Which typical cloud-related limitation can affect NPM monitoring of cloud-hosted devices?

Which typical cloud-related limitation can affect NPM monitoring of cloud-hosted devices?

• A. Latency due to shared resources
• B. Cloud firewall restrictions blocking monitoring traffic
• C. Availability of local agents for all metrics
• D. Infinite bandwidth

Answer: (B)

Cloud firewalls and security groups control what traffic can reach cloud-hosted devices. For NPM to monitor, it must be able to reach those devices on the standard management ports and protocols (such as SNMP, ping, WMI/WinRM, SSH, etc.). If the cloud firewall blocks this traffic, the monitoring probes cannot collect data, resulting in gaps or failed monitors. This is a typical cloud-related limitation because reachability is gated by firewall rules, not by the monitoring software itself. Latency and performance can affect how fresh data looks, but they don’t inherently prevent data collection. The availability of local agents is a design choice and can be mitigated with agentless checks or alternative methods. Infinite bandwidth isn’t realistic in any environment, so it doesn’t describe a real limitation.

Cloud firewalls and security groups control what traffic can reach cloud-hosted devices. For NPM to monitor, it must be able to reach those devices on the standard management ports and protocols (such as SNMP, ping, WMI/WinRM, SSH, etc.). If the cloud firewall blocks this traffic, the monitoring probes cannot collect data, resulting in gaps or failed monitors. This is a typical cloud-related limitation because reachability is gated by firewall rules, not by the monitoring software itself.

Latency and performance can affect how fresh data looks, but they don’t inherently prevent data collection. The availability of local agents is a design choice and can be mitigated with agentless checks or alternative methods. Infinite bandwidth isn’t realistic in any environment, so it doesn’t describe a real limitation.