Juniper JN0-650 Practice Test 29
Question 280
An overly aggressive dampening design suppresses a recovered critical prefix. Which next investigation or correction is MOST appropriate?
- Examine suppression status penalty decay and recovery timing.
- Check BGP advertised families and show route table inet6.0 protocol bgp.
- Inspect reflected path originator ID cluster list and neighbor client roles.
- Raise Ethernet MTU to eliminate every BGP route-flap penalty.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Examine suppression status penalty decay and recovery timing. This checks whether flapping prefixes are damped according to intended thresholds and recover within acceptable time.
Incorrect Answers
B:Check BGP advertised families and show route table inet6.0 protocol bgp. That check applies chiefly to BGP NLRI IPv6 unicast inet6 family, not the current BGP route damping flap penalty issue. Route damping suppresses unstable routes but adds recovery latency.
C:Inspect reflected path originator ID cluster list and neighbor client roles. That check applies chiefly to BGP route reflection cluster, not the current BGP route damping flap penalty issue. Route damping suppresses unstable routes but adds recovery latency.
D:Raise Ethernet MTU to eliminate every BGP route-flap penalty. That bypass leaves the BGP route damping flap penalty issue unresolved. Damping critical destinations without review can prolong customer downtime.
Question 281
A BGP prefix is received but appears hidden because its next hop cannot resolve. Which configuration or operational step BEST meets the stated requirement?
- Restore valid next-hop reachability without indiscriminately accepting broken routes.
- Apply controlled AS_PATH prepending in export policy to appropriate external neighbors.
- Lower an unrelated interface MTU to fix missing BGP next-hop resolution.
- Export appropriate MED values where comparison conditions and policy support them.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Restore valid next-hop reachability without indiscriminately accepting broken routes. BGP path eligibility depends on successful next-hop resolution in the routing table. The expected validation is that the BGP route becomes active after recursive next-hop resolution succeeds.
Incorrect Answers
B:Apply controlled AS_PATH prepending in export policy to appropriate external neighbors. This addresses BGP AS path prepend outbound advertisement rather than the required BGP next-hop reachability hidden route decision. BGP path eligibility depends on successful next-hop resolution in the routing table.
C:Lower an unrelated interface MTU to fix missing BGP next-hop resolution. This is a risky or ineffective shortcut for BGP next-hop reachability hidden route. An accepted advertisement with an unusable next hop may not be installed.
D:Export appropriate MED values where comparison conditions and policy support them. This addresses BGP MED inbound traffic hint rather than the required BGP next-hop reachability hidden route decision. BGP path eligibility depends on successful next-hop resolution in the routing table.
Question 282
A technician assumes an IPv4 239/8 address can be reused unchanged as an IPv6 multicast address. Which technical principle BEST explains the IPv6 multicast scope and group use decision?
- IPv6 multicast uses ff00::/8 scoped addressing separate from IPv4 group syntax.
- IGMP queriers maintain host membership state on a local multicast segment.
- IGMP expresses host interest in groups while routing protocols move traffic between subnets.
- VLAN stacking requires compatible tag interpretation and consistent port behavior.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:IPv6 multicast uses ff00::/8 scoped addressing separate from IPv4 group syntax. In this situation, the relevant action is to select appropriate IPv6 multicast addressing and scope behavior for intended receivers.
Incorrect Answers
B:IGMP queriers maintain host membership state on a local multicast segment. That principle is related to IGMP querier on subscriber VLAN, not the main IPv6 multicast scope and group use choice. Mis-scoped multicast can leak too far or fail to reach authorized hosts.
C:IGMP expresses host interest in groups while routing protocols move traffic between subnets. That principle is related to IGMPv2 membership report and leave, not the main IPv6 multicast scope and group use choice. Mis-scoped multicast can leak too far or fail to reach authorized hosts.
D:VLAN stacking requires compatible tag interpretation and consistent port behavior. That principle is related to QinQ tag protocol EtherType compatibility, not the main IPv6 multicast scope and group use choice. Mis-scoped multicast can leak too far or fail to reach authorized hosts.
Question 283
A Junos switch exchanges spanning-tree BPDUs with another vendor on tagged VLAN trunks. Which configuration or operational step BEST meets the stated requirement?
- Validate compatible VSTP participation per VLAN and consistent trunk membership.
- Configure only OSPF neighbor authentication and assume tagged STP BPDUs become compatible.
- Align MSTP region name revision and VLAN-to-instance mapping across intended peers.
- Configure appropriate VSTP VLAN-specific bridge priorities and port values.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Validate compatible VSTP participation per VLAN and consistent trunk membership. Per-VLAN STP compatibility depends on VLAN tagging and protocol expectations. The expected validation is that correct VLAN STP instances exchange control frames and maintain loop-free forwarding.
Incorrect Answers
B:Configure only OSPF neighbor authentication and assume tagged STP BPDUs become compatible. This is a risky or ineffective shortcut for VSTP interoperation and VLAN tagging. Different BPDU handling per VLAN can leave only some VLANs unprotected.
C:Align MSTP region name revision and VLAN-to-instance mapping across intended peers. This addresses MSTP region name revision and VLAN digest rather than the required VSTP interoperation and VLAN tagging decision. Per-VLAN STP compatibility depends on VLAN tagging and protocol expectations.
D:Configure appropriate VSTP VLAN-specific bridge priorities and port values. This addresses VSTP per-VLAN root distribution rather than the required VSTP interoperation and VLAN tagging decision. Per-VLAN STP compatibility depends on VLAN tagging and protocol expectations.
Question 284
During an operational risk review, this situation is reported: An ingress filter maps an intended management flow to a user VLAN unexpectedly. If the underlying control is neglected, which failure would MOST directly follow?
- An overly broad match can reclassify unrelated packets into the wrong broadcast domain.
- Enabling it on legitimate interswitch links can unnecessarily disable useful uplinks.
- A valid group membership cannot compensate for a failed RPF incoming-interface check.
- Changing the switch IP address does not correct an endpoint access VLAN mismatch.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:An overly broad match can reclassify unrelated packets into the wrong broadcast domain. Filter-based VLAN decisions can classify traffic by supported packet fields instead of fixed port membership alone. A useful corrective investigation is to check filter terms counters and learned VLAN association for sample ingress frames.
Incorrect Answers
B:Enabling it on legitimate interswitch links can unnecessarily disable useful uplinks. This is a BPDU protection on access edges failure pattern, not the primary Filter-based VLAN assignment failure in this case. Filter-based VLAN decisions can classify traffic by supported packet fields instead of fixed port membership alone.
C:A valid group membership cannot compensate for a failed RPF incoming-interface check. This is a Multicast RPF shortest reverse path check failure pattern, not the primary Filter-based VLAN assignment failure in this case. Filter-based VLAN decisions can classify traffic by supported packet fields instead of fixed port membership alone.
D:Changing the switch IP address does not correct an endpoint access VLAN mismatch. This is a Ethernet access interface VLAN membership failure pattern, not the primary Filter-based VLAN assignment failure in this case. Filter-based VLAN decisions can classify traffic by supported packet fields instead of fixed port membership alone.
Question 285
A remote office must redistribute a local static prefix while the area limits ordinary type-5 flooding. Which configuration or operational step BEST meets the stated requirement?
- Configure an appropriate NSSA design and verify type-7 external translation where applicable.
- Assign deliberate OSPF interface costs and check the total path metric.
- Use a consistent OSPF reference-bandwidth policy across the intended routing domain.
- Assume a type-7 LSA is a BGP VPN label advertisement.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Configure an appropriate NSSA design and verify type-7 external translation where applicable. NSSA can carry type-7 external LSAs and ABRs may translate them to type-5. The expected validation is that nSSA-local external reachability is advertised as expected into other areas.
Incorrect Answers
B:Assign deliberate OSPF interface costs and check the total path metric. This addresses OSPF path cost selection rather than the required OSPF NSSA type-seven translation decision. NSSA can carry type-7 external LSAs and ABRs may translate them to type-5.
C:Use a consistent OSPF reference-bandwidth policy across the intended routing domain. This addresses OSPF reference bandwidth and high-speed links rather than the required OSPF NSSA type-seven translation decision. NSSA can carry type-7 external LSAs and ABRs may translate them to type-5.
D:Assume a type-7 LSA is a BGP VPN label advertisement. This is a risky or ineffective shortcut for OSPF NSSA type-seven translation. Treating NSSA redistribution as a normal stub area can suppress required external routes.
Question 286
A conference-room port connects several users through a small downstream switch. Which configuration or operational step BEST meets the stated requirement?
- Configure a supported multi-supplicant policy with the intended authorization granularity.
- Select unrestricted port-based admission whenever there is more than one client.
- Configure supported 802.1X authenticator on edge ports and RADIUS server reachability.
- Configure appropriate supplicant EAP trust and supported RADIUS certificate or credential policy.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Configure a supported multi-supplicant policy with the intended authorization granularity. 802.1X host-mode behavior controls whether access applies per endpoint or per port. The expected validation is that each permitted identity is authorized without inheriting unrelated devices' access.
Incorrect Answers
B:Select unrestricted port-based admission whenever there is more than one client. This is a risky or ineffective shortcut for 802.1X multi-supplicant port control. Treating one successful login as authorization for every attached client increases exposure.
C:Configure supported 802.1X authenticator on edge ports and RADIUS server reachability. This addresses 802.1X supplicant authenticator RADIUS roles rather than the required 802.1X multi-supplicant port control decision. 802.1X host-mode behavior controls whether access applies per endpoint or per port.
D:Configure appropriate supplicant EAP trust and supported RADIUS certificate or credential policy. This addresses 802.1X EAP authentication credential validation rather than the required 802.1X multi-supplicant port control decision. 802.1X host-mode behavior controls whether access applies per endpoint or per port.
Question 287
Two tenants share a physical fabric but their overlay segments must remain isolated. Which technical principle BEST explains the VXLAN VNI to VLAN association decision?
- EVPN split-horizon prevents replication back toward the same multihomed Ethernet segment.
- VXLAN network identifiers distinguish overlay Layer 2 broadcast domains.
- IGMP snooping uses observed host joins to constrain layer-2 multicast replication.
- EVPN IP/MAC learning can support distributed ARP suppression where platforms support it.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:VXLAN network identifiers distinguish overlay Layer 2 broadcast domains. In this situation, the relevant action is to configure consistent supported VLAN-to-VNI mapping in the intended routing instances.
Incorrect Answers
A:EVPN split-horizon prevents replication back toward the same multihomed Ethernet segment. That principle is related to EVPN multihoming split horizon loop avoidance, not the main VXLAN VNI to VLAN association choice. Reusing wrong VNI mapping can leak traffic across tenant boundaries or break reachability.
C:IGMP snooping uses observed host joins to constrain layer-2 multicast replication. That principle is related to IGMP snooping access-port replication, not the main VXLAN VNI to VLAN association choice. Reusing wrong VNI mapping can leak traffic across tenant boundaries or break reachability.
D:EVPN IP/MAC learning can support distributed ARP suppression where platforms support it. That principle is related to EVPN ARP suppression from IP MAC bindings, not the main VXLAN VNI to VLAN association choice. Reusing wrong VNI mapping can leak traffic across tenant boundaries or break reachability.
Question 288
Multicast for an internal finance group must not leave a specified campus boundary. After deploying the recommended Multicast policy group scoping change, which result MOST directly verifies success?
- A (S,G) shortest-path tree forms when supported and efficient source routing is available.
- Both routers see expected PIM neighbors and build join state.
- Authorized groups forward while disallowed group joins or advertisements are rejected.
- Voice latency stays controlled while data classes continue transmitting.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Authorized groups forward while disallowed group joins or advertisements are rejected. This is the directly observable outcome for Multicast policy group scoping. Multicast routing policy or scoping constrains distribution without changing sender addresses.
Incorrect Answers
A:A (S,G) shortest-path tree forms when supported and efficient source routing is available. This validates ASM shared tree versus SPT switchover but does not directly demonstrate the required Multicast policy group scoping result. Multicast routing policy or scoping constrains distribution without changing sender addresses.
B:Both routers see expected PIM neighbors and build join state. This validates PIM sparse-mode neighbor discovery but does not directly demonstrate the required Multicast policy group scoping result. Multicast routing policy or scoping constrains distribution without changing sender addresses.
D:Voice latency stays controlled while data classes continue transmitting. This validates Scheduler strict priority and starvation but does not directly demonstrate the required Multicast policy group scoping result. Multicast routing policy or scoping constrains distribution without changing sender addresses.
Question 289
Two area-zero routers on an Ethernet link stay in Init because received Hellos list no reciprocal router ID. After deploying the recommended OSPFv2 Hello and Dead timer adjacency change, which result MOST directly verifies success?
- The preferred external route follows correct E1 total metric or E2 selection rules.
- A full adjacency forms after bidirectional Hellos and compatible timers are observed.
- Both ends form a Full adjacency without an unnecessary DR election.
- Incoming multicast packets arrive on the interface selected by a valid source route.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:A full adjacency forms after bidirectional Hellos and compatible timers are observed. This is the directly observable outcome for OSPFv2 Hello and Dead timer adjacency. OSPF neighbors exchange compatible Hellos before database synchronization.
Incorrect Answers
A:The preferred external route follows correct E1 total metric or E2 selection rules. This validates OSPF external type-one versus type-two metrics but does not directly demonstrate the required OSPFv2 Hello and Dead timer adjacency result. OSPF neighbors exchange compatible Hellos before database synchronization.
C:Both ends form a Full adjacency without an unnecessary DR election. This validates OSPF point-to-point network type but does not directly demonstrate the required OSPFv2 Hello and Dead timer adjacency result. OSPF neighbors exchange compatible Hellos before database synchronization.
D:Incoming multicast packets arrive on the interface selected by a valid source route. This validates Multicast source route policy and RPF but does not directly demonstrate the required OSPFv2 Hello and Dead timer adjacency result. OSPF neighbors exchange compatible Hellos before database synchronization.
Question 290
An eBGP neighbor uses a remote loopback rather than a directly connected interface. Which configuration or operational step BEST meets the stated requirement?
- Use deliberate AS-path policy without bypassing loop-prevention safeguards.
- Configure supported multihop and correct local address with underlay reachability.
- Set the remote loopback as DNS name only and assume eBGP TTL adjusts itself.
- Validate supported forwarding-table hashing and load distribution across many distinct flows.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Configure supported multihop and correct local address with underlay reachability. eBGP multihop and local-address controls align transport endpoints and TTL. The expected validation is that loopback-sourced peers establish across the intended hop count and remain reachable.
Incorrect Answers
A:Use deliberate AS-path policy without bypassing loop-prevention safeguards. This addresses BGP AS_PATH loop prevention and length rather than the required BGP loopback peering and multihop decision. eBGP multihop and local-address controls align transport endpoints and TTL.
C:Set the remote loopback as DNS name only and assume eBGP TTL adjusts itself. This is a risky or ineffective shortcut for BGP loopback peering and multihop. Missing multihop or source-address configuration prevents loopback-based BGP session establishment.
D:Validate supported forwarding-table hashing and load distribution across many distinct flows. This addresses BGP ECMP per-flow hashing rather than the required BGP loopback peering and multihop decision. eBGP multihop and local-address controls align transport endpoints and TTL.