Cisco 300-420 Exam Dumps, Practice Test Questions

That option concerns a separate design case: Fabric edge nodes encapsulate packets, but the underlay path MTU is too small for added VXLAN overhead. The relevant control here is: Keep underlay IP reachability independent of endpoint addressing and establish the intended overlay virtual networks.

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: Keep underlay IP reachability independent of endpoint addressing and establish the intended overlay virtual networks.

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: Keep underlay IP reachability independent of endpoint addressing and establish the intended overlay virtual networks.

That option concerns a separate design case: A remote branch uses an OSPF stub area but a design change introduces an ASBR that must redistribute external routes within it. The relevant control here is: Use properly bounded OSPF areas and appropriate summarization at ABRs to contain topology scope.

That option concerns a separate design case: A campus OSPF area 0 is split into disconnected islands connected only by another area; route distribution is unstable. The relevant control here is: Use properly bounded OSPF areas and appropriate summarization at ABRs to contain topology scope.

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: Use properly bounded OSPF areas and appropriate summarization at ABRs to contain topology scope.

That option concerns a separate design case: A campus designs priority queues only on the access switch but ignores a congested upstream WAN edge. The relevant control here is: Separate delay-critical voice priority from video classes with appropriate bounded queuing and bandwidth guarantees.

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: Separate delay-critical voice priority from video classes with appropriate bounded queuing and bandwidth guarantees.

That option concerns a separate design case: A branch QoS policy matches all TCP 443 traffic as video, including large software downloads. The relevant control here is: Separate delay-critical voice priority from video classes with appropriate bounded queuing and bandwidth guarantees.

That option concerns a separate design case: A controller issues RESTCONF PATCH to many routers but treats HTTP 200 from a reverse proxy login page as proof that config was changed. The relevant control here is: Coordinate cloud on-ramp routing with DNS, security and application placement to reduce unnecessary tromboning.

That option concerns a separate design case: A customer rents virtual machines from a provider and must patch their operating systems, but procurement classifies the service as SaaS. The relevant control here is: Coordinate cloud on-ramp routing with DNS, security and application placement to reduce unnecessary tromboning.

That option concerns a separate design case: A multivendor enterprise wants one consistent YANG representation for interface operational counters but each platform exposes vendor-specific native trees. The relevant control here is: Coordinate cloud on-ramp routing with DNS, security and application placement to reduce unnecessary tromboning.

That option concerns a separate design case: A lab requires a routed overlay carrying multicast between sites but encryption is not part of the GRE service itself. The relevant control here is: Use a provider Layer 2 service with customer-controlled Layer 3 adjacencies and monitoring.

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: Use a provider Layer 2 service with customer-controlled Layer 3 adjacencies and monitoring.

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: Use a provider Layer 2 service with customer-controlled Layer 3 adjacencies and monitoring.

That option concerns a separate design case: In a planned SD-Access fabric, border nodes can reach edge loopbacks but endpoints fail because the team placed user subnets into the underlay instead of overlay VRFs. The relevant control here is: Differentiate NSR control-plane state replication from NSF forwarding continuity and design according to supported platform roles.

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: Differentiate NSR control-plane state replication from NSF forwarding continuity and design according to supported platform roles.

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: Differentiate NSR control-plane state replication from NSF forwarding continuity and design according to supported platform roles.

That option concerns a separate design case: Headquarters supports IPv4 but users now require IPv6 applications without losing legacy IPv4 services. The relevant control here is: Coordinate IPv6 rollout with equivalent policy, logging, and path monitoring before publishing AAAA records.

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: Coordinate IPv6 rollout with equivalent policy, logging, and path monitoring before publishing AAAA records.

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: Coordinate IPv6 rollout with equivalent policy, logging, and path monitoring before publishing AAAA records.

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: Evaluate controlled multicast service reflection or translation with explicit source/group mappings.

That option concerns a separate design case: Remote branch routers are managed using the same public internet IP address that exposes a user web service. The relevant control here is: Evaluate controlled multicast service reflection or translation with explicit source/group mappings.

That option concerns a separate design case: A new multicast source uses group 232.1.1.1 but the client sends only (*,G) membership instead of a source-specific join. The relevant control here is: Evaluate controlled multicast service reflection or translation with explicit source/group mappings.

That option concerns a separate design case: A disaster-recovery branch depends on a 5G uplink as backup for wired MPLS, but cellular coverage varies by carrier and power failure. The relevant control here is: Introduce deliberate recovery policy or dampening to prevent repeated unstable failback.

That option concerns a separate design case: Backup 5G is installed at a factory but its data plan and APN firewall rules block VPN establishment after primary fiber failure. The relevant control here is: Introduce deliberate recovery policy or dampening to prevent repeated unstable failback.

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: Introduce deliberate recovery policy or dampening to prevent repeated unstable failback.

That option concerns a separate design case: Branch-specific prefix updates flood every campus router; a proposed aggregate crosses two distinct WAN egress sites. The relevant control here is: Design a routed intercampus topology with appropriate direct or regional paths and deterministic failover.

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 a routed intercampus topology with appropriate direct or regional paths and deterministic failover.

That option concerns a separate design case: A public safety campus requires independent operations from a corporate tenant even when both use the same distribution hardware. The relevant control here is: Design a routed intercampus topology with appropriate direct or regional paths and deterministic failover.

That option concerns a separate design case: A campus advertises a /18 summary into the WAN but has no route for one constituent /24 after a building is decommissioned. The relevant control here is: Evaluate whether additional-paths or path diversity is required and supported by the topology and platforms.

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: Evaluate whether additional-paths or path diversity is required and supported by the topology and platforms.

That option concerns a separate design case: An EIGRP core has routes stuck active after one WAN path fails and queries spread into many remote sites. The relevant control here is: Evaluate whether additional-paths or path diversity is required and supported by the topology and platforms.