Unit 3 Capstone — Design business continuity solutions
AZ-305 › Unit 3
Unit 3 Capstone — Design business continuity solutions
The capstone is a synthesis exercise: design one production workload whose architecture crosses every topic in Unit 3. Your submission should read like a lightweight architecture review package, not an exam answer.
Capstone contract
- 15–20%
- 2
- 90–120 minutes
- No unowned critical risk
Scenario
Contoso is moving a revenue-generating service onto Azure. It operates across two business regions, processes confidential customer data, has a small central platform team, and must demonstrate recoverability to auditors. Traffic and data volume are expected to grow, but finance requires a design that can start economically. The organisation wants a decision package it can use for a proof of concept and production readiness review.
Translate business impact into workload-level RTO/RPO, then design independent backup, recovery, and availability controls.
Required topic threads
- Design solutions for backup and disaster recovery: Map each dependency to a recovery mechanism that can meet tested RTO/RPO and compliance requirements.
- Design for high availability: Remove failure domains and add detection, traffic steering, state continuity, capacity, and recovery automation.
The client also requires least-privilege workload identity, private administration paths, infrastructure as code, measurable service objectives, cost allocation, and an exit or migration strategy for any service on a retirement path.
Starting comparison
| Topic | Candidate anchor | Trap the capstone must avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Design solutions for backup and disaster recovery | Azure Backup or service-native backups | Backup and replication solve different failures. |
| Design for high availability | Availability Zones and zone-redundant services | Multiple instances in one zone are not zonally resilient. |
Deliverables
- Context and requirements: business goals, measurable non-functional requirements, assumptions, exclusions, and five open questions.
- Architecture: one system-context diagram and one deployment/data-flow diagram, each with a text equivalent.
- Decision records: at least one ADR per topic, including alternatives and consequences.
- Security and governance: identities, permissions, network boundaries, policy, secrets, audit evidence, and data residency.
- Reliability: dependency inventory, availability calculation assumptions, RTO/RPO allocation, backup/failover/failback, and a test schedule.
- Operations: deployment strategy, telemetry, alerts with owners, capacity signals, patching/upgrades, and runbook entry points.
- Economics: primary cost drivers, scaling assumptions, commitment risks, and a method for validating current prices.
- Pilot plan: success criteria, failure injection, security tests, performance evidence, and a stop/go decision.
Text equivalent: requirements drive the architecture; security, continuity, and operations qualify it; pilot evidence determines the production decision.
Review rubric
Score each dimension from 0 to 3: requirements traceability, cross-topic coherence, least privilege, failure coverage, data semantics, network/DNS completeness, deployability, observability, recovery evidence, cost reasoning, current sources, and clarity. A passing capstone has no zero, no unowned critical risk, and at least 28 of 36 points. A high total cannot compensate for a missing recovery owner or an unsupported product assumption.
Learner self-check
- Can another engineer implement the design without inventing its key decisions?
- Does every critical dependency have a health signal and recovery owner?
- Are current limits, availability, and retirement milestones cited from Microsoft primary sources?
- Does the proof of concept test the riskiest assumption rather than the easiest happy path?
- Can I explain how this design changes if scale, recovery, regulation, or team capability changes?
Source and freshness
Aligned to the current AZ-305 blueprint and grounded in both attached course sources. Current product contracts must be cited during the exercise. Reviewed 2026-08-02.