A logistics hub already keeps its site inventory in Catalyst Center and wants assurance findings in that same system. Which approach fits?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
You don't build a second warehouse when the first warehouse already has the shelves. You share assurance findings into Catalyst Center so the hub keeps a single inventory. A handwritten spreadsheet, turning Catalyst Center off, or a collector that does not share the view creates the duplicate you were avoiding.
Full Explanation
The hub already trusts Catalyst Center as the site inventory and wants assurance findings there, so a second list of sites would undo the request. Sharing assurance findings into the Catalyst Center inventory the hub already keeps fits, because the findings land on the sites that inventory already names and no parallel inventory is created. A spreadsheet that copies the Catalyst Center site inventory by hand on a recurring schedule is a detached copy. It drifts, and assurance findings pasted into it are not in Catalyst Center. Turning Catalyst Center off so assurance lives only in a product that does not share the inventory discards the system of record in order to view assurance somewhere else. A second collector that builds its own site list and does not share that list with Catalyst Center is the extra inventory the hub said it should not stand up, even if that collector measures something useful on its own. Exam caveat: owning both products is not the same as sharing assurance into the inventory that already exists. Operational check: pick one site, confirm it appears once in Catalyst Center, and confirm the assurance finding is attached there rather than on a separate site list.