PAM-SEN: CyberArk Sentry PAMDemo

By CyberArk · Question Mode

QuestionQ8

Troubleshooting & Diagnostics

All 80 employees in your satellite Tokyo office complain that browsing the PVWA site is very slow, while users at the New York headquarters do not have this issue. The current PAM solution includes:

  • 2 distributed Vaults: the primary Vault in New York and a satellite Vault in Tokyo
  • 2 PVWA servers, both in New York, with load balancing configured
  • 2 PSM servers, both in New York, without load balancing configured
  • 1 CPM server in New York

All PVWA, PSM, and CPM servers are connected to the primary Vault.

Which proposal best resolves the performance issue while minimizing the impact on production?

  • A Install two new PVWA servers in Tokyo data center, configure load balancing, connect to the local satellite Vault and provide the URL of new PVWA servers to the local employees.
  • B Install two new PVWA servers in New York data center, configure load balancing and have them connect to the satellite Vault in Tokyo.
  • C Install two new PSM servers in the Tokyo data center, configure load balancing, connect to the local satellite vault, and inform the local employees to browse using the same PVWA URL.
  • D Change the current distributed Vaults architecture, migrate back to a Primary-DR architecture, install two new PVWA servers in the Tokyo data center and configure load balancing. Connect to the local DR Vault and provide the URL of new PVWA servers to the local employees.
Explanation

PVWA browsing for Tokyo users is slowed by WAN distance to the New York PVWA tier and primary Vault. Deploying two load-balanced PVWA servers in Tokyo and configuring them to use the local Satellite Vault provides a local, highly available access path while preserving the existing distributed-Vault architecture and New York production deployment.

Community Discussion

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!