Cisco 300-420 Exam Dumps, Practice Test Questions

That option concerns a separate design case: An OSPF redistribution boundary introduces the same connected subnet from two ASBRs, resulting in inconsistent egress selection. The relevant control here is: Evaluate an NSSA design and associated ABR external-route translation rather than a plain stub area.

That option concerns a separate design case: Branch A and B redistribute external BGP into OSPF, then advertise resulting routes back into BGP at the opposite edge. The relevant control here is: Evaluate an NSSA design and associated ABR external-route translation rather than a plain stub area.

That option concerns a separate design case: An OSPF deployment puts all 600 remote access switches into area 0 and floods changes to every site. The relevant control here is: Evaluate an NSSA design and associated ABR external-route translation rather than a plain stub area.

That option concerns a separate design case: A design team wants fast OSPF failure detection on long-running optical links without dropping stable adjacencies during occasional control-plane delay. The relevant control here is: Apply compatible supported OSPF authentication with coordinated keys and rollover on both ends.

That option concerns a separate design case: A branch OSPF design selects a totally stubby area but an application requires type-3 interarea routes rather than only the default. The relevant control here is: Apply compatible supported OSPF authentication with coordinated keys and rollover on both ends.

That option concerns a separate design case: A campus plans IPv6 addressing with one /64 shared between two routed VLAN interfaces in different buildings. The relevant control here is: Apply compatible supported OSPF authentication with coordinated keys and rollover on both ends.

That option concerns a separate design case: A many-to-many trading network has multiple multicast senders and a scalable shared-tree forwarding requirement. The relevant control here is: Constrain route leaking to the precise management service endpoints and permitted directions.

That option concerns a separate design case: A guest wireless SSID creates burst traffic exceeding its contracted share and disrupts campus applications. The relevant control here is: Constrain route leaking to the precise management service endpoints and permitted directions.

That option concerns a separate design case: Network management of a branch uses a VPN over its sole primary WAN, and the organization reports no way to diagnose a provider outage. The relevant control here is: Constrain route leaking to the precise management service endpoints and permitted directions.

That option concerns a separate design case: A wireless access-point refresh increases PoE needs above the available 802.3at class on older switches. The relevant control here is: Design supported multicast replication and routed multicast services across the intended fabric transit.

That option concerns a separate design case: An organization needs consistent segmentation across two SD-Access fabric sites connected by a routed MPLS service. The relevant control here is: Design supported multicast replication and routed multicast services across the intended fabric transit.

That option concerns a separate design case: A branch router redistributes a static default to the campus IGP without approval, causing arbitrary sites to shift egress. The relevant control here is: Design supported multicast replication and routed multicast services across the intended fabric transit.

That option concerns a separate design case: A network wants a hub-and-spoke topology for finance traffic but allows any-to-any policy for all service VPNs. The relevant control here is: Define a backup-class QoS and application admission design appropriate to smaller available bandwidth.

That option concerns a separate design case: An SD-WAN fabric routes guest traffic into the production VPN because a new edge reused the corporate service VPN identifier. The relevant control here is: Define a backup-class QoS and application admission design appropriate to smaller available bandwidth.

That option concerns a separate design case: A branch uses IPsec overlay on broadband with 1400-byte effective MTU, but an application sends 1500-byte DF-set packets and stalls. The relevant control here is: Define a backup-class QoS and application admission design appropriate to smaller available bandwidth.

That option concerns a separate design case: A standards group needs an interoperable interface model but mistakenly calls every IETF YANG module an OpenConfig model. The relevant control here is: Design timestamped telemetry with source identification and collector reconnection/backfill policy as supported.

That option concerns a separate design case: A global WAN telemetry system publishes a complete 10,000-interface snapshot every 100 ms although the target is only five-minute capacity planning. The relevant control here is: Design timestamped telemetry with source identification and collector reconnection/backfill policy as supported.

That option concerns a separate design case: A support dashboard needs regular CPU and interface-rate samples even when values remain unchanged. The relevant control here is: Design timestamped telemetry with source identification and collector reconnection/backfill policy as supported.

That option concerns a separate design case: A company wants most return traffic for its public prefix to enter ISP B rather than ISP A. The relevant control here is: Plan the EIGRP successor and feasible-successor relationship using composite metric and feasibility checks.

That option concerns a separate design case: A BGP operator attempts to influence routes within one AS by changing the weight attribute only on one edge router. The relevant control here is: Plan the EIGRP successor and feasible-successor relationship using composite metric and feasibility checks.

That option concerns a separate design case: A branch EIGRP router advertises remote routes back into its hub and occasionally becomes a transit path between hubs. The relevant control here is: Plan the EIGRP successor and feasible-successor relationship using composite metric and feasibility checks.

That option concerns a separate design case: A campus has a fabric border but its external firewall cannot distinguish multiple endpoint VNs leaving the fabric. The relevant control here is: Plan redundant supported fabric control-plane nodes with resilient underlay reachability.

That option concerns a separate design case: An SD-Access architect assumes the fabric's LISP control plane transports all user packets like a data-plane tunnel. The relevant control here is: Plan redundant supported fabric control-plane nodes with resilient underlay reachability.

That option concerns a separate design case: An NSF-capable router pair loses a control-plane process briefly and the design assumes all neighboring routers will preserve forwarding. The relevant control here is: Plan redundant supported fabric control-plane nodes with resilient underlay reachability.

That option concerns a separate design case: A customer needs private route separation for 12 branches over a shared provider backbone, not a single Ethernet broadcast domain. The relevant control here is: Align the service's supported VLAN encapsulation and mapping with the carrier's EVC definition.

That option concerns a separate design case: Two industrial sites require transparent delivery of a small set of Ethernet services and reject routing between their private LANs. The relevant control here is: Align the service's supported VLAN encapsulation and mapping with the carrier's EVC definition.

That option concerns a separate design case: Two hospitals need their existing Ethernet VLANs extended across a provider circuit but their engineers incorrectly request a routed L3VPN. The relevant control here is: Align the service's supported VLAN encapsulation and mapping with the carrier's EVC definition.

That option concerns a separate design case: An enterprise wants to expose a multicast stream to one receiver group but the original source uses a group address conflicting with a remote application. The relevant control here is: Map actual application traffic to appropriate DiffServ classes and engineering budget across each congested hop.

That option concerns a separate design case: A 10,000-receiver IPTV deployment requires one-to-many traffic from known sources but still uses RP discovery for each stream. The relevant control here is: Map actual application traffic to appropriate DiffServ classes and engineering budget across each congested hop.

That option concerns a separate design case: Video and voice both use one strict-priority queue, causing voice jitter when video surges. The relevant control here is: Map actual application traffic to appropriate DiffServ classes and engineering budget across each congested hop.

That option concerns a separate design case: An OSPF deployment puts all 600 remote access switches into area 0 and floods changes to every site. The relevant control here is: Use a legitimately allocated private or global prefix at the remote site and reserve IPv4 link-local for local-only communication.

That option concerns a separate design case: A branch EIGRP router advertises remote routes back into its hub and occasionally becomes a transit path between hubs. The relevant control here is: Use a legitimately allocated private or global prefix at the remote site and reserve IPv4 link-local for local-only communication.

That option concerns a separate design case: A campus plans IPv6 addressing with one /64 shared between two routed VLAN interfaces in different buildings. The relevant control here is: Use a legitimately allocated private or global prefix at the remote site and reserve IPv4 link-local for local-only communication.