Cisco 300-420 Exam Dumps, Practice Test Questions

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.

That option concerns a separate design case: A switch must remotely wake office PCs overnight, but the access port powers down and the design assumes Wake-on-LAN works regardless of power state. The relevant control here is: Use targeted route distribution policy and VRF containment for sensitive prefixes.

That option concerns a separate design case: A routed-access campus needs equal-cost forwarding to two distribution routers while keeping each VLAN local to one wiring closet. The relevant control here is: Use targeted route distribution policy and VRF containment for sensitive prefixes.

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: Use targeted route distribution policy and VRF containment for sensitive prefixes.

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: Extend consistent class scheduling to each actual bottleneck along the end-to-end path.

That option concerns a separate design case: A multicast network has active PIM neighbors but one edge switch suppresses IGMP reports after an access-layer topology change. The relevant control here is: Extend consistent class scheduling to each actual bottleneck along the end-to-end path.

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: Extend consistent class scheduling to each actual bottleneck along the end-to-end path.

That option concerns a separate design case: A development team consumes a managed runtime that deploys application code without administering underlying servers and calls it raw IaaS. The relevant control here is: Design NETCONF operations around capabilities, RPCs, datastores and transactional edit/commit behavior where supported.

That option concerns a separate design case: A monitoring team tries to exchange gNMI Get and Subscribe messages with a device that only exposes ordinary HTTP REST endpoints. The relevant control here is: Design NETCONF operations around capabilities, RPCs, datastores and transactional edit/commit behavior where supported.

That option concerns a separate design case: A fleet telemetry design streams all available operational leaves every second over a constrained management link. The relevant control here is: Design NETCONF operations around capabilities, RPCs, datastores and transactional edit/commit behavior where supported.

That option concerns a separate design case: A multisite SD-WAN deployment uses one manager for configuration and assumes manager reachability is necessary for every packet of user data. The relevant control here is: Map Cisco SD-WAN Controller, Manager and Validator functions to their actual roles, including legacy labels.

That option concerns a separate design case: A global business wants to connect its datacenter and branches on two different MPLS L3VPN providers with no accidental route leak between customers. The relevant control here is: Map Cisco SD-WAN Controller, Manager and Validator functions to their actual roles, including legacy labels.

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: Map Cisco SD-WAN Controller, Manager and Validator functions to their actual roles, including legacy labels.

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: Introduce an independently reachable redundant aggregation path with planned metrics and bounded query behavior.

That option concerns a separate design case: Branches summarize their local EIGRP networks at a hub-facing boundary, but a detached subnet is included in the summary. The relevant control here is: Introduce an independently reachable redundant aggregation path with planned metrics and bounded query behavior.

That option concerns a separate design case: A router receives two EIGRP routes for a prefix with different metrics and the design team wants deterministic failover. The relevant control here is: Introduce an independently reachable redundant aggregation path with planned metrics and bounded query behavior.

That option concerns a separate design case: New routers have valid IP addresses but IS-IS peers in separate areas never form a level-1 adjacency. The relevant control here is: Design an appropriate level-2 backbone with level-1/level-2 routers at area boundaries.

That option concerns a separate design case: A retailer adds 70 branches and reused 10.20.0.0/16 at several sites; the MPLS provider cannot distinguish the overlapping prefixes in the enterprise routing table. The relevant control here is: Design an appropriate level-2 backbone with level-1/level-2 routers at area boundaries.

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: Design an appropriate level-2 backbone with level-1/level-2 routers at area boundaries.

That option concerns a separate design case: A building has two independent distribution switches but hosts use the physical IP of one switch as their default gateway. The relevant control here is: Design separate VRFs and policy boundaries aligned to each tenant's compliance constraints.

That option concerns a separate design case: A campus design requires both distribution uplinks active but the chosen topology uses classic STP on all Layer 2 connections. The relevant control here is: Design separate VRFs and policy boundaries aligned to each tenant's compliance constraints.

That option concerns a separate design case: A new campus design requires maintaining service during both one uplink failure and one planned software upgrade. The relevant control here is: Design separate VRFs and policy boundaries aligned to each tenant's compliance constraints.

That option concerns a separate design case: A 20-Mbps backup link replaces a 200-Mbps primary WAN but the shaper keeps its 200-Mbps limit after failover. The relevant control here is: Create feasible bandwidth allocations and an explicit priority bandwidth budget that sums within supported scheduler constraints.

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: Create feasible bandwidth allocations and an explicit priority bandwidth budget that sums within supported scheduler constraints.

That option concerns a separate design case: A regional WAN prioritizes voice using a DiffServ marking but provides no scheduler preference on its congested egress link. The relevant control here is: Create feasible bandwidth allocations and an explicit priority bandwidth budget that sums within supported scheduler constraints.

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: Design redundant supported key servers and registration/rekey recovery for the group encryption domain.

That option concerns a separate design case: A video conference SD-WAN policy accepts tunnels with 1% packet loss but ignores sustained jitter above application tolerance. The relevant control here is: Design redundant supported key servers and registration/rekey recovery for the group encryption domain.

That option concerns a separate design case: Branches will be migrated from static internet VPNs to SD-WAN customer edges but the design omits transport isolation and overlay security. The relevant control here is: Design redundant supported key servers and registration/rekey recovery for the group encryption domain.

That option concerns a separate design case: An access switch's BPDU Guard disables a legitimate downstream bridge, and the network team proposes disabling Guard on every port. The relevant control here is: Calculate worst-case powered-device class demand, switch power supply budget, and redundancy headroom.

That option concerns a separate design case: A guest workstation port can learn hundreds of source MAC addresses because an unmanaged mini-switch is connected behind it. The relevant control here is: Calculate worst-case powered-device class demand, switch power supply budget, and redundancy headroom.

That option concerns a separate design case: An attacker plugs an unmanaged switch into a lobby edge port and advertises superior STP BPDUs, changing the root topology. The relevant control here is: Calculate worst-case powered-device class demand, switch power supply budget, and redundancy headroom.