An operator asks whether putting Unified Access Gateway in the DMZ is the city's disaster-recovery plan. What is the right distinction?

UAG in the DMZ is remote-access and security placement, not the city's second-site disaster-recovery plan. In municipal EUC terms, treat the endpoint as a window into city systems when the architecture says so, not as the system of record for the files or apps in the stem. Distractor concept: DMZ UAG is not second-site recovery for the Horizon pod. Distractor concept: DMZ UAG does not replace backups of Connection Server configuration. Distractor concept: DMZ UAG is not vSphere HA for desktop VMs. Exam caveat: Access-tier placement ≠ DR; keep remote access and site recovery as separate designs. Operational check: Show stakeholders the inland DR site plan alongside the DMZ UAG diagram so they are not treated as the same control. Record the chosen control and the rejected failure modes in the civic change ticket or runbook so on-call staff and auditors share the same rationale after the next maintenance window. Re-validate after personnel or image changes that the same control still meets the city's continuity, security, and support expectations for this service. Helpdesk coaching tip aligned to the conversational brief: A guard shack at the parking lot is not a second city hall. UAG in the DMZ is how home inspectors reach VDI safely, not how you rebuild after a site loss. DR still needs another site and a recovery plan.