Cisco 200-301 Exam Dumps, Practice Test Questions

Clearing routing state does not remove the specifically configured static route and can disrupt other learned entries.

Disabling IPv6 routing affects the entire device and is unnecessary to remove a single obsolete static entry.

Deleting a default route is a different operation and would leave the obsolete /64 configured.

A default route is much broader and would affect unrelated IPv6 destinations, not the required /56 only.

A /64 covers only one portion of the /56 and omits the other /64 networks in the intended block.

A /48 includes many destinations outside the requested /56 and is not the exact remote prefix.

Suppressing router advertisements affects IPv6 host discovery and does not change route-recursion through ::/0.

Installing a Null0 default blackholes unknown IPv6 destinations; it does not enable the recursive next-hop lookup behavior.

The IPv4 default route changes only the IPv4 RIB, not how a recursive IPv6 static route resolves through an IPv6 default.

Replacing or competing for the entire /64 would affect all hosts in that subnet, contrary to the single-host exception.

A /0 default changes forwarding for otherwise unmatched IPv6 destinations and is not scoped to this host.

The prefix /64 applied to a non-network host address does not represent a host-specific IPv6 route; /128 is needed.

The IPv4 ARP table serves IPv4 neighbors, not the ICMPv6 Neighbor Discovery resolution required for fe80::a.

An IPv4 static route configuration filter will not reveal IPv6 neighbor-cache reachability or the scoped peer link-layer mapping.

Spanning Tree status shows Layer 2 topology roles, not the IPv6 neighbor binding for a specific link-local next hop.

With both eligible for the same /64, the lower AD 1 static would displace the OSPF primary.

Equal preference does not provide a deliberate higher-distance floating backup hierarchy.

On Cisco, AD 255 is not eligible for route installation, so it cannot be used as a functioning backup.

Connected routes normally have administrative distance zero, and 255 does not give static routes the preference of connected routes.

When comparing same-prefix eligible routes, smaller AD is preferred; 255 is not eligible rather than a better preference.

Specifying a /16 static route does not turn it into the IPv4 default prefix; a /0 route is separately required for a default.

A Null0 default applies to every otherwise unmatched IPv4 destination, far outside the requested customer aggregate.

A /24 discard covers just 10.88.0.0/24 and leaves many unallocated /16 destinations without the intended discard safety net.

An Ethernet interface-only route forwards toward the link and may trigger ARP rather than deliberately discard unknown aggregate destinations.

The /20 mask is too broad for this allocation, and 10.60.8.0 is not an aligned /20 prefix boundary.

A /24 includes only third-octet 8 and fails to cover the remainder of the specified /21 subnet.

A default route is not limited to the customer subnet and would alter unrelated Internet forwarding.

Traffic filtering and the route’s eligibility to install are different stages; the indicated failure is unresolved next-hop reachability.

AD only ranks eligible sources; a route whose next hop cannot be resolved still cannot install correctly.

A fallback prefix may change forwarding but does not diagnose the configured route’s recursion failure.

The static would win while both are available, contrary to remaining inactive when the primary recovers.

Equal AD does not establish an unambiguous primary/standby preference.

AD 255 is not an eligible installed route and cannot provide the intended failover.