Question 190
A desktop service validation exercise records: An AVD pilot changes from client multi-session to Windows Server and misses RDS CAL planning. Which observation MOST DIRECTLY verifies the appropriate corrective approach succeeded?
Explanation
Correct Answer
The test concerns: An AVD pilot changes from client multi-session to Windows Server and misses RDS CAL planning. Decisive evidence is: A compliance review reconciles OS choice, user entitlement, VM license settings and any Server CALs. This confirms the intended correction (Configure the applicable license type or entitlement for AVD session hosts and confirm Windows Server RDS CAL obligations if Server is used.) and tests the failure risk: A working VM image and host pool can still be noncompliant with user access and Windows OS entitlement rules. Other healthy Azure resources or unrelated service telemetry would not, by themselves, establish success for this case.
Incorrect Answers
This option relates to Portal host pool and workspace provisioning under AZ-140 objective group 1.4. It addresses a different failure risk: Creating a session host without an accessible application group and registered workspace will not publish a usable desktop feed. But the observed requirement is: An AVD pilot changes from client multi-session to Windows Server and misses RDS CAL planning. For the targeted topic (Windows client and Server session-host licensing configuration), the directly relevant verification is: A compliance review reconciles OS choice, user entitlement, VM license settings and any Server CALs. That other measure may be useful in a separate environment, but does not by itself establish the specific requested outcome. An independent qualified Azure Virtual Desktop expert must adjudicate any plausible overlapping alternatives before release.
This option relates to PowerShell, ARM and Bicep AVD deployment automation under AZ-140 objective group 1.4. It addresses a different failure risk: Ad hoc portal clicks across environments can create inconsistent AVD configuration and make approved rollback difficult. But the observed requirement is: An AVD pilot changes from client multi-session to Windows Server and misses RDS CAL planning. For the targeted topic (Windows client and Server session-host licensing configuration), the directly relevant verification is: A compliance review reconciles OS choice, user entitlement, VM license settings and any Server CALs. That other measure may be useful in a separate environment, but does not by itself establish the specific requested outcome. An independent qualified Azure Virtual Desktop expert must adjudicate any plausible overlapping alternatives before release.
This option relates to Session host registration token and agent lifecycle under AZ-140 objective group 1.4. It addresses a different failure risk: An expired token or broken registration agent can leave a powered-on VM unavailable for AVD connections. But the observed requirement is: An AVD pilot changes from client multi-session to Windows Server and misses RDS CAL planning. For the targeted topic (Windows client and Server session-host licensing configuration), the directly relevant verification is: A compliance review reconciles OS choice, user entitlement, VM license settings and any Server CALs. That other measure may be useful in a separate environment, but does not by itself establish the specific requested outcome. An independent qualified Azure Virtual Desktop expert must adjudicate any plausible overlapping alternatives before release.