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 57

Question 560

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A provider circuit requires at least two active 10G members to meet an SLA. What specific configuration or diagnostic action BEST implements the intended response? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Configure supported LACP modes and consistent ae membership
  2. Configure supported GRES and synchronized configuration behavior
  3. Inspect database description exchange and relevant mismatch counters
  4. Configure the supported minimum-links threshold and monitor member state

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Configure the supported minimum-links threshold and monitor member state is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: A provider circuit requires at least two active 10G members to meet an SLA. Technical basis: A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Configure supported LACP modes and consistent ae membership is relevant to the different engineering topic "LAG and LACP negotiation", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A provider circuit requires at least two active 10G members to meet an SLA. the best answer here is: Configure the supported minimum-links threshold and monitor member state.

B:

Configure supported GRES and synchronized configuration behavior is relevant to the different engineering topic "GRES Routing Engine failover", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A provider circuit requires at least two active 10G members to meet an SLA. the best answer here is: Configure the supported minimum-links threshold and monitor member state.

C:

That option concerns OSPF LSDB synchronization. A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

Question 561

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A provider circuit requires at least two active 10G members to meet an SLA. Which observation would MOST RELIABLY verify the intended outcome? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Both eligible member links appear active in show lacp interfaces
  2. The aggregate's operational state reflects the required active-member count
  3. Relevant protocol state persists across a controlled failover
  4. The chosen active route and actual forwarding next hop can be reconciled

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The aggregate's operational state reflects the required active-member count is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: A provider circuit requires at least two active 10G members to meet an SLA. Technical basis: A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Both eligible member links appear active in show lacp interfaces is relevant to the different engineering topic "LAG and LACP negotiation", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A provider circuit requires at least two active 10G members to meet an SLA. the best answer here is: The aggregate's operational state reflects the required active-member count.

C:

That option concerns Nonstop active routing NSR. A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

D:

That option concerns Active-route versus hidden-route triage. A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

Question 562

A provider network team identifies this situation: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. Which engineering decision BEST fits the stated requirement? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Apply appropriate aggregated-Ethernet minimum-link conditions before declaring a degraded bundle operational
  2. Use VRRP priorities and tracking to provide a resilient virtual default gateway on an eligible segment
  3. Use protocol graceful restart only where neighbors support the necessary restart signaling and helper behavior
  4. Assign stable distinct OSPF router identifiers across the participating topology

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Apply appropriate aggregated-Ethernet minimum-link conditions before declaring a degraded bundle operational is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. Technical basis: A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Use VRRP priorities and tracking to provide a resilient virtual default gateway on an eligible segment is relevant to the different engineering topic "VRRP virtual gateway failover", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. the best answer here is: Apply appropriate aggregated-Ethernet minimum-link conditions before declaring a degraded bundle operational.

C:

Use protocol graceful restart only where neighbors support the necessary restart signaling and helper behavior is relevant to the different engineering topic "Graceful restart helper coordination", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. the best answer here is: Apply appropriate aggregated-Ethernet minimum-link conditions before declaring a degraded bundle operational.

D:

That option concerns OSPF router-ID uniqueness. A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

Question 563

A provider network team identifies this situation: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. Which implementation or troubleshooting step is MOST APPROPRIATE here? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Inspect GRES synchronization and commit synchronization settings
  2. Check member state and configured minimum-links policy
  3. Compare native VLAN configuration on each side
  4. Inspect helper support, restart timers and protocol-specific state

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Check member state and configured minimum-links policy is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. Technical basis: A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Inspect GRES synchronization and commit synchronization settings is relevant to the different engineering topic "GRES Routing Engine failover", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. the best answer here is: Check member state and configured minimum-links policy.

C:

That option concerns Native VLAN and untagged trunk behavior. A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

D:

Inspect helper support, restart timers and protocol-specific state is relevant to the different engineering topic "Graceful restart helper coordination", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. the best answer here is: Check member state and configured minimum-links policy.

Question 564

A provider network team identifies this situation: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. What verification evidence MOST CLEARLY demonstrates the solution is working? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. The service fails or continues only according to the approved threshold
  2. The healthy backup becomes master and external reachability recovers
  3. The failure is attributed to unsupported or mismatched GR conditions
  4. The path is validated by IGP SID and label forwarding state

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

The service fails or continues only according to the approved threshold is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. Technical basis: A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The healthy backup becomes master and external reachability recovers is relevant to the different engineering topic "VRRP virtual gateway failover", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. the best answer here is: The service fails or continues only according to the approved threshold.

C:

The failure is attributed to unsupported or mismatched GR conditions is relevant to the different engineering topic "Graceful restart helper coordination", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A three-member LAG loses two links and behaves differently from design expectations. the best answer here is: The service fails or continues only according to the approved threshold.

D:

That option concerns SR-MPLS shortest-path transport. A minimum-links threshold can prevent operation when insufficient links remain, protecting capacity assumptions.

Question 565

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. Which technical approach MOST DIRECTLY addresses the issue? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Use graceful Routing Engine switchover where supported to preserve forwarding across a control-plane transition
  2. Inspect VLAN membership and Ethernet-switching MAC tables to confirm layer-2 implementation
  3. Use BFD with a supported routing protocol to detect forwarding-path failures faster than its regular Hello timers
  4. Use nonstop bridging with its platform-specific GRES dependency when L2 state continuity matters

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Use graceful Routing Engine switchover where supported to preserve forwarding across a control-plane transition is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. Technical basis: GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

Incorrect Answers

B:

That option concerns Junos VLAN operational validation. GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

C:

Use BFD with a supported routing protocol to detect forwarding-path failures faster than its regular Hello timers is relevant to the different engineering topic "BFD rapid failure detection", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. the best answer here is: Use graceful Routing Engine switchover where supported to preserve forwarding across a control-plane transition.

D:

Use nonstop bridging with its platform-specific GRES dependency when L2 state continuity matters is relevant to the different engineering topic "Nonstop bridging during RE switchover", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. the best answer here is: Use graceful Routing Engine switchover where supported to preserve forwarding across a control-plane transition.

Question 566

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. What specific configuration or diagnostic action BEST implements the intended response? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Inspect the corresponding router LSA in that area database
  2. Configure supported BFD for the peer with safe negotiated intervals
  3. Configure and verify supported graceful restart and helper capabilities
  4. Configure supported GRES and synchronized configuration behavior

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Configure supported GRES and synchronized configuration behavior is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. Technical basis: GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That option concerns Router-LSA type-one interpretation. GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

B:

Configure supported BFD for the peer with safe negotiated intervals is relevant to the different engineering topic "BFD rapid failure detection", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. the best answer here is: Configure supported GRES and synchronized configuration behavior.

C:

That option concerns Graceful restart helper coordination. GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

Question 567

A Junos service-provider engineer is reviewing this operational case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. Which observation would MOST RELIABLY verify the intended outcome? Select ONE best answer.

  1. Both eligible member links appear active in show lacp interfaces
  2. Layer2 forwarding and protocol state remain stable under approved failover
  3. Forwarding continuity is maintained during controlled switchover
  4. The advertising DR represents the broadcast segment accurately

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Forwarding continuity is maintained during controlled switchover is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. Technical basis: GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Both eligible member links appear active in show lacp interfaces is relevant to the different engineering topic "LAG and LACP negotiation", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. the best answer here is: Forwarding continuity is maintained during controlled switchover.

B:

Layer2 forwarding and protocol state remain stable under approved failover is relevant to the different engineering topic "Nonstop bridging during RE switchover", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A dual-RE core chassis needs resilient control-plane failover during maintenance. the best answer here is: Forwarding continuity is maintained during controlled switchover.

D:

That option concerns Network-LSA type-two interpretation. GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

Question 568

A provider network team identifies this situation: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. Which engineering decision BEST fits the stated requirement? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Use nonstop bridging with its platform-specific GRES dependency when L2 state continuity matters
  2. Use graceful Routing Engine switchover where supported to preserve forwarding across a control-plane transition
  3. Use generated routes when a synthesized route should depend on contributing route information under policy
  4. Apply appropriate aggregated-Ethernet minimum-link conditions before declaring a degraded bundle operational

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Use graceful Routing Engine switchover where supported to preserve forwarding across a control-plane transition is the best technical design or decision for this Junos service-provider case: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. Technical basis: GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Use nonstop bridging with its platform-specific GRES dependency when L2 state continuity matters is relevant to the different engineering topic "Nonstop bridging during RE switchover", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. the best answer here is: Use graceful Routing Engine switchover where supported to preserve forwarding across a control-plane transition.

C:

That option concerns Generated-route dependencies. GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

D:

Apply appropriate aggregated-Ethernet minimum-link conditions before declaring a degraded bundle operational is relevant to the different engineering topic "Aggregated-Ethernet minimum links", but it is not the most directly supported technical design or decision for this precise case: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. the best answer here is: Use graceful Routing Engine switchover where supported to preserve forwarding across a control-plane transition.

Question 569

A provider network team identifies this situation: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. Which implementation or troubleshooting step is MOST APPROPRIATE here? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Check member state and configured minimum-links policy
  2. Check LACP partner system/key state and aggregation configuration
  3. Observe the new DIS election and LSP convergence
  4. Inspect GRES synchronization and commit synchronization settings

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Inspect GRES synchronization and commit synchronization settings is the best implementation and troubleshooting step for this Junos service-provider case: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. Technical basis: GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Check member state and configured minimum-links policy is relevant to the different engineering topic "Aggregated-Ethernet minimum links", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. the best answer here is: Inspect GRES synchronization and commit synchronization settings.

B:

Check LACP partner system/key state and aggregation configuration is relevant to the different engineering topic "LAG and LACP negotiation", but it is not the most directly supported implementation and troubleshooting step for this precise case: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. the best answer here is: Inspect GRES synchronization and commit synchronization settings.

C:

That option concerns IS-IS LAN DIS election. GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

Question 570

A provider network team identifies this situation: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. What verification evidence MOST CLEARLY demonstrates the solution is working? Choose ONE best answer.

  1. Both engines have matching intended configuration state
  2. The service fails or continues only according to the approved threshold
  3. The healthy backup becomes master and external reachability recovers
  4. The approved /24 is accepted without opening broad unintended acceptance

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Both engines have matching intended configuration state is the best operational verification evidence for this Junos service-provider case: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. Technical basis: GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The service fails or continues only according to the approved threshold is relevant to the different engineering topic "Aggregated-Ethernet minimum links", but it is not the most directly supported operational verification evidence for this precise case: A standby Routing Engine does not have synchronized configuration after a change. the best answer here is: Both engines have matching intended configuration state.

C:

That option concerns VRRP virtual gateway failover. GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

D:

That option concerns BGP inbound routing policy. GRES synchronizes key forwarding and interface state between Routing Engines to reduce traffic interruption.

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