Professional Cloud DevOps Engineer
Prepare and test your skills
Prepare and test your skills
Worked example. The correct answer is already marked and every option is explained below, so there is nothing to select here. To answer questions yourself, start the free trial.
A DevOps engineer deploys a new version of a microservice to a Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) cluster integrated with Cloud Service Mesh and Google Cloud Observability. After deployment, automated canary verification fails due to missing service performance telemetry and elevated upstream errors.
The engineer observes the following symptoms:
app and istio-proxy).traceId with proxy logs shows traffic being handled as opaque TCP streams rather than HTTP/gRPC protocol traffic.Which root cause and diagnostic action explain this deployment failure?
In Cloud Service Mesh and GKE, the service mesh relies on Kubernetes Service port definitions to determine the application protocol (e.g., HTTP, HTTP/2, gRPC). When port names do not begin with an accepted protocol prefix such as http, http2, or grpc (or use the standard appProtocol field), the Envoy proxy defaults to treating traffic as raw, unparsed TCP streams.
http or http- naming convention, Cloud Service Mesh treats incoming connections as generic TCP.http or http- enables Envoy to parse Layer 7 HTTP request headers, inject distributed tracing context headers, and generate appropriate HTTP-level telemetry and metrics.traceparent, x-cloud-trace-context) and attach trace spans automatically.Service manifest without altering application binaries.Other possibilities (such as proxy injection failure or API quota exhaustion) are ruled out by the telemetry evidence: pods already possess running istio-proxy containers, and raw TCP logs are successfully ingested. Modifying the Service port name directly fixes the root protocol mismatch.
Keep the momentum going with these hand-picked practice scenarios
Want more questions like this?
Get a free certification question every week.