So let's reinforce what we've learned about Catalyst Center Assurance. We learned a lot
about Catalyst Center and ST-Access in general, but the main focus was on assurance. A network
operations team wants a way to continuously monitor overall network health and quickly
understand whether user connectivity issues are caused by the network, the client, or the
application. Which Catalyst Center feature best meets this requirement? Is it policy and group
based access controls? Plug and play provisioning? No, we know it's assurance. Assurance is all about WEBVTT X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=MPEGTS:0,LOCAL:00:00:00.000
based access controls? Plug and play provisioning? No, we know it's assurance. Assurance is all about
monitoring the network itself from end to end, user to application and everything in between.
An enterprise wants to move away from manual CLI troubleshooting, good, and instead use
telemetry and analytics to understand how the network is performing over time. Great. Which
capability enables this approach? NetFlow version 9? Not really telemetry. Cisco Catalyst WEBVTT X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=MPEGTS:0,LOCAL:00:00:00.000
capability enables this approach? NetFlow version 9? Not really telemetry. Cisco Catalyst
Center Assurance? Absolutely. SNMP polling? Not telemetry. And static configuration templates?
Again, not telemetry at all. A help desk frequently receives complaints that the network is slow,
but lacks visibility into individual user experience across wired and wireless connections.
Which assurance concept addresses this problem? IPSLA probes? Configuration compliance? WEBVTT X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=MPEGTS:0,LOCAL:00:00:00.000
Which assurance concept addresses this problem? IPSLA probes? Configuration compliance?
The client health section? That's where we can go and see what is happening with a specific
individual user, what protocols they're trying to access, and what their connectivity or experience
may be when using specific applications. So this has been what it's like to work with Catalyst Center.