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 30

Question 290

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A service-management port sends untagged control traffic on a shared trunk. What specific configuration or diagnostic action BEST implements the intended response? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Check native VLAN policy on both peers and avoid accidental customer mixing
  2. Assign separate provider S-VLANs while retaining each customer inner tag
  3. Inspect show vlans and show ethernet-switching table with port membership
  4. Configure the common VRRP virtual address and appropriate priorities

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Check native VLAN policy on both peers and avoid accidental customer mixing is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: A service-management port sends untagged control traffic on a shared trunk. Technical basis: On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Assign separate provider S-VLANs while retaining each customer inner tag is relevant to the different engineering topic "Provider bridging Q-in-Q", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A service-management port sends untagged control traffic on a shared trunk. the best answer here is: Check native VLAN policy on both peers and avoid accidental customer mixing.

C:

Inspect show vlans and show ethernet-switching table with port membership is relevant to the different engineering topic "Junos VLAN operational validation", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A service-management port sends untagged control traffic on a shared trunk. the best answer here is: Check native VLAN policy on both peers and avoid accidental customer mixing.

D:

That option concerns VRRP virtual gateway failover. On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

Question 291

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A service-management port sends untagged control traffic on a shared trunk. Which observation would MOST RELIABLY verify the intended outcome? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Traffic exits using the translated tag required by the remote segment
  2. The designed core bridge is elected root
  3. The untagged traffic lands only in its approved VLAN
  4. MAC learning and flooding remain isolated by customer context

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The untagged traffic lands only in its approved VLAN is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: A service-management port sends untagged control traffic on a shared trunk. Technical basis: On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Traffic exits using the translated tag required by the remote segment is relevant to the different engineering topic "VLAN translation distinction", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A service-management port sends untagged control traffic on a shared trunk. the best answer here is: The untagged traffic lands only in its approved VLAN.

B:

That option concerns STP root bridge placement. On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

D:

MAC learning and flooding remain isolated by customer context is relevant to the different engineering topic "Virtual-switch routing instance", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A service-management port sends untagged control traffic on a shared trunk. the best answer here is: The untagged traffic lands only in its approved VLAN.

Question 292

A provider network team identifies this situation: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. Which engineering decision BEST fits the stated requirement? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Use a service VLAN outer tag to transport distinct customer VLANs through a provider bridge
  2. Understand unknown-destination unicast flooding within a bridge domain until learning occurs
  3. Match IS-IS authentication configuration on participating interfaces and levels
  4. Treat the trunk native VLAN as a deliberate untagged-frame mapping, not a generic security bypass

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Treat the trunk native VLAN as a deliberate untagged-frame mapping, not a generic security bypass is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. Technical basis: On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Use a service VLAN outer tag to transport distinct customer VLANs through a provider bridge is relevant to the different engineering topic "Provider bridging Q-in-Q", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. the best answer here is: Treat the trunk native VLAN as a deliberate untagged-frame mapping, not a generic security bypass.

B:

That option concerns Unknown unicast and flooding. On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

C:

That option concerns IS-IS authentication checks. On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

Question 293

A provider network team identifies this situation: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. Which implementation or troubleshooting step is MOST APPROPRIATE here? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Check both ends for matching VLAN allowlists and tags
  2. Compare native VLAN configuration on each side
  3. Check access VLAN assignment and port state
  4. Check incoming and outgoing label operations for the LSP

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Compare native VLAN configuration on each side is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. Technical basis: On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Check both ends for matching VLAN allowlists and tags is relevant to the different engineering topic "Trunk tagging and VLAN allowlist", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. the best answer here is: Compare native VLAN configuration on each side.

C:

Check access VLAN assignment and port state is relevant to the different engineering topic "Access port VLAN membership", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. the best answer here is: Compare native VLAN configuration on each side.

D:

That option concerns MPLS push swap pop forwarding. On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

Question 294

A provider network team identifies this situation: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. What verification evidence MOST CLEARLY demonstrates the solution is working? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Route availability matches the intentional reflection or mesh architecture
  2. The MAC table correctly points to the intended handoff after repair
  3. The endpoint MAC is learned in the expected VLAN
  4. Untagged traffic is consistently mapped and unrelated tenant VLANs remain isolated

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Untagged traffic is consistently mapped and unrelated tenant VLANs remain isolated is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. Technical basis: On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns IBGP route propagation constraints. On platforms supporting a native VLAN, untagged frames on a trunk can be assigned to a designated VLAN.

B:

The MAC table correctly points to the intended handoff after repair is relevant to the different engineering topic "Junos VLAN operational validation", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. the best answer here is: Untagged traffic is consistently mapped and unrelated tenant VLANs remain isolated.

C:

The endpoint MAC is learned in the expected VLAN is relevant to the different engineering topic "Access port VLAN membership", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A trunk mismatch places untagged test frames into the wrong tenant segment. the best answer here is: Untagged traffic is consistently mapped and unrelated tenant VLANs remain isolated.

Question 295

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. Which technical approach MOST DIRECTLY addresses the issue? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Account for implicit-null advertisement and penultimate-hop popping when validating an MPLS egress
  2. Use a service VLAN outer tag to transport distinct customer VLANs through a provider bridge
  3. Diagnose Ethernet MAC learning by VLAN and ingress port before changing bridge forwarding policy
  4. Use IRB interfaces when authorized L3 routing is needed between distinct VLAN broadcast domains

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Use a service VLAN outer tag to transport distinct customer VLANs through a provider bridge is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. Technical basis: Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns Penultimate-hop popping. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

C:

Diagnose Ethernet MAC learning by VLAN and ingress port before changing bridge forwarding policy is relevant to the different engineering topic "MAC-address dynamic learning", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. the best answer here is: Use a service VLAN outer tag to transport distinct customer VLANs through a provider bridge.

D:

Use IRB interfaces when authorized L3 routing is needed between distinct VLAN broadcast domains is relevant to the different engineering topic "Integrated routing and bridging", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. the best answer here is: Use a service VLAN outer tag to transport distinct customer VLANs through a provider bridge.

Question 296

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. What specific configuration or diagnostic action BEST implements the intended response? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Inspect the MAC forwarding table for the relevant VLAN and physical interface
  2. Assign separate provider S-VLANs while retaining each customer inner tag
  3. Configure the approved access port membership
  4. Review acceptable MED policy and path comparison behavior

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Assign separate provider S-VLANs while retaining each customer inner tag is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. Technical basis: Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Inspect the MAC forwarding table for the relevant VLAN and physical interface is relevant to the different engineering topic "MAC-address dynamic learning", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. the best answer here is: Assign separate provider S-VLANs while retaining each customer inner tag.

C:

That option concerns Access port VLAN membership. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

D:

That option concerns BGP MED and peer comparison. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

Question 297

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. Which observation would MOST RELIABLY verify the intended outcome? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Both allowed VLANs pass while VLAN700 is absent
  2. The customers traverse the shared network without VLAN collision
  3. The duplicate path is safely blocked or protected
  4. Devices reach the IRB gateway and authorized inter-VLAN destinations

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The customers traverse the shared network without VLAN collision is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. Technical basis: Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Both allowed VLANs pass while VLAN700 is absent is relevant to the different engineering topic "Trunk tagging and VLAN allowlist", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. the best answer here is: The customers traverse the shared network without VLAN collision.

C:

That option concerns Spanning-tree troubleshooting and edge settings. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

D:

Devices reach the IRB gateway and authorized inter-VLAN destinations is relevant to the different engineering topic "Integrated routing and bridging", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: Two enterprise customers both use inner VLAN100 across one provider metro-E segment. the best answer here is: The customers traverse the shared network without VLAN collision.

Question 298

A provider network team identifies this situation: A remote customer site sees its VLAN tagging altered after a provider upgrade. Which engineering decision BEST fits the stated requirement? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Use a service VLAN outer tag to transport distinct customer VLANs through a provider bridge
  2. Use graceful Routing Engine switchover where supported to preserve forwarding across a control-plane transition
  3. Choose VLAN tag translation when the service needs intentional replacement of an 802.1Q tag
  4. Use IRB interfaces when authorized L3 routing is needed between distinct VLAN broadcast domains

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Use a service VLAN outer tag to transport distinct customer VLANs through a provider bridge is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: A remote customer site sees its VLAN tagging altered after a provider upgrade. Technical basis: Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

Incorrect Answers

B:

That option concerns GRES Routing Engine failover. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

C:

That option concerns VLAN translation distinction. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

D:

Use IRB interfaces when authorized L3 routing is needed between distinct VLAN broadcast domains is relevant to the different engineering topic "Integrated routing and bridging", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A remote customer site sees its VLAN tagging altered after a provider upgrade. the best answer here is: Use a service VLAN outer tag to transport distinct customer VLANs through a provider bridge.

Question 299

A provider network team identifies this situation: A remote customer site sees its VLAN tagging altered after a provider upgrade. Which implementation or troubleshooting step is MOST APPROPRIATE here? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Check the transport addresses and route to the neighbor's LDP identifier
  2. Inspect IRB unit, VLAN association and L3 address
  3. Inspect outer and inner tag handling on the QinQ service
  4. Check both ends for matching VLAN allowlists and tags

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Inspect outer and inner tag handling on the QinQ service is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: A remote customer site sees its VLAN tagging altered after a provider upgrade. Technical basis: Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns LDP session discovery. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

B:

Inspect IRB unit, VLAN association and L3 address is relevant to the different engineering topic "Integrated routing and bridging", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A remote customer site sees its VLAN tagging altered after a provider upgrade. the best answer here is: Inspect outer and inner tag handling on the QinQ service.

D:

Check both ends for matching VLAN allowlists and tags is relevant to the different engineering topic "Trunk tagging and VLAN allowlist", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A remote customer site sees its VLAN tagging altered after a provider upgrade. the best answer here is: Inspect outer and inner tag handling on the QinQ service.

Question 300

A provider network team identifies this situation: A remote customer site sees its VLAN tagging altered after a provider upgrade. What verification evidence MOST CLEARLY demonstrates the solution is working? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. The specific IPv6 prefix becomes visible after correcting advertisement
  2. Unknown unicast is contained within the intended broadcast domain
  3. Untagged traffic is consistently mapped and unrelated tenant VLANs remain isolated
  4. The expected C-VLAN remains intact from ingress to egress

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

The expected C-VLAN remains intact from ingress to egress is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: A remote customer site sees its VLAN tagging altered after a provider upgrade. Technical basis: Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns IS-IS IPv6 reachability. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

B:

That option concerns Unknown unicast and flooding. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

C:

That option concerns Native VLAN and untagged trunk behavior. Q-in-Q adds a provider S-VLAN tag while retaining the customer's inner C-VLAN tag.

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