True or False. We should always make sure that the APIs being designed and developed are self-servable even if it needs more man-day effort and resources.
Answer : B
Correct Answer : TRUE
*****************************************
>> As per MuleSoft proposed IT Operating Model, designing APIs and making sure that they are discoverable and self-servable is VERY VERY IMPORTANT and decides the success of an API and its application network.
What are 4 important Platform Capabilities offered by Anypoint Platform?
Answer : C
Correct Answer : API Design and Development, API Runtime Execution and Hosting, API Operations and Management, API Consumer Engagement
*****************************************
>> API Design and Development - Anypoint Studio, Anypoint Design Center, Anypoint Connectors
>> API Runtime Execution and Hosting - Mule Runtimes, CloudHub, Runtime Services
>> API Operations and Management - Anypoint API Manager, Anypoint Exchange
>> API Consumer Management - API Contracts, Public Portals, Anypoint Exchange, API Notebooks
What Anypoint Platform Capabilities listed below fall under APIs and API Invocations/Consumers category? Select TWO.
Answer : D
Correct Answers: API Design and Development and API Runtime Execution and Hosting
*****************************************
>> API Design and Development - Anypoint Studio, Anypoint Design Center, Anypoint Connectors
>> API Runtime Execution and Hosting - Mule Runtimes, CloudHub, Runtime Services
>> API Operations and Management - Anypoint API Manager, Anypoint Exchange
Correct Answers:API Operations and Management and API Consumer Engagement
*****************************************
>>API Design and Development- Anypoint Studio, Anypoint Design Center, Anypoint Connectors
>>API Runtime Execution and Hosting- Mule Runtimes, CloudHub, Runtime Services
>>API Operations and Management- Anypoint API Manager, Anypoint Exchange
>>API Consumer Management- API Contracts, Public Portals, Anypoint Exchange, API Notebooks
Bottom of Form
Top of Form
Select the correct Owner-Layer combinations from below options
Answer : C
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
https://blogs.mulesoft.com/biz/api/experience-api-ownership/
https://blogs.mulesoft.com/biz/api/process-api-ownership/
https://blogs.mulesoft.com/biz/api/system-api-ownership/
Which layer in the API-led connectivity focuses on unlocking key systems, legacy systems, data sources etc and exposes the functionality?
Answer : C
Correct Answer : System Layer
The APIs used in an API-led approach to connectivity fall into three categories:
System APIs -- these usually access the core systems of record and provide a means of insulating the user from the complexity or any changes to the underlying systems. Once built, many users, can access data without any need to learn the underlying systems and can reuse these APIs in multiple projects.
Process APIs -- These APIs interact with and shape data within a single system or across systems (breaking down data silos) and are created here without a dependence on the source systems from which that data originates, as well as the target channels through which that data is delivered.
Experience APIs -- Experience APIs are the means by which data can be reconfigured so that it is most easily consumed by its intended audience, all from a common data source, rather than setting up separate point-to-point integrations for each channel. An Experience API is usually created with API-first design principles where the API is designed for the specific user experience in mind.
When could the API data model of a System API reasonably mimic the data model exposed by the corresponding backend system, with minimal improvements over the backend system's data model?
Answer : C
Correct Answer : When a pragmatic approach with only limited isolation from the
backend system is deemed appropriate.
*****************************************
General guidance w.r.t choosing Data Models:
>> If an Enterprise Data Model is in use then the API data model of System APIs should make use of data types from that Enterprise Data Model and the corresponding API implementation should translate between these data types from the Enterprise Data Model and the native data model of the backend system.
>> If no Enterprise Data Model is in use then each System API should be assigned to a Bounded Context, the API data model of System APIs should make use of data types from the corresponding Bounded Context Data Model and the corresponding API implementation should translate between these data types from the Bounded Context Data Model and the native data model of the backend system. In this scenario, the data types in the Bounded Context Data Model are defined purely in terms of their business characteristics and are typically not related to the native data model of the backend system. In other words, the translation effort may be significant.
>> If no Enterprise Data Model is in use, and the definition of a clean Bounded Context Data Model is considered too much effort, then the API data model of System APIs should make use of data types that approximately mirror those from the backend system, same semantics and naming as backend system, lightly sanitized, expose all fields needed for the given System API's functionality, but not significantly more and making good use of REST conventions.
The latter approach, i.e., exposing in System APIs an API data model that basically mirrors that of the backend system, does not provide satisfactory isolation from backend systems through the System API tier on its own. In particular, it will typically not be possible to 'swap out' a backend system without significantly changing all System APIs in front of that backend system and therefore the API implementations of all Process APIs that depend on those System APIs! This is so because it is not desirable to prolong the life of a previous backend system's data model in the form of the API data model of System APIs that now front a new backend system. The API data models of System APIs following this approach must therefore change when the backend system is replaced.
On the other hand:
>> It is a very pragmatic approach that adds comparatively little overhead over accessing the backend system directly
>> Isolates API clients from intricacies of the backend system outside the data model (protocol, authentication, connection pooling, network address, ...)
>> Allows the usual API policies to be applied to System APIs
>> Makes the API data model for interacting with the backend system explicit and visible, by exposing it in the RAML definitions of the System APIs
>> Further isolation from the backend system data model does occur in the API implementations of the Process API tier
Mule applications that implement a number of REST APIs are deployed to their own subnet that is inaccessible from outside the organization.
External business-partners need to access these APIs, which are only allowed to be invoked from a separate subnet dedicated to partners - called Partner-subnet. This subnet is accessible from the public internet, which allows these external partners to reach it.
Anypoint Platform and Mule runtimes are already deployed in Partner-subnet. These Mule runtimes can already access the APIs.
What is the most resource-efficient solution to comply with these requirements, while having the least impact on other applications that are currently using the APIs?
Answer : A