cluster API as one of those layers, reinforcing that Cluster API is foundational for ongoing cluster operations (create, scale, upgrade, reconcile). Contour is an ingress controller (traffic routing), kubeadm is a Kubernetes bootstrap tool (not the VKS lifecycle controller framework), and Grafana is observability/visualization (not cluster lifecycle).

VCF 9.0 defines aVCF CLI contextas aconfiguration setfor a specific endpoint (for example, a Kubernetes cluster, vSphere Supervisor, or VCF Automation) and explains that a context stores the key connection parameters such asendpoint,context type,path to kubeconfig, andcredentials. This aligns directly with optionC, because vcf context create is used to create anamedcontext that encapsulates the access parameters needed to work with a specific Supervisor or VKS cluster and to switch between multiple environments without rewriting configuration each time.

The documentation further shows vcf context create being used to connect either to aSupervisor endpointor to aworkload (VKS) cluster(by providing workload cluster name/namespace or by using a generated kubeconfig), which is exactly the multi-tenant operational pattern in the question. While authentication is part of what happens during context creation (for example, creating a configuration that includes a JWT for Kubernetes API access), the command’s purpose is broader: it creates the reusablecontextobject that defineswhereandhowthe CLI connects.

VCF 9.0 explicitly documents thatVKS supports two CNI options: Antrea and Calico, and that thesystem-defined default CNI is Antrea. This directly eliminates Flannel and Cilium as default supported options for VKS clusters on Supervisor in this context. VCF 9.0 also describes how a vSphere administrator can view or change this setting in the vSphere Client underSupervisor Management → Configure → Kubernetes Service → Default CNI, further reinforcing that Antrea is the baseline/default choice.

From a policy perspective in the question, the requirement is Kubernetes-layer observability and control of pod communications “without additional licensing or overlay complexity.” Antrea is presented in VCF 9.0 as the default CNI and is implemented usingOpen vSwitch, with networking and network policy capabilities provided at the Kubernetes layer for pods and services. Because it is the documented default (and supported) option for new VKS clusters, selectingAntreabest aligns with the “default supported option” requirement.

Answer (Correct Order):

Run the install command:velero install … --provider aws --bucket … --plugins … --backup-location-config …

Apply BackupStorageLocation YAML.

Apply VolumeSnapshotLocation YAML.

Run test backup:velero backup create test-backup --include-namespaces "myapp1"

The correct sequence follows Velero’s operational model: install the Velero components first, then define where backups and snapshots are stored, and finally validate with a real backup. In VCF 9.0, the Velero Plugin for vSphere installation command includes parameters for the object-store provider, bucket, and plugin images, which establishes the Velero control plane in the target namespace and prepares it to communicate with an S3-compatible store.

After the installation is in place, you apply theBackupStorageLocationconfiguration so Velero has a durable destination for Kubernetes backup metadata in the object store. This aligns with the VCF 9.0 guidance that backups upload Kubernetes metadata to the object store and require S3-compatible storage for backup/restore workflows.

Next, apply theVolumeSnapshotLocationso Velero knows how and where to create/track volume snapshots for stateful workloads. The VCF 9.0 install example explicitly includes snapshot/backup location configuration parameters, reflecting that both must be set for complete protection.

Finally, run a test backup scoped to the namespace (--include-namespaces=my-namespace) to confirm end-to-end functionality.

In VCF 9.0 VKS clusters, network policy is a core Kubernetes networking control implemented by the cluster’s CNI (Antrea or Calico). The VCF documentation’s “VKS Cluster Networking” table describesNetwork policyas the feature that “controls what traffic is allowed to and from selected pods and network endpoints,” and identifies Antrea or Calico as the providers for this capability. That definition precisely matches optionB: it governs pod-to-pod and pod-to-external endpoint communication rules. This is different from ingress routing (which the same table describes separately as “Cluster ingress … routing for inbound pod traffic”), so option C is not correct for “network policy.” It is also different from NodePort behavior (external access via a port on each worker node through the Kubernetes network proxy), which is explicitly listed as “Service type: NodePort.” Finally, creating/operating clusters natively in Supervisor is a broader lifecycle function (Cluster API/VKS API), not the definition of network policy. Therefore,NetworkPolicyis the Kubernetes-layer mechanism to define and enforce allowed traffic flows.

Configuration Sequence (in order):

Deactivate the service.

Confirm uninstallation.

Delete the service.

Confirm deletion.

Uninstalling a Supervisor Service cleanly follows a “stop/remove/cleanup” pattern to avoid orphaned components and to ensure the Supervisor isn’t still reconciling the service while you remove it. First, youDeactivate the serviceso the Supervisor stops managing and running the Harbor service components. This prevents new service resources from being created while you are attempting to remove them and allows the platform to transition the service into a non-operational state safely.

Next, youConfirm uninstallationto initiate the removal workflow. This step acknowledges that the service’s deployed components (such as pods, controllers, and any associated objects) will be removed from the Supervisor-managed environment. After the uninstall workflow is initiated and the service is no longer active, you proceed toDelete the serviceto remove the Harbor service registration/entry from the Supervisor Services list, ensuring it is no longer available to namespaces or consumers. Finally, youConfirm deletionas the last safeguard, since deletion is typically destructive and removes the service definition from the environment’s available services catalog.

VCF 9.0 describes Supervisor networking with NSX as a model whereNSX provides network connectivity to Supervisor control plane VMs, services, and workloads, and where the Supervisor can use either the NSX Load Balancer or the Avi Load Balancer. In the NSX + Avi design, the documentation identifies theAvi Load Balancer Controlleras a core infrastructure element: the Controller “interacts with vCenter to automate the load balancing for the VKS clusters,” and is responsible for provisioning and coordinating Service Engines and exposing operational interfaces.

Also, the Supervisor itself is anchored by theSupervisor control plane virtual machines. VCF 9.0 explains you deploy the Supervisor with one or three control plane VMs, and in a three-zone Supervisor the control plane VMs are distributed across zones for high availability.

Finally, because the requirement explicitly calls for a unified networking/security model throughNSX, theNSX Manager virtual machineis foundational to the NSX-based Supervisor design, as shown in the documented architecture and component descriptions for NSX-backed Supervisor deployments.

A Supervisor upgrade impacts the lifecycle and compatibility of Supervisor Services (including Core Supervisor Services). VMware guidance emphasizes validating compatibility for the components that depend on the Supervisor and remediating any incompatibilities as part of the overall upgrade process. If a Core Supervisor Service remains stuck in“Configuring”after the Supervisor is upgraded, a common and expected cause is that the service version isnot compatiblewith the upgraded Supervisor/vCenter software state. In those cases, the upgrade workflow expects you toidentify and update incompatible Supervisor Servicesto versions that match the new supported software level. Ensuring the vSphere Kubernetes Service is at asupportedversion (for the upgraded Supervisor) aligns with the documented approach: run compatibility checks and thenupdate the versions of incompatible Supervisor Servicesso they can complete reconciliation and reach a healthy state.

In Workload Management, updating the Supervisor and updating VKS clusters are related but distinct lifecycle operations. The Supervisor runs its own Kubernetes distribution, while VKS clusters consume vSphere Kubernetes releases (VKrs). These are “delivered differently,” with Supervisor Kubernetes releases and VKrs each having their own release cadence and compatibility constraints. As a result, successfully updating the Supervisor control plane does not automatically change the Kubernetes version running inside an existing VKS workload cluster; the VKS cluster must be updated to a compatible VKr separately. This mismatch is exactly why an application can still fail after a Supervisor update: the DevOps engineer is still deploying onto a cluster that hasn’t been updated to the Kubernetes version required by the application (or by the API versions/features it depends on). Additionally, Workload Management enforces sequential minor-version updates and compatibility checks between Supervisor and VKrs, so the correct remediation is to update the VKS cluster to an appropriate VKr that satisfies both application needs and Supervisor compatibility.

Kubernetes Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) is implemented through theRBAC API group(rbac.authorization.k8s.io) and defines the core authorization primitives used to grant permissions to users, groups, and service accounts. The cluster-scoped objects declared by the RBAC API areClusterRoleandClusterRoleBinding. AClusterRoledefines a set of permissions (verbs such as get/list/watch/create/update/delete) over resources at thecluster scope(including cluster-wide resources and optionally namespaced resources across namespaces). AClusterRoleBindingthenbindsthat ClusterRole to a subject (user/group/serviceaccount), making those permissions effective cluster-wide.

This differs from namespace-scoped RBAC objects (RoleandRoleBinding) which apply only within a single namespace. The other options are incorrect becauseClusterObject/ClusterNodeare not RBAC API objects,ValidatingAdmissionPolicybelongs to the admission control API surface (policy enforcement),ResourceQuotais a namespace resource governance object, andContainer/Deploymentare workload/runtime concepts defined in the core/apps APIs rather than authorization primitives.

Istio is available in VCF 9.0 as an optional package that can be installed for VKS clusters. The VCF 9.0 documentation explicitly lists “Istio” among the optional packages that “can be optionally installed” for the vSphere Kubernetes Service (VKS). In Kubernetes platforms, Istio is a service mesh that secures and manages service-to-service (east-west) traffic by establishing authenticated and encrypted connections between workloads. The encryption mechanism it provides for inter-service communication ismutual TLS (mTLS), which means both ends (client and server workloads) authenticate each other and negotiate encrypted transport for every service call—meeting the requirement to “encrypt the transport and communications between services.” This is distinct from host-level mechanisms like IPsec/IKEv2 (network-layer) or “AES-256” (an algorithm, not the service-to-service transport model). Enabling Istio Service Mesh is therefore aligned to deliver encrypted, identity-aware service communications across the cluster at the application service layer.

VCF 9.0 defines VKS as an upstream Kubernetes offering that isbuilt for vSphereand delivered with “well-thought-out defaults” to reduce operational burden. It states VKS provides an“opinionated installation of Kubernetes”with defaults “optimized for vSphere,” which “reduce[s] the amount of time and effort” typically spent deploying and running an enterprise Kubernetes cluster—this directly supportssimplified management and operations (A).

VCF 9.0 also emphasizes VKS is“integrated with the vSphere infrastructure”(storage, networking, authentication) and is built on a Supervisor that maps to vSphere clusters, creating a “unified product experience.” This supportsconsistent Kubernetes deployment on vSphere (B)because clusters are provisioned and operated in a standardized, vSphere-native way.

Finally, VCF 9.0 states VKS clusters “use open source Linux-based” components from VMware by Broadcom and notes key integrations (for example, CNI options) are open source—supportingleveraging open-source technologies (D).

OptionsCandEare not VKS benefits as stated: VKS targets VKS-provisioned upstream Kubernetes clusters (not “any distribution”), and “pods directly on ESXi” is described asvSphere Pods(Workload Management), not a defining benefit of VKS clusters.