cert
cert-1
cert-2

Pass Juniper JN0-650 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
JN0-650 Exam - Verified By Experts
JN0-650 Premium File

JN0-650 Premium File

$69.99
$76.99
  • Premium File 107 Questions & Answers. Last Update: Nov 08, 2026

Whats Included:

  • Latest Questions
  • 100% Accurate Answers
  • Fast Exam Updates
 
$76.99
$69.99
accept 18 downloads in the last 7 days
block-screenshots
Juniper JN0-650 Practice Test 64

Question 630

Voice uses strict priority but high-volume traffic prevents normal data from progressing. Which configuration or operational step BEST meets the stated requirement?

  1. Configure appropriate rewrite rules mapping forwarding class and PLP to egress DSCP.
  2. Put every queue at the highest priority and claim starvation is impossible.
  3. Configure supported priority treatment with bounds and sufficient lower-class service.
  4. Classify authorized control-plane traffic into an appropriate protected forwarding class.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Configure supported priority treatment with bounds and sufficient lower-class service. Strict priority can reduce latency but must be designed to avoid starvation. The expected validation is that voice latency stays controlled while data classes continue transmitting.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Configure appropriate rewrite rules mapping forwarding class and PLP to egress DSCP. This addresses DSCP egress rewrite rules rather than the required Scheduler strict priority and starvation decision. Strict priority can reduce latency but must be designed to avoid starvation.

B:

Put every queue at the highest priority and claim starvation is impossible. This is a risky or ineffective shortcut for Scheduler strict priority and starvation. Unbounded high-priority traffic can starve nonpriority queues.

D:

Classify authorized control-plane traffic into an appropriate protected forwarding class. This addresses Network-control forwarding class differentiation rather than the required Scheduler strict priority and starvation decision. Strict priority can reduce latency but must be designed to avoid starvation.

Question 631

Two leaf VTEPs have underlay IP reachability but exchange no EVPN control-plane routes. After deploying the recommended BGP EVPN address-family peer negotiation change, which result MOST directly verifies success?

  1. Only matching tenant EVPN routes import and authorized MAC learning succeeds.
  2. Each VLAN shows its intended root and a loop-free active topology.
  3. Eligible ARP lookups are answered locally and unnecessary BUM replication decreases.
  4. Expected EVPN NLRI appears in the routing instance and route table.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Expected EVPN NLRI appears in the routing instance and route table. This is the directly observable outcome for BGP EVPN address-family peer negotiation. EVPN uses MP-BGP control-plane signaling separate from ordinary IPv4 unicast reachability.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Only matching tenant EVPN routes import and authorized MAC learning succeeds. This validates EVPN route target import export scope but does not directly demonstrate the required BGP EVPN address-family peer negotiation result. EVPN uses MP-BGP control-plane signaling separate from ordinary IPv4 unicast reachability.

B:

Each VLAN shows its intended root and a loop-free active topology. This validates VSTP per-VLAN root distribution but does not directly demonstrate the required BGP EVPN address-family peer negotiation result. EVPN uses MP-BGP control-plane signaling separate from ordinary IPv4 unicast reachability.

C:

Eligible ARP lookups are answered locally and unnecessary BUM replication decreases. This validates EVPN ARP suppression from IP MAC bindings but does not directly demonstrate the required BGP EVPN address-family peer negotiation result. EVPN uses MP-BGP control-plane signaling separate from ordinary IPv4 unicast reachability.

Question 632

An IPv6 passive interface must be advertised without forming unwanted neighbors. Select TWO statements that correctly combine the OSPFv3 IPv6 prefix advertisement implementation, its evidence, or its governing principle.

  1. Apply a correct address-range summary on the intended ABR with covering-prefix review.
  2. Verify IPv6 interface participation and OSPFv3 prefix advertisement settings.
  3. Put both interfaces in the same intended OSPF area and verify shared area policy.
  4. Intended inet6 routes appear on remote Junos nodes with resolvable next hops.
  5. Add an IPv4 network statement and assume it advertises every IPv6 LAN.

Explanation

Correct Answers

B:

Verify IPv6 interface participation and OSPFv3 prefix advertisement settings. This is the intended implementation action for OSPFv3 IPv6 prefix advertisement.

D:

Intended inet6 routes appear on remote Junos nodes with resolvable next hops. This is direct observable evidence for OSPFv3 IPv6 prefix advertisement.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Apply a correct address-range summary on the intended ABR with covering-prefix review. This belongs to OSPF interarea route summarization, not the specified OSPFv3 IPv6 prefix advertisement operation. OSPFv3 separates neighbor topology information from IPv6 prefix dissemination.

C:

Put both interfaces in the same intended OSPF area and verify shared area policy. This belongs to OSPFv2 area identifier consistency, not the specified OSPFv3 IPv6 prefix advertisement operation. OSPFv3 separates neighbor topology information from IPv6 prefix dissemination.

E:

Add an IPv4 network statement and assume it advertises every IPv6 LAN. This would not be an appropriate OSPFv3 IPv6 prefix advertisement decision. An established IPv6 adjacency does not prove every attached prefix is advertised.

Question 633

Different VLAN groups require separate designed root bridges for load placement. After deploying the recommended MSTP instance root selection change, which result MOST directly verifies success?

  1. Packet counters show EF-marked traffic assigned to approved forwarding class and queue.
  2. Switches report the same MST region and shared MSTI topology.
  3. Expected tagged VLAN traffic traverses the trunk while unapproved VLANs remain blocked.
  4. Each MST instance elects its planned root and stable forwarding paths.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Each MST instance elects its planned root and stable forwarding paths. This is the directly observable outcome for MSTP instance root selection. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections.

Incorrect Answers

A:

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 MSTP instance root selection result. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections.

B:

Switches report the same MST region and shared MSTI topology. This validates MSTP region name revision and VLAN digest but does not directly demonstrate the required MSTP instance root selection result. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections.

C:

Expected tagged VLAN traffic traverses the trunk while unapproved VLANs remain blocked. This validates 802.1Q trunk allowed VLANs but does not directly demonstrate the required MSTP instance root selection result. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections.

Question 634

Different VLAN groups require separate designed root bridges for load placement. Which configuration or operational step BEST meets the stated requirement?

  1. Combine required static VLAN membership with deliberate dynamic registration policy.
  2. Set explicit MSTI bridge priorities in the intended MST region.
  3. Create an extra VLAN name Root and expect MSTP bridge priority to change.
  4. Create controlled firewall-filter-based VLAN classification on eligible ingress interfaces.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Set explicit MSTI bridge priorities in the intended MST region. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections. The expected validation is that each MST instance elects its planned root and stable forwarding paths.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Combine required static VLAN membership with deliberate dynamic registration policy. This addresses MVRP static versus dynamic registration rather than the required MSTP instance root selection decision. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections.

C:

Create an extra VLAN name Root and expect MSTP bridge priority to change. This is a risky or ineffective shortcut for MSTP instance root selection. Leaving roots uncontrolled may put access switches in core transit roles.

D:

Create controlled firewall-filter-based VLAN classification on eligible ingress interfaces. This addresses Filter-based VLAN assignment rather than the required MSTP instance root selection decision. MSTP can group VLANs into instances with independent root bridge elections.

Question 635

During an operational risk review, this situation is reported: A regional ABR advertises intra-area prefixes but cannot move routes across the backbone. If the underlying control is neglected, which failure would MOST directly follow?

  1. Mixing stub and normal-area settings prevents correct neighbor establishment.
  2. Assuming every high-priority router instantly replaces the current DR leads to wrong operational expectations.
  3. Designing arbitrary direct interarea exchanges without a backbone can partition routing.
  4. Reusing wrong VNI mapping can leak traffic across tenant boundaries or break reachability.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Designing arbitrary direct interarea exchanges without a backbone can partition routing. Standard multi-area OSPF uses the backbone to exchange interarea information. A useful corrective investigation is to check ABR area membership backbone adjacency and summary LSAs.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Mixing stub and normal-area settings prevents correct neighbor establishment. This is a OSPF stub area external LSA suppression failure pattern, not the primary OSPF area-border backbone connectivity failure in this case. Standard multi-area OSPF uses the backbone to exchange interarea information.

B:

Assuming every high-priority router instantly replaces the current DR leads to wrong operational expectations. This is a OSPF designated router election broadcast LAN failure pattern, not the primary OSPF area-border backbone connectivity failure in this case. Standard multi-area OSPF uses the backbone to exchange interarea information.

D:

Reusing wrong VNI mapping can leak traffic across tenant boundaries or break reachability. This is a VXLAN VNI to VLAN association failure pattern, not the primary OSPF area-border backbone connectivity failure in this case. Standard multi-area OSPF uses the backbone to exchange interarea information.

Question 636

Routers connected over a multicast transit VLAN do not discover PIM neighbors. After deploying the recommended PIM sparse-mode neighbor discovery change, which result MOST directly verifies success?

  1. Both routers see expected PIM neighbors and build join state.
  2. Captures and counters explain ingress class egress queue and final header marking.
  3. Group memberships reflect active local receivers and unwanted replicated traffic diminishes.
  4. Receivers continue forwarding through the surviving RP without changing group configuration.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Both routers see expected PIM neighbors and build join state. This is the directly observable outcome for PIM sparse-mode neighbor discovery. PIM establishes multicast router adjacencies independently of host IGMP group membership.

Incorrect Answers

B:

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 PIM sparse-mode neighbor discovery result. PIM establishes multicast router adjacencies independently of host IGMP group membership.

C:

Group memberships reflect active local receivers and unwanted replicated traffic diminishes. This validates IGMPv2 membership report and leave but does not directly demonstrate the required PIM sparse-mode neighbor discovery result. PIM establishes multicast router adjacencies independently of host IGMP group membership.

D:

Receivers continue forwarding through the surviving RP without changing group configuration. This validates Anycast RP with shared address but does not directly demonstrate the required PIM sparse-mode neighbor discovery result. PIM establishes multicast router adjacencies independently of host IGMP group membership.

Question 637

Two leaf switches connect to one dual-homed server using an ESI-LAG. After deploying the recommended Ethernet segment identifier ESI consistency change, which result MOST directly verifies success?

  1. Peers agree on a common Ethernet segment and relevant EVPN ES routes.
  2. Each VLAN shows its intended root and a loop-free active topology.
  3. Each participating VTEP has the required BUM flood destinations for the VNI.
  4. Remote peers recognize Ethernet segment participation and respond to advertised withdrawals.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Peers agree on a common Ethernet segment and relevant EVPN ES routes. This is the directly observable outcome for Ethernet segment identifier ESI consistency. ESI identifies a shared multihomed Ethernet segment to EVPN control plane.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Each VLAN shows its intended root and a loop-free active topology. This validates VSTP per-VLAN root distribution but does not directly demonstrate the required Ethernet segment identifier ESI consistency result. ESI identifies a shared multihomed Ethernet segment to EVPN control plane.

C:

Each participating VTEP has the required BUM flood destinations for the VNI. This validates EVPN Type3 IMET inclusive multicast routes but does not directly demonstrate the required Ethernet segment identifier ESI consistency result. ESI identifies a shared multihomed Ethernet segment to EVPN control plane.

D:

Remote peers recognize Ethernet segment participation and respond to advertised withdrawals. This validates EVPN Type1 Ethernet auto discovery but does not directly demonstrate the required Ethernet segment identifier ESI consistency result. ESI identifies a shared multihomed Ethernet segment to EVPN control plane.

Question 638

Switch authentication counters show Access-Reject from the identity system for approved clients. After deploying the recommended RADIUS Access-Accept versus Access-Reject handling change, which result MOST directly verifies success?

  1. The active route reflects documented policy and any hidden route has an explained reason.
  2. Session logs identify the failing exchange or authorized role without broad policy bypass.
  3. Authorized user EAP exchanges complete while invalid or expired certificates are rejected.
  4. Access-Accept authorizes approved access while explicit rejections remain denied.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Access-Accept authorizes approved access while explicit rejections remain denied. This is the directly observable outcome for RADIUS Access-Accept versus Access-Reject handling. RADIUS outcomes express AAA authorization decisions separate from transport connectivity.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The active route reflects documented policy and any hidden route has an explained reason. This validates BGP hidden and rejected path diagnosis but does not directly demonstrate the required RADIUS Access-Accept versus Access-Reject handling result. RADIUS outcomes express AAA authorization decisions separate from transport connectivity.

B:

Session logs identify the failing exchange or authorized role without broad policy bypass. This validates Junos Layer 2 authentication session monitoring but does not directly demonstrate the required RADIUS Access-Accept versus Access-Reject handling result. RADIUS outcomes express AAA authorization decisions separate from transport connectivity.

C:

Authorized user EAP exchanges complete while invalid or expired certificates are rejected. This validates 802.1X EAP authentication credential validation but does not directly demonstrate the required RADIUS Access-Accept versus Access-Reject handling result. RADIUS outcomes express AAA authorization decisions separate from transport connectivity.

Question 639

A 1-Gbps router port feeds a slower carrier subrate and queues build upstream. Which configuration or operational step BEST meets the stated requirement?

  1. Tune supported scheduler buffer sizes consistent with measured burst requirements.
  2. Apply a policer to random ingress VLANs and assume it is equivalent to egress shaping.
  3. Configure suitable RED or WRED drop profiles and map PLP to planned thresholds.
  4. Set egress shaping to the supported carrier rate on the correct interface or queue.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Set egress shaping to the supported carrier rate on the correct interface or queue. Shaping delays packets to smooth egress rate while policing meters and may drop. The expected validation is that aggregate traffic conforms to the carrier contract without unnecessary downstream discards.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Tune supported scheduler buffer sizes consistent with measured burst requirements. This addresses Queue buffer-size allocation rather than the required Junos egress shaping rate decision. Shaping delays packets to smooth egress rate while policing meters and may drop.

B:

Apply a policer to random ingress VLANs and assume it is equivalent to egress shaping. This is a risky or ineffective shortcut for Junos egress shaping rate. Shaping above a carrier limit can shift congestion to an uncontrolled downstream point.

C:

Configure suitable RED or WRED drop profiles and map PLP to planned thresholds. This addresses RED WRED drop profile thresholds rather than the required Junos egress shaping rate decision. Shaping delays packets to smooth egress rate while policing meters and may drop.

Question 640

Two candidate routes exist but one fails import policy and another lacks a next hop. Which technical principle BEST explains the BGP hidden and rejected path diagnosis decision?

  1. Anycast RP can present one logical RP address across multiple physical routers.
  2. Communities can be selectively matched manipulated and stripped in routing policy.
  3. BGP neighbor state and route installation are separate control-plane gates.
  4. BGP origin distinguishes IGP EGP and incomplete values with limited relative ranking.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

BGP neighbor state and route installation are separate control-plane gates. In this situation, the relevant action is to trace BGP received route status through import policy next-hop resolution and path eligibility.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Anycast RP can present one logical RP address across multiple physical routers. That principle is related to Anycast RP with shared address, not the main BGP hidden and rejected path diagnosis choice. Treating peer Established as proof every received prefix is installed masks routing failures.

B:

Communities can be selectively matched manipulated and stripped in routing policy. That principle is related to BGP communities match and deletion, not the main BGP hidden and rejected path diagnosis choice. Treating peer Established as proof every received prefix is installed masks routing failures.

D:

BGP origin distinguishes IGP EGP and incomplete values with limited relative ranking. That principle is related to BGP origin attribute influence, not the main BGP hidden and rejected path diagnosis choice. Treating peer Established as proof every received prefix is installed masks routing failures.

Enterprise Routing and Switching, Professional (JNCIP-ENT) (JN0-650) Practice Tests