MuleSoft-Platform-Architect-I VCE Exam Download

Explanation

Correct Answer: Implement required changes to the Process API implementation so that, whenever possible, the Process API’s RAML definition remains unchanged.

*****************************************

Key requirement in the question is:

>> Approach that minimizes the impact of this change on API clients

Based on above:

>> Updating the RAML definition would possibly impact the API clients if the changes require any thing mandatory from client side. So, one should try to avoid doing that until really necessary.

>> Implementing the changes as a completely different API and then redirectly the clients with 3xx status code is really upsetting design and heavily impacts the API clients.

>> Organisations and IT cannot simply postpone the changes required until all API consumers acknowledge they are ready to migrate to a new Process API or API version. This is unrealistic and not possible.

The best way to handle the changes always is to implement required changes to the API implementations so that, whenever possible, the API’s RAML definition remains unchanged.

Explanation

Correct Answer:

1. App Developers owns and focuses on Experience Layer APIs

2. LOB IT owns and focuses on Process Layer APIs

3. Central IT owns and focuses on System Layer APIs

In MuleSoft’s ecosystem, when a Process API needs to consume a System API (published to Exchange and protected by OAuth 2.0), the recommended approach is to utilize the REST Connect Connector. Here’s how it aligns with best practices:

Automated Connector Generation:

When a RAML or OAS specification is published in Exchange, MuleSoft automatically generates a REST Connect Connector for that API. This connector simplifies integration as it abstracts the complexity of making HTTP requests and handling OAuth authentication.

Streamlined Integration:

The Process API can import this generated connector from Exchange and configure OAuth credentials, streamlining secure access to the System API without manual HTTP setup.

Why Option C is Correct:

Using the REST Connect Connector directly leverages MuleSoft’s automated tooling, minimizing manual configurations and ensuring a more maintainable integration.

Explanation of Incorrect Options:

Option A (importing an OAuth module) is unnecessary; OAuth is handled within the connector’s configuration.

Option B (property YAML files with HTTP requests) involves manual setup, which is more error-prone and not recommended.

Option D (manually updating POM file) does not directly aid in invoking an API through Exchange.

ReferencesFor more information on using REST Connect Connectors and OAuth integration in MuleSoft, refer to the MuleSoft documentation on API Management and Connectors​​.

Explanation

Correct Answer: Set a timeout of 100ms; that leaves 400ms for other two downstream APIs to complete

*****************************************

Key details to take from the given scenario:

>> Upstream API's designed SLA is 500ms (median). Lets ignore maximum SLA response times.

>> This API calls 3 downstream APIs sequentially and all these are of similar complexity.

>> The first downstream API is offering median SLA of 100ms, 80th percentile: 500ms; 95th percentile: 1000ms.

Based on the above details:

>> We can rule out the option which is suggesting to set 50ms timeout. Because, if the median SLA itself being offered is 100ms then most of the calls are going to timeout and time gets wasted in retried them and eventually gets exhausted with all retries. Even if some retries gets successful, the remaining time wont leave enough room for 2nd and 3rd downstream APIs to respond within time.

>> The option suggesting to NOT set a timeout as the invocation of this API is mandatory and so we must wait until it responds is silly. As not setting time out would go against the good implementation pattern and moreover if the first API is not responding within its offered median SLA 100ms then most probably it would either respond in 500ms (80th percentile) or 1000ms (95th percentile). In BOTH cases, getting a successful response from 1st downstream API does NO GOOD because already by this time the Upstream API SLA of 500 ms is breached. There is no time left to call 2nd and 3rd downstream APIs.

>> It is NOT true that no timeout is possible to meet the upstream APIs desired SLA.

As 1st downstream API is offering its median SLA of 100ms, it means MOST of the time we would get the responses within that time. So, setting a timeout of 100ms would be ideal for MOST calls as it leaves enough room of 400ms for remaining 2 downstream API calls.