cert
cert-1
cert-2

Pass Juniper JN0-364 Exam in First Attempt Guaranteed!

Get 100% Latest Exam Questions, Accurate & Verified Answers to Pass the Actual Exam!
30 Days Free Updates, Instant Download!

cert-5
cert-6
JN0-364 Exam - Verified By Experts
JN0-364 Premium File

JN0-364 Premium File

$69.99
$76.99
  • Premium File 69 Questions & Answers. Last Update: Nov 06, 2026

Whats Included:

  • Latest Questions
  • 100% Accurate Answers
  • Fast Exam Updates
 
$76.99
$69.99
accept 11 downloads in the last 7 days
block-screenshots
Juniper JN0-364 Practice Test 25

Question 240

A provider network team identifies this situation: An import policy accidentally rejects a legitimate customer /24. What verification evidence MOST CLEARLY demonstrates the solution is working? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. The approved /24 is accepted without opening broad unintended acceptance
  2. The endpoint MAC is learned in the expected VLAN
  3. The unintended default is withdrawn without suppressing required prefixes
  4. Route availability matches the intentional reflection or mesh architecture

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

The approved /24 is accepted without opening broad unintended acceptance is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: An import policy accidentally rejects a legitimate customer /24. Technical basis: Junos BGP import policies govern acceptance and route attributes before routes become eligible for the local RIB.

Incorrect Answers

B:

That option concerns Access port VLAN membership. Junos BGP import policies govern acceptance and route attributes before routes become eligible for the local RIB.

C:

That option concerns BGP outbound advertisement policy. Junos BGP import policies govern acceptance and route attributes before routes become eligible for the local RIB.

D:

Route availability matches the intentional reflection or mesh architecture is relevant to the different engineering topic "IBGP route propagation constraints", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: An import policy accidentally rejects a legitimate customer /24. the best answer here is: The approved /24 is accepted without opening broad unintended acceptance.

Question 241

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. Which technical approach MOST DIRECTLY addresses the issue? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Verify the BGP NEXT_HOP resolves in the correct table before expecting installation
  2. Use show bgp neighbor and show route protocol/receive/advertising views to separate session, policy and RIB problems
  3. Place interfaces in the correct OSPF area and maintain intended backbone connectivity
  4. Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. Technical basis: Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Verify the BGP NEXT_HOP resolves in the correct table before expecting installation is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP next-hop reachability", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. the best answer here is: Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks.

B:

Use show bgp neighbor and show route protocol/receive/advertising views to separate session, policy and RIB problems is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP route-troubleshooting CLI", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. the best answer here is: Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks.

C:

That option concerns OSPF backbone membership. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

Question 242

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. What specific configuration or diagnostic action BEST implements the intended response? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Review full-mesh or supported route-reflection design rather than changing EBGP ASNs
  2. Inspect database description exchange and relevant mismatch counters
  3. Apply explicit BGP export policy matching authorized active routes
  4. Inspect current route candidates and identify the first decisive comparison

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Apply explicit BGP export policy matching authorized active routes is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. Technical basis: Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns IBGP route propagation constraints. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

B:

That option concerns OSPF LSDB synchronization. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

D:

Inspect current route candidates and identify the first decisive comparison is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP best-path selection order", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. the best answer here is: Apply explicit BGP export policy matching authorized active routes.

Question 243

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. Which observation would MOST RELIABLY verify the intended outcome? Select ONE best answer.

  1. The route client promptly reacts when BFD session Down is confirmed
  2. The neighbor sees exactly the intended advertised prefixes
  3. The BGP prefix becomes eligible only when the next hop resolves
  4. Peers share the approved policy but retain valid independent sessions

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The neighbor sees exactly the intended advertised prefixes is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. Technical basis: Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns BFD rapid failure detection. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

C:

The BGP prefix becomes eligible only when the next hop resolves is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP next-hop reachability", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. the best answer here is: The neighbor sees exactly the intended advertised prefixes.

D:

Peers share the approved policy but retain valid independent sessions is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP peer-group policy inheritance", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A provider must advertise only assigned public prefixes to its upstream. the best answer here is: The neighbor sees exactly the intended advertised prefixes.

Question 244

A provider network team identifies this situation: A default route begins leaking to a settlement-free peer unexpectedly. Which engineering decision BEST fits the stated requirement? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Apply BGP's ordered path-selection criteria rather than selecting routes by one attribute in isolation
  2. Use IGP SPF results and segment labels to validate shortest-path SR-MPLS forwarding
  3. Interpret OPEN, UPDATE, KEEPALIVE and NOTIFICATION roles during session setup and operation
  4. Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: A default route begins leaking to a settlement-free peer unexpectedly. Technical basis: Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Apply BGP's ordered path-selection criteria rather than selecting routes by one attribute in isolation is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP best-path selection order", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A default route begins leaking to a settlement-free peer unexpectedly. the best answer here is: Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks.

B:

That option concerns SR-MPLS shortest-path transport. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

C:

Interpret OPEN, UPDATE, KEEPALIVE and NOTIFICATION roles during session setup and operation is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP message processing", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A default route begins leaking to a settlement-free peer unexpectedly. the best answer here is: Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks.

Question 245

A provider network team identifies this situation: A default route begins leaking to a settlement-free peer unexpectedly. Which implementation or troubleshooting step is MOST APPROPRIATE here? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Align timer configuration under controlled change on both ends
  2. Inspect policy and the route selection order before attributing the result to MED
  3. Inspect show route advertising-protocol bgp and export terms
  4. Inspect local preference and candidate route attributes in the local AS

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Inspect show route advertising-protocol bgp and export terms is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: A default route begins leaking to a settlement-free peer unexpectedly. Technical basis: Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns OSPF hello/dead agreement. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

B:

That option concerns BGP MED and peer comparison. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

D:

That option concerns BGP local preference selection. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

Question 246

A provider network team identifies this situation: A default route begins leaking to a settlement-free peer unexpectedly. What verification evidence MOST CLEARLY demonstrates the solution is working? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Operational roles permit the intended rapid transition
  2. The transport establishes and BGP progresses beyond Active
  3. The deviating neighbor configuration explains its behavior
  4. The unintended default is withdrawn without suppressing required prefixes

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

The unintended default is withdrawn without suppressing required prefixes is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: A default route begins leaking to a settlement-free peer unexpectedly. Technical basis: Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns RSTP rapid transitions. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

B:

That option concerns BGP TCP session and AS negotiation. Junos BGP export policy governs what eligible routes are advertised to peers.

C:

The deviating neighbor configuration explains its behavior is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP peer-group policy inheritance", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A default route begins leaking to a settlement-free peer unexpectedly. the best answer here is: The unintended default is withdrawn without suppressing required prefixes.

Question 247

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: An ISP brings up several customer eBGP peers with the same route-filter policy. Which technical approach MOST DIRECTLY addresses the issue? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Use BGP groups to share policy and common parameters while retaining correct peer-specific settings
  2. Interpret OPEN, UPDATE, KEEPALIVE and NOTIFICATION roles during session setup and operation
  3. Use show bgp neighbor and show route protocol/receive/advertising views to separate session, policy and RIB problems
  4. Use a resolvable next hop for a Junos static route instead of assuming a configured route is automatically active

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Use BGP groups to share policy and common parameters while retaining correct peer-specific settings is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: An ISP brings up several customer eBGP peers with the same route-filter policy. Technical basis: A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Interpret OPEN, UPDATE, KEEPALIVE and NOTIFICATION roles during session setup and operation is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP message processing", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: An ISP brings up several customer eBGP peers with the same route-filter policy. the best answer here is: Use BGP groups to share policy and common parameters while retaining correct peer-specific settings.

C:

Use show bgp neighbor and show route protocol/receive/advertising views to separate session, policy and RIB problems is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP route-troubleshooting CLI", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: An ISP brings up several customer eBGP peers with the same route-filter policy. the best answer here is: Use BGP groups to share policy and common parameters while retaining correct peer-specific settings.

D:

That option concerns Static-route next-hop resolution. A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

Question 248

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: An ISP brings up several customer eBGP peers with the same route-filter policy. What specific configuration or diagnostic action BEST implements the intended response? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Create a suitable BGP group and set each peer's correct AS and address
  2. Configure the BGP neighbor with the correct peer AS and reachable endpoint
  3. Inspect mpls.0 and relevant forwarding entries for the assigned label
  4. Review full-mesh or supported route-reflection design rather than changing EBGP ASNs

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Create a suitable BGP group and set each peer's correct AS and address is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: An ISP brings up several customer eBGP peers with the same route-filter policy. Technical basis: A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Configure the BGP neighbor with the correct peer AS and reachable endpoint is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP TCP session and AS negotiation", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: An ISP brings up several customer eBGP peers with the same route-filter policy. the best answer here is: Create a suitable BGP group and set each peer's correct AS and address.

C:

That option concerns MPLS route and forwarding tables. A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

D:

That option concerns IBGP route propagation constraints. A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

Question 249

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: An ISP brings up several customer eBGP peers with the same route-filter policy. Which observation would MOST RELIABLY verify the intended outcome? Select ONE best answer.

  1. The preferred route follows actual ordered policy rules
  2. The design meets both reachability and confidentiality requirements
  3. Peers share the approved policy but retain valid independent sessions
  4. Ingress path selection reflects policy where MED is eligible for comparison

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Peers share the approved policy but retain valid independent sessions is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: An ISP brings up several customer eBGP peers with the same route-filter policy. Technical basis: A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns BGP best-path selection order. A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

B:

That option concerns GRE protocol and security limitations. A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

D:

That option concerns BGP MED and peer comparison, not the requirement in this case.

Question 250

A provider network team identifies this situation: A policy change works for all but one peer in a group. Which engineering decision BEST fits the stated requirement? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Configure an eBGP or iBGP peer with the correct peer AS and reachable TCP endpoint
  2. Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks
  3. Use BGP groups to share policy and common parameters while retaining correct peer-specific settings
  4. Advertise IPv6 prefixes using supported IS-IS IPv6 address-family capability and TLVs

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Use BGP groups to share policy and common parameters while retaining correct peer-specific settings is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: A policy change works for all but one peer in a group. Technical basis: A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Configure an eBGP or iBGP peer with the correct peer AS and reachable TCP endpoint is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP TCP session and AS negotiation", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A policy change works for all but one peer in a group. the best answer here is: Use BGP groups to share policy and common parameters while retaining correct peer-specific settings.

B:

Control BGP route advertisements with explicit export policy and eligibility checks is relevant to the different engineering topic "BGP outbound advertisement policy", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A policy change works for all but one peer in a group. the best answer here is: Use BGP groups to share policy and common parameters while retaining correct peer-specific settings.

D:

That option concerns IS-IS IPv6 reachability. A Junos BGP group provides common configuration for neighbors, which can be overridden or completed per peer as supported.

Service Provider Routing and Switching, Specialist (JNCIS-SP) (JN0-364) Practice Tests