Juniper JN0-650 Practice Test 38
Question 370
Two Junos peers reach ExStart and repeatedly fail database-description negotiation. After deploying the recommended OSPF interface MTU mismatch change, which result MOST directly verifies success?
- Hello packets agree on area identification and neighbors reach Full.
- Remote IPv6 routers receive only the intended OSPFv3 external destinations.
- Packet counters show EF-marked traffic assigned to approved forwarding class and queue.
- Database-description exchange completes and neighbor reaches Full.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Database-description exchange completes and neighbor reaches Full. This is the directly observable outcome for OSPF interface MTU mismatch. OSPF database exchange can stall when peers disagree on interface MTU.
Incorrect Answers
A:Hello packets agree on area identification and neighbors reach Full. This validates OSPFv2 area identifier consistency but does not directly demonstrate the required OSPF interface MTU mismatch result. OSPF database exchange can stall when peers disagree on interface MTU.
B:Remote IPv6 routers receive only the intended OSPFv3 external destinations. This validates OSPFv3 routing policy for external IPv6 but does not directly demonstrate the required OSPF interface MTU mismatch result. OSPF database exchange can stall when peers disagree on interface MTU.
C:Packet counters show EF-marked traffic assigned to approved forwarding class and queue. This validates Junos ingress BA DSCP classifier but does not directly demonstrate the required OSPF interface MTU mismatch result. OSPF database exchange can stall when peers disagree on interface MTU.
Question 371
A phone fails to power despite a configured PoE-enabled interface. Which configuration or operational step BEST meets the stated requirement?
- Test cable integrity PoE detection and switch port power status.
- Calculate supported switch PoE budget and per-port device allocation before deployment.
- Enable supported LLDP transmit and receive functions on the intended interface.
- Create an OSPF neighbor statement and assume damaged copper pairs are repaired.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Test cable integrity PoE detection and switch port power status. PoE delivery requires compatible power sourcing and physical cable conditions. The expected validation is that the phone powers reliably on the approved port with no short or overload alarms.
Incorrect Answers
B:Calculate supported switch PoE budget and per-port device allocation before deployment. This addresses PoE power budget switch capacity rather than the required PoE fault isolation and cable pair decision. PoE delivery requires compatible power sourcing and physical cable conditions.
C:Enable supported LLDP transmit and receive functions on the intended interface. This addresses LLDP neighbor advertisement rather than the required PoE fault isolation and cable pair decision. PoE delivery requires compatible power sourcing and physical cable conditions.
D:Create an OSPF neighbor statement and assume damaged copper pairs are repaired. This is a risky or ineffective shortcut for PoE fault isolation and cable pair. A physical pair or overload fault can stop power before any voice VLAN setup matters.
Question 372
During an operational risk review, this situation is reported: Higher-power phones boot only when fewer neighboring ports are active. If the underlying control is neglected, which failure would MOST directly follow?
- Summing device requirements above available chassis budget causes port power denial.
- A physically connected device without LLDP exchange cannot receive LLDP-based network policy.
- Trusting all edge markings lets ordinary traffic claim priority service.
- A physical pair or overload fault can stop power before any voice VLAN setup matters.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Summing device requirements above available chassis budget causes port power denial. IEEE PoE total power budget and per-port allocation constrain powered endpoints. A useful corrective investigation is to inspect show poe interface and total allocated versus available watts.
Incorrect Answers
B:A physically connected device without LLDP exchange cannot receive LLDP-based network policy. This is a LLDP neighbor advertisement failure pattern, not the primary PoE power budget switch capacity failure in this case. IEEE PoE total power budget and per-port allocation constrain powered endpoints.
C:Trusting all edge markings lets ordinary traffic claim priority service. This is a QoS trust boundary at campus edge failure pattern, not the primary PoE power budget switch capacity failure in this case. IEEE PoE total power budget and per-port allocation constrain powered endpoints.
D:A physical pair or overload fault can stop power before any voice VLAN setup matters. This is a PoE fault isolation and cable pair failure pattern, not the primary PoE power budget switch capacity failure in this case. IEEE PoE total power budget and per-port allocation constrain powered endpoints.
Question 373
A dual-stack interface has an IPv4 DSCP classifier but no equivalent IPv6 treatment. Which next investigation or correction is MOST appropriate?
- Review filter counters and packet classification for sample voice and data flows.
- Inspect classifier family and IPv6 marked packet queue counters.
- Modify IPv6 route preference and assume it sets the IPv6 DSCP classifier.
- Inspect rewrite rule binding and compare inbound versus outbound DSCP captures.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Inspect classifier family and IPv6 marked packet queue counters. This checks whether authorized IPv4 and IPv6 voice receive equivalent intended forwarding-class treatment.
Incorrect Answers
A:Review filter counters and packet classification for sample voice and data flows. That check applies chiefly to Junos multifield firewall filter classification, not the current Junos IPv6 DSCP classifier family issue. Packet classification must account for the correct protocol header family.
C:Modify IPv6 route preference and assume it sets the IPv6 DSCP classifier. That bypass leaves the Junos IPv6 DSCP classifier family issue unresolved. Assuming an IPv4-only classifier handles all IPv6 traffic may cause inconsistent QoS.
D:Inspect rewrite rule binding and compare inbound versus outbound DSCP captures. That check applies chiefly to DSCP egress rewrite rules, not the current Junos IPv6 DSCP classifier family issue. Packet classification must account for the correct protocol header family.
Question 374
Distribution links show VLAN membership configured but only one side tagged the relevant VLAN. Which technical principle BEST explains the Layer 2 trunk VLAN mismatch diagnosis decision?
- VLAN delivery requires consistent port roles tags and eligible forwarding state at every hop.
- Root protection guards designated bridge roles against unexpected root changes.
- BGP origin distinguishes IGP EGP and incomplete values with limited relative ranking.
- Q-in-Q tunnels customer 802.1Q tags inside a provider service VLAN.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:VLAN delivery requires consistent port roles tags and eligible forwarding state at every hop. In this situation, the relevant action is to trace each Layer 2 hop for VLAN membership tagging outer and inner tags and protection state.
Incorrect Answers
B:Root protection guards designated bridge roles against unexpected root changes. That principle is related to Root protection on designated links, not the main Layer 2 trunk VLAN mismatch diagnosis choice. Troubleshooting only end-host IP routes can miss a transport VLAN mismatch.
C:BGP origin distinguishes IGP EGP and incomplete values with limited relative ranking. That principle is related to BGP origin attribute influence, not the main Layer 2 trunk VLAN mismatch diagnosis choice. Troubleshooting only end-host IP routes can miss a transport VLAN mismatch.
D:Q-in-Q tunnels customer 802.1Q tags inside a provider service VLAN. That principle is related to QinQ service VLAN outer tag, not the main Layer 2 trunk VLAN mismatch diagnosis choice. Troubleshooting only end-host IP routes can miss a transport VLAN mismatch.
Question 375
A BGP restart helper retains stale routes longer than an acceptable failure interval. Which next investigation or correction is MOST appropriate?
- Inspect eligible multipath route detail and forwarding table next hops.
- Permanently disable route withdrawal because graceful restart exists.
- Inspect show route advertising-protocol BGP and remote policy confirmation if available.
- Verify capability negotiation and route states during controlled restart.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Verify capability negotiation and route states during controlled restart. This checks whether peers maintain only supported stale routes during a bounded restart and withdraw them when unsafe.
Incorrect Answers
A:Inspect eligible multipath route detail and forwarding table next hops. That check applies chiefly to BGP multipath equal-cost path installation, not the current BGP graceful restart session continuity issue. Graceful restart preserves temporary forwarding state but is not unlimited reachability assurance.
B:Permanently disable route withdrawal because graceful restart exists. That bypass leaves the BGP graceful restart session continuity issue unresolved. Excessive stale retention after a genuine failure can blackhole traffic.
C:Inspect show route advertising-protocol BGP and remote policy confirmation if available. That check applies chiefly to BGP AS path prepend outbound advertisement, not the current BGP graceful restart session continuity issue. Graceful restart preserves temporary forwarding state but is not unlimited reachability assurance.
Question 376
An RP address is configured but not reachable via the unicast underlay. Which next investigation or correction is MOST appropriate?
- Compare RP mappings group ranges and route to RP across nodes.
- Set a BGP community called RP and assume all PIM routers adopt it.
- Trace multicast forwarding entries hop by hop toward source or RP.
- Inspect querier address and membership aging across several intervals.
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Compare RP mappings group ranges and route to RP across nodes. This checks whether every receiver-facing router resolves the same intended RP for each permitted group.
Incorrect Answers
B:Set a BGP community called RP and assume all PIM routers adopt it. That bypass leaves the Static RP mapping group range issue unresolved. Inconsistent RP views can divide a single group into separate multicast trees.
C:Trace multicast forwarding entries hop by hop toward source or RP. That check applies chiefly to PIM join prune forwarding path, not the current Static RP mapping group range issue. RP mapping and unicast RP reachability are separate multicast requirements.
D:Inspect querier address and membership aging across several intervals. That check applies chiefly to IGMP querier on subscriber VLAN, not the current Static RP mapping group range issue. RP mapping and unicast RP reachability are separate multicast requirements.
Question 377
During an operational risk review, this situation is reported: MST instance 2 unexpectedly selects an access switch as its root after a priority change. If the underlying control is neglected, which failure would MOST directly follow?
- Slight configuration mismatches can create independent MST regions and unexpected port states.
- Leaving roots uncontrolled may put access switches in core transit roles.
- Changing the switch IP address does not correct an endpoint access VLAN mismatch.
- Treating RADIUS as an EAPOL packet directly emitted by the laptop prevents correct troubleshooting.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Leaving roots uncontrolled may put access switches in core transit roles. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections. A useful corrective investigation is to inspect spanning-tree mstp instance root and port roles on all participating switches.
Incorrect Answers
A:Slight configuration mismatches can create independent MST regions and unexpected port states. This is a MSTP region name revision and VLAN digest failure pattern, not the primary MSTP instance root selection failure in this case. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections.
C: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 MSTP instance root selection failure in this case. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections.
D:Treating RADIUS as an EAPOL packet directly emitted by the laptop prevents correct troubleshooting. This is a 802.1X supplicant authenticator RADIUS roles failure pattern, not the primary MSTP instance root selection failure in this case. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections.
Question 378
OSPF and BGP keepalives should stay reachable during user traffic congestion. After deploying the recommended Network-control forwarding class differentiation change, which result MOST directly verifies success?
- Queue statistics show probabilistic early drops according to class and PLP settings.
- Routing control packets show stable service during expected congestion.
- Candidate routers acquire the intended RP mappings for authorized multicast ranges.
- Captures and counters explain ingress class egress queue and final header marking.
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Routing control packets show stable service during expected congestion. This is the directly observable outcome for Network-control forwarding class differentiation. Network-control traffic may need separate protection from bulk and voice services.
Incorrect Answers
A:Queue statistics show probabilistic early drops according to class and PLP settings. This validates RED WRED drop profile thresholds but does not directly demonstrate the required Network-control forwarding class differentiation result. Network-control traffic may need separate protection from bulk and voice services.
C:Candidate routers acquire the intended RP mappings for authorized multicast ranges. This validates PIM RP discovery and bootstrap mapping but does not directly demonstrate the required Network-control forwarding class differentiation result. Network-control traffic may need separate protection from bulk and voice services.
D:Captures and counters explain ingress class egress queue and final header marking. This validates CoS processing order ingress to egress but does not directly demonstrate the required Network-control forwarding class differentiation result. Network-control traffic may need separate protection from bulk and voice services.
Question 379
A carrier-prepend policy makes one available route look less attractive to remote ASes. Which next investigation or correction is MOST appropriate?
- Inspect BGP path attributes and active routes at multiple iBGP speakers.
- Remove all route-target communities and claim an AS_PATH loop has been resolved.
- Inspect show route protocol bgp extensive for AS_PATH and hidden reason.
- Inspect negotiated families and show route table inet.0 protocol bgp.
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Inspect show route protocol bgp extensive for AS_PATH and hidden reason. This checks whether selected routes have expected AS sequence and no local-AS loop.
Incorrect Answers
A:Inspect BGP path attributes and active routes at multiple iBGP speakers. That check applies chiefly to BGP LOCAL_PREF outbound exit selection, not the current BGP AS_PATH loop prevention and length issue. BGP AS_PATH records AS traversal and participates in loop prevention and path selection.
B:Remove all route-target communities and claim an AS_PATH loop has been resolved. That bypass leaves the BGP AS_PATH loop prevention and length issue unresolved. Ignoring the local-AS loop check can introduce unstable routing behavior.
D:Inspect negotiated families and show route table inet.0 protocol bgp. That check applies chiefly to BGP NLRI IPv4 unicast inet family, not the current BGP AS_PATH loop prevention and length issue. BGP AS_PATH records AS traversal and participates in loop prevention and path selection.
Question 380
An ABR advertises thousands of adjacent site networks and operators want a smaller summary. After deploying the recommended OSPF interarea route summarization change, which result MOST directly verifies success?
- The intended eligible DR and BDR appear on the broadcast segment after reelection.
- Flapping prefixes are damped according to intended thresholds and recover within acceptable time.
- The preferred external route follows correct E1 total metric or E2 selection rules.
- Other areas see the approved aggregate while required specifics remain reachable.
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Other areas see the approved aggregate while required specifics remain reachable. This is the directly observable outcome for OSPF interarea route summarization. OSPF interarea summarization originates at area boundaries with reachability tradeoffs.
Incorrect Answers
A:The intended eligible DR and BDR appear on the broadcast segment after reelection. This validates OSPF designated router election broadcast LAN but does not directly demonstrate the required OSPF interarea route summarization result. OSPF interarea summarization originates at area boundaries with reachability tradeoffs.
B:Flapping prefixes are damped according to intended thresholds and recover within acceptable time. This validates BGP route damping flap penalty but does not directly demonstrate the required OSPF interarea route summarization result. OSPF interarea summarization originates at area boundaries with reachability tradeoffs.
C: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 OSPF interarea route summarization result. OSPF interarea summarization originates at area boundaries with reachability tradeoffs.