Cisco 300-420 Exam Dumps, Practice Test Questions

That option concerns a separate design case: An edge router receives a full BGP table where the security policy allows only the provider's approved default. The relevant control here is: Use an appropriate local-preference policy inside the enterprise AS to set outbound exit preference.

That option concerns a separate design case: A new IPv6-only client subnet must access a legacy IPv4-only web endpoint through an enterprise gateway. The relevant control here is: Use an appropriate local-preference policy inside the enterprise AS to set outbound exit preference.

This alternative is aimed at a different design constraint: A provider delegation contains 2001:db8:4200::/48 and the design requires 256 independent /64 LANs across 16 branches. The relevant control for this case is: Use an appropriate local-preference policy inside the enterprise AS to set outbound exit preference.

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: Evaluate physical fault domains and provide independent power, links, and control-plane recovery within the chosen abstraction.

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: Evaluate physical fault domains and provide independent power, links, and control-plane recovery within the chosen abstraction.

That option concerns a separate design case: A new MST campus region accidentally has a different VLAN-to-instance mapping on one distribution switch. The relevant control here is: Evaluate physical fault domains and provide independent power, links, and control-plane recovery within the chosen abstraction.

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: Evaluate a dedicated cloud interconnect or partner/private WAN option with diverse regional termination and routing.

That option concerns a separate design case: A Cisco-only controller needs platform-specific wireless policies that are not represented by the organization's standard OpenConfig model. The relevant control here is: Evaluate a dedicated cloud interconnect or partner/private WAN option with diverse regional termination and routing.

That option concerns a separate design case: An organization hosts workloads in its owned private cloud and bursts selected approved applications to a public cloud while declaring this exclusively private deployment. The relevant control here is: Evaluate a dedicated cloud interconnect or partner/private WAN option with diverse regional termination and routing.

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: Rate-limit or aggregate nonessential management streams and preserve bandwidth for emergency control sessions.

That option concerns a separate design case: A QoS controller marks all backup data DSCP AF41 while the provider honors it as a premium video class. The relevant control here is: Rate-limit or aggregate nonessential management streams and preserve bandwidth for emergency control sessions.

That option concerns a separate design case: A team expects multicast traffic to traverse a shared tree forever even though its design requests shortest-path switching. The relevant control here is: Rate-limit or aggregate nonessential management streams and preserve bandwidth for emergency control sessions.

That option concerns a separate design case: An organization needs any-to-any group-encrypted private WAN traffic but the new design proposes a traditional hub-and-spoke IPsec overlay with hub hairpins. The relevant control here is: Select MPLS L3VPN service with CE-PE routing, per-customer VRFs and explicit route policy.

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: Select MPLS L3VPN service with CE-PE routing, per-customer VRFs and explicit route policy.

That option concerns a separate design case: A retail chain needs many spokes to make dynamic spoke-to-spoke tunnels without permanent full-mesh configuration. The relevant control here is: Select MPLS L3VPN service with CE-PE routing, per-customer VRFs and explicit route policy.

That option concerns a separate design case: A branch aggregation point has both IS-IS and OSPF neighbors with multiple equal-cost exits; traffic unexpectedly hairpins through a data center. The relevant control here is: Evaluate supported BFD-based fault detection and matching IGP convergence policy for the routed adjacency.

That option concerns a separate design case: Two intercampus routers redistribute OSPF and EIGRP in both directions, making route origin hard to track. The relevant control here is: Evaluate supported BFD-based fault detection and matching IGP convergence policy for the routed adjacency.

That option concerns a separate design case: Two campus distribution routers each have a single power feed from the same rack PDU, yet the architecture counts them as separate fault domains. The relevant control here is: Evaluate supported BFD-based fault detection and matching IGP convergence policy for the routed adjacency.

That option concerns a separate design case: A company wants to expose IPv6 resources to a partner with IPv4-only routing and assumes dual stack at headquarters solves the partner boundary. The relevant control here is: Set consistent IS-IS link metrics reflecting intended primary and backup capacity and verify resulting shortest paths.

That option concerns a separate design case: A BGP customer has two provider uplinks and wants automatic loss-of-transport detection when the BGP session remains Established over a stale recursive path. The relevant control here is: Set consistent IS-IS link metrics reflecting intended primary and backup capacity and verify resulting shortest paths.

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: Set consistent IS-IS link metrics reflecting intended primary and backup capacity and verify resulting shortest paths.

That option concerns a separate design case: A WAN team assumes DWDM wavelength multiplexing itself supplies packet-level route isolation between tenants. The relevant control here is: Design control/management resilience separately from WAN edge data-plane forwarding.

That option concerns a separate design case: An industrial site uses 4G LTE as primary WAN, and its routing team assumes public inbound addresses remain reachable through carrier-grade NAT. The relevant control here is: Design control/management resilience separately from WAN edge data-plane forwarding.

That option concerns a separate design case: A manufacturing WAN requires multicast distribution but the SD-WAN overlay has only validated unicast OMP reachability. The relevant control here is: Design control/management resilience separately from WAN edge data-plane forwarding.

That option concerns a separate design case: Two business units share one management VLAN with unrestricted access to each other's routers. The relevant control here is: Allocate queue scheduling according to measured application criticality and minimum bandwidth needs.

That option concerns a separate design case: A campus uses DSCP EF for voice signaling, voice media, and backup traffic, causing priority queue overload. The relevant control here is: Allocate queue scheduling according to measured application criticality and minimum bandwidth needs.

That option concerns a separate design case: A campus QoS policy gives low priority to routing keepalives and network monitoring, and routing adjacencies flap during congestion. The relevant control here is: Allocate queue scheduling according to measured application criticality and minimum bandwidth needs.

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 supported eBGP multihop design with reachable loopback endpoints and suitable TTL/security policy.

That option concerns a separate design case: A security design requires authenticating OSPF control packets on shared routed links, but only one neighbor has authentication enabled. The relevant control here is: Use a supported eBGP multihop design with reachable loopback endpoints and suitable TTL/security policy.

That option concerns a separate design case: A remote office assigns clients addresses from 169.254.0.0/16 and expects them to be reachable through a routed WAN. The relevant control here is: Use a supported eBGP multihop design with reachable loopback endpoints and suitable TTL/security policy.

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: Evaluate supported multisite design with MTU, latency, encapsulation, and control-plane reachability constraints.

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: Evaluate supported multisite design with MTU, latency, encapsulation, and control-plane reachability constraints.

That option concerns a separate design case: A multicampus network has two equal-cost paths but the design assumes packets always alternate evenly across every individual packet. The relevant control here is: Evaluate supported multisite design with MTU, latency, encapsulation, and control-plane reachability constraints.