Cisco 350-501 Practice Test 65
Question 640
For an original SPCOR service-provider engineering scenario, consider: A service provider playbook targets a misspelled inventory group and reports no failed tasks although none of the required PEs were changed. Select TWO complementary steps: the targeted correction and its strongest prechange validation.
- Check: Trace one known link flap across device clock, gNMI update, IPFIX flow record and monitoring event with ingestion-lag checks.
- Check: Run check mode or an isolated deployment twice, comparing targeted hosts, command diff, failed hosts and change counts.
- Change: Execute NETCONF operations against the intended supported datastore and verify RPC outcomes, commit state and operational configuration.
- Treat a zero-fail play recap as proof every intended router was modified without validating inventory membership.
- Change: Use a verified inventory and idempotent supported network modules with meaningful prechecks, task results and stable desired-state templates.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes. Acceptance: Only authorized PEs are targeted, repeated runs become stable and skipped or unreachable devices are explicitly reported.
E:Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes. Applied case: A service provider playbook targets a misspelled inventory group and reports no failed tasks although none of the required PEs were changed.
Incorrect Answers
A:Check: Trace one known link flap across device clock, gNMI update, IPFIX flow record and monitoring event with ingestion-lag checks. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
C:Change: Execute NETCONF operations against the intended supported datastore and verify RPC outcomes, commit state and operational configuration. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
D:For this select two assessment, the shortcut changes or bypasses the necessary routing, service or operational boundary rather than correcting it. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
Question 641
A service provider network engineer is reviewing this backbone or customer-service scenario: An Ansible network configuration playbook pushes the same command every run and continually marks every device changed even when policy is already correct. A proposed shortcut is: Treat a zero-fail play recap as proof every intended router was modified without validating inventory membership. What should the service provider engineer recommend as the narrowly scoped correction? Select ONE best answer.
- Use a verified inventory and idempotent supported network modules with meaningful prechecks, task results and stable desired-state templates.
- Select supported RESTCONF data paths and HTTP operations, preserve YANG schema types and handle documented status and error bodies.
- Represent service intent using supported Cisco NSO models and dry-run transactional changes and validate device diffs and recovery behavior.
- Treat a zero-fail play recap as proof every intended router was modified without validating inventory membership.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:This targeted action addresses the observed service-provider control or forwarding gap without discarding necessary controls. The required acceptance condition is: Only authorized PEs are targeted, repeated runs become stable and skipped or unreachable devices are explicitly reported.
Incorrect Answers
B:Select supported RESTCONF data paths and HTTP operations, preserve YANG schema types and handle documented status and error bodies. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
C:Represent service intent using supported Cisco NSO models and dry-run transactional changes and validate device diffs and recovery behavior. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
D:Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes. Use this instead: Use a verified inventory and idempotent supported network modules with meaningful prechecks, task results and stable desired-state templates.
Question 642
A Cisco service provider design review finds: An Ansible network configuration playbook pushes the same command every run and continually marks every device changed even when policy is already correct. The team proposes: Use a verified inventory and idempotent supported network modules with meaningful prechecks, task results and stable desired-state templates. Which engineering principle most strongly supports the recommended response? Select ONE best answer.
- Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
- Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
- NetFlow and IPFIX export summarized flow records whose field templates and sampling rules determine what collectors can reconstruct.
- NETCONF uses modeled XML RPC messages and datastore operations; an active SSH transport or accepted candidate does not necessarily mean a committed change.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Demonstrable success requires: Only authorized PEs are targeted, repeated runs become stable and skipped or unreachable devices are explicitly reported. Applied case: An Ansible network configuration playbook pushes the same command every run and continually marks every device changed even when policy is already correct.
Incorrect Answers
B:Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
C:NetFlow and IPFIX export summarized flow records whose field templates and sampling rules determine what collectors can reconstruct. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
D:NETCONF uses modeled XML RPC messages and datastore operations; an active SSH transport or accepted candidate does not necessarily mean a committed change. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
Question 643
The service provider operations team has not yet approved a change. Current evidence indicates: An Ansible network configuration playbook pushes the same command every run and continually marks every device changed even when policy is already correct. Which evidence best tests the technical diagnosis before approving a disruptive change? Select ONE best answer.
- Inspect module revision, namespace, leaf types and schema paths and test one valid and one invalid payload in a lab.
- Check state addresses, lock contention, plan create-update-destroy actions and expected controller changes in a sandbox.
- Run check mode or an isolated deployment twice, comparing targeted hosts, command diff, failed hosts and change counts.
- Trace one known link flap across device clock, gNMI update, IPFIX flow record and monitoring event with ingestion-lag checks.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes. Applied case: An Ansible network configuration playbook pushes the same command every run and continually marks every device changed even when policy is already correct.
Incorrect Answers
A:Inspect module revision, namespace, leaf types and schema paths and test one valid and one invalid payload in a lab. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
B:Check state addresses, lock contention, plan create-update-destroy actions and expected controller changes in a sandbox. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
D:Trace one known link flap across device clock, gNMI update, IPFIX flow record and monitoring event with ingestion-lag checks. An Ansible network configuration playbook pushes the same command every run and continually marks every device changed even when policy is already correct.
Question 644
A candidate correction has been tested and the platform team requires a post-change acceptance check. Original problem: An Ansible network configuration playbook pushes the same command every run and continually marks every device changed even when policy is already correct. The carrier operations owner needs positive and negative tests showing existing customer services remain available. Which acceptance result demonstrates correct service provider forwarding and control behavior without disrupting authorized workflows? Select ONE best answer.
- The service converges consistently or exposes a recoverable failure without silent partial configuration across customers.
- Only valid transactions enter the intended configuration datastore and any commit failure is clearly reported and rolled back where supported.
- Only authorized PEs are targeted, repeated runs become stable and skipped or unreachable devices are explicitly reported.
- Approved collectors can query counters securely and unauthorized requests fail while essential traps remain observable.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes. The approved implementation step was: Use a verified inventory and idempotent supported network modules with meaningful prechecks, task results and stable desired-state templates.
Incorrect Answers
A:The service converges consistently or exposes a recoverable failure without silent partial configuration across customers. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
B:Only valid transactions enter the intended configuration datastore and any commit failure is clearly reported and rolled back where supported. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
D:Approved collectors can query counters securely and unauthorized requests fail while essential traps remain observable. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
Question 645
An implementation sign-off request identifies the following problem: An Ansible network configuration playbook pushes the same command every run and continually marks every device changed even when policy is already correct. Which paired technical change and validation should close the implementation review? Select ONE best answer.
- Change: Use documented SNMP access restrictions and authenticated encrypted SNMPv3 where supported and verify polling and notifications separately. Verify: Inspect security level, user and engine parameters, permitted managers, packet captures and a representative interface counter query and notification.
- Change: Represent service intent using supported Cisco NSO models and dry-run transactional changes and validate device diffs and recovery behavior. Verify: Inspect modeled service inputs, dry-run target diffs, device transaction outcomes and an injected failure during a lab provision.
- Change: Align exporter and collector template handling, source interface, sampling and timeout settings, then validate interpreted flow fields. Verify: Compare exported templates, sequence counters, sampling rate, collector parsing and independently measured test-flow traffic.
- Change: Use a verified inventory and idempotent supported network modules with meaningful prechecks, task results and stable desired-state templates. Verify: Run check mode or an isolated deployment twice, comparing targeted hosts, command diff, failed hosts and change counts.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes. The change is successful only when: Only authorized PEs are targeted, repeated runs become stable and skipped or unreachable devices are explicitly reported.
Incorrect Answers
A:Change: Use documented SNMP access restrictions and authenticated encrypted SNMPv3 where supported and verify polling and notifications separately. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
B:Change: Represent service intent using supported Cisco NSO models and dry-run transactional changes and validate device diffs and recovery behavior.
C:Change: Align exporter and collector template handling, source interface, sampling and timeout settings, then validate interpreted flow fields. Ansible hosts and groups determine the execution scope while modules and conditions can converge device configuration without uncontrolled repeated changes.
Question 646
A service provider network engineer is reviewing this backbone or customer-service scenario: Two concurrent CI jobs write the same Terraform state for network infrastructure and produce conflicting resource identities. A proposed shortcut is: Delete the state whenever drift appears and immediately apply all proposed replacements without any plan review. What should the service provider engineer recommend as the narrowly scoped correction? Select ONE best answer.
- Select supported RESTCONF data paths and HTTP operations, preserve YANG schema types and handle documented status and error bodies.
- Delete the state whenever drift appears and immediately apply all proposed replacements without any plan review.
- Keep state in an access-controlled locked backend and review plans and drift against provider-supported network resources before apply.
- Normalize model identifiers, timestamps and collector health across gNMI, flow and management telemetry before declaring a backbone service incident.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:This targeted action addresses the observed service-provider control or forwarding gap without discarding necessary controls. Validate the premise using: Check state addresses, lock contention, plan create-update-destroy actions and expected controller changes in a sandbox.
Incorrect Answers
A:Select supported RESTCONF data paths and HTTP operations, preserve YANG schema types and handle documented status and error bodies. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
B:Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption. For this best change assessment, the shortcut changes or bypasses the necessary routing, service or operational boundary rather than correcting it.
D:Normalize model identifiers, timestamps and collector health across gNMI, flow and management telemetry before declaring a backbone service incident. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
Question 647
A Cisco service provider design review finds: Two concurrent CI jobs write the same Terraform state for network infrastructure and produce conflicting resource identities. The team proposes: Keep state in an access-controlled locked backend and review plans and drift against provider-supported network resources before apply. Which engineering principle most strongly supports the recommended response? Select ONE best answer.
- YANG defines containers lists keys and typed leaves, allowing supported protocol clients to validate configuration independently of arbitrary CLI text layouts.
- Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
- NetFlow and IPFIX export summarized flow records whose field templates and sampling rules determine what collectors can reconstruct.
- RESTCONF maps YANG-modeled resources to HTTP semantics; a valid TCP connection cannot replace correct method, content type or schema validation.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Relevant validation before approval: Check state addresses, lock contention, plan create-update-destroy actions and expected controller changes in a sandbox. Demonstrable success requires: Reviewed plans converge expected resources without conflicting state writes or unapproved destructive network actions.
Incorrect Answers
A:YANG defines containers lists keys and typed leaves, allowing supported protocol clients to validate configuration independently of arbitrary CLI text layouts. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
C:NetFlow and IPFIX export summarized flow records whose field templates and sampling rules determine what collectors can reconstruct. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
D:RESTCONF maps YANG-modeled resources to HTTP semantics; a valid TCP connection cannot replace correct method, content type or schema validation. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
Question 648
The service provider operations team has not yet approved a change. Current evidence indicates: Two concurrent CI jobs write the same Terraform state for network infrastructure and produce conflicting resource identities. Which evidence best tests the technical diagnosis before approving a disruptive change? Select ONE best answer.
- Trace one known link flap across device clock, gNMI update, IPFIX flow record and monitoring event with ingestion-lag checks.
- Verify service certificates, trust chains, SAN validation, gNMI subscription paths and telemetry timestamps over a controlled authorized and unauthorized test.
- Inspect security level, user and engine parameters, permitted managers, packet captures and a representative interface counter query and notification.
- Check state addresses, lock contention, plan create-update-destroy actions and expected controller changes in a sandbox.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Confirm afterward that: Reviewed plans converge expected resources without conflicting state writes or unapproved destructive network actions. Applied case: Two concurrent CI jobs write the same Terraform state for network infrastructure and produce conflicting resource identities.
Incorrect Answers
A:Trace one known link flap across device clock, gNMI update, IPFIX flow record and monitoring event with ingestion-lag checks. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
B:Verify service certificates, trust chains, SAN validation, gNMI subscription paths and telemetry timestamps over a controlled authorized and unauthorized test. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
C:Inspect security level, user and engine parameters, permitted managers, packet captures and a representative interface counter query and notification. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
Question 649
A candidate correction has been tested and the platform team requires a post-change acceptance check. Original problem: Two concurrent CI jobs write the same Terraform state for network infrastructure and produce conflicting resource identities. The carrier operations owner needs positive and negative tests showing existing customer services remain available. Which acceptance result demonstrates correct service provider forwarding and control behavior without disrupting authorized workflows? Select ONE best answer.
- Approved collectors can query counters securely and unauthorized requests fail while essential traps remain observable.
- Only authenticated collectors and devices exchange model-consistent telemetry, and certificate rotation can be validated without blind trust bypass.
- Reviewed plans converge expected resources without conflicting state writes or unapproved destructive network actions.
- The collector identifies correct source and destination flows with explicit sampling limits and detects exporter or template loss.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption. The result must be validated using the documented device, service or access context.
Incorrect Answers
A:Approved collectors can query counters securely and unauthorized requests fail while essential traps remain observable. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
B:Only authenticated collectors and devices exchange model-consistent telemetry, and certificate rotation can be validated without blind trust bypass. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
D:The collector identifies correct source and destination flows with explicit sampling limits and detects exporter or template loss. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
Question 650
For an original SPCOR service-provider engineering scenario, consider: Two concurrent CI jobs write the same Terraform state for network infrastructure and produce conflicting resource identities. Select TWO complementary steps: the targeted correction and its strongest prechange validation.
- Check: Check bootstrap trust, certificate or signed-image verification, credential issuance, endpoint authorization and failure handling in a spare router lab.
- Delete the state whenever drift appears and immediately apply all proposed replacements without any plan review.
- Change: Keep state in an access-controlled locked backend and review plans and drift against provider-supported network resources before apply.
- Check: Check state addresses, lock contention, plan create-update-destroy actions and expected controller changes in a sandbox.
- Change: Represent service intent using supported Cisco NSO models and dry-run transactional changes and validate device diffs and recovery behavior.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Evidence: Check state addresses, lock contention, plan create-update-destroy actions and expected controller changes in a sandbox.
D:Acceptance: Reviewed plans converge expected resources without conflicting state writes or unapproved destructive network actions.
Incorrect Answers
A:Check: Check bootstrap trust, certificate or signed-image verification, credential issuance, endpoint authorization and failure handling in a spare router lab. Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption.
B:Terraform tracks managed resource identities in state and computes provider-specific actions; reliable remote state and locking prevent accidental concurrent corruption. Use this instead: Keep state in an access-controlled locked backend and review plans and drift against provider-supported network resources before apply.
E:Change: Represent service intent using supported Cisco NSO models and dry-run transactional changes and validate device diffs and recovery behavior. Two concurrent CI jobs write the same Terraform state for network infrastructure and produce conflicting resource identities.
