Which of the following would be the most efficient way to ensure a naming convention was followed across your subscription?

Creating a policy with your naming requirements and assigning it to the scope of your subscription is the most efficient way to ensure consistency in naming conventions. This method automates the enforcement of the naming standards you establish, thus reducing the dependence on manual compliance. Policies can evaluate resources against the specified rules, and only those that meet the criteria are allowed, ensuring that all resource names adhere to the defined conventions.

In contrast, simply sending out an email with the details of your naming conventions places reliance on individuals to remember and implement these guidelines. This method lacks accountability and oversight, making compliance uncertain.

Providing read-only access to all users except yourself means you would have to manually review and approve all naming requests, which is time-consuming and inefficient, especially as the number of requests grows.

Allowing users to use any naming convention without restrictions introduces inconsistencies that can lead to confusion and management difficulties as the subscription scales. It defeats the purpose of having a systematic approach to naming resources, making governance and resource management cumbersome.