100% Latest & Updated HP HPE7-A01 Practice Test Questions, Exam Dumps & Verified Answers!
30 Days Free Updates, Instant Download!
Question 470
Two AOS-CX distribution switches form an OSPF adjacency but a connected user subnet is absent from the peer table. Which belief about the configuration should the team reject?
- Assume an OSPF Full neighbor state proves every attached VLAN prefix is advertised
- Tune local preference before confirming the BGP TCP session can open
- Assume the staff firewall policy alone prevents every routing mistake after default import
- Assume AS-path prepending on advertisements solely controls the campus's own outbound path
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:OSPF can form adjacency while specific networks are filtered or excluded. Adjacency does not imply every local route is eligible to be learned.
Incorrect Answers
B:Route attributes matter only after the session exchanges routes. It would not resolve the documented symptom; oSPF can form adjacency while specific networks are filtered or excluded.
C:A wrong route can still disrupt or misroute permitted traffic. By contrast, oSPF can form adjacency while specific networks are filtered or excluded.
D:Prepending generally influences other networks' inbound decisions. In this situation, oSPF can form adjacency while specific networks are filtered or excluded.
Question 471
Two AOS-CX distribution switches form an OSPF adjacency but a connected user subnet is absent from the peer table. What should be included in the rollout plan to limit a foreseeable failure?
- Review the permitted subnet inventory before broadening OSPF redistribution
- Test destinations inside and outside the overlapping ranges after migration
- Capacity-plan for hash skew and a full single-link failure
- Test failure of the preferred carrier and verify the alternate route takes over
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Route leakage can expose management or guest networks. The evidence distinguishes omitted advertisement from route preference.
Incorrect Answers
B:A fix for one host must not blackhole adjacent subnets. The relevant technical distinction is that route leakage can expose management or guest networks.
C:Effective redundancy requires enough surviving bandwidth. By contrast, route leakage can expose management or guest networks.
D:A preference policy should not eliminate internet resilience. It would not resolve the documented symptom; route leakage can expose management or guest networks.
Question 472
An OSPF neighbor remains stuck in a two-way state on a point-to-point campus interconnect. What should the network engineer do to address this requirement?
- Check network type, DR/BDR behavior and compatible OSPF interface settings
- Advertise a conditional or monitored default route using a supported mechanism
- Verify TCP reachability, peer IP addresses, AS numbers and authentication where used
- Restrict redistribution with reviewed prefix policies and source tags
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Adjacency state depends on the link type and protocol roles. Peer-level evidence reveals incompatible adjacency expectations.
Incorrect Answers
B:The default should not persist when the upstream exit is unavailable. By contrast, adjacency state depends on the link type and protocol roles.
C:A BGP session needs transport and compatible neighboring identities. Here, however, adjacency state depends on the link type and protocol roles.
D:Uncontrolled mutual redistribution can reintroduce and amplify routes. The relevant technical distinction is that adjacency state depends on the link type and protocol roles.
Question 473
An OSPF neighbor remains stuck in a two-way state on a point-to-point campus interconnect. What should the team inspect to confirm the result?
- Probe permitted DNS and denied server flows while reviewing imported VRF routes
- Inspect neighbor state, network type and hello parameters on both switches
- Trace a test session in both directions and check the destination route table
- Compare multiple traffic flows and next-hop byte counters during the same period
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Peer-level evidence reveals incompatible adjacency expectations. Adjacency state depends on the link type and protocol roles.
Incorrect Answers
A:Both results confirm correct import scope. In this situation, peer-level evidence reveals incompatible adjacency expectations.
C:The missing return entry reveals why clients see timeouts. Here, however, peer-level evidence reveals incompatible adjacency expectations.
D:Flow-level evidence explains imbalance better than one speed test. The relevant technical distinction is that peer-level evidence reveals incompatible adjacency expectations.
Question 474
An OSPF neighbor remains stuck in a two-way state on a point-to-point campus interconnect. Which misconception is most likely to obstruct a correct fix?
- Increase administrative distance to force a router to enter Full state
- Assume a reachable next-hop MAC implies the ISP can route every external prefix
- Assume IPv6 DHCP options alone necessarily supply the default route in all implementations
- Assume changing OSPF cost will override a more specific static prefix automatically
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:Route preference cannot repair neighbor negotiation. Adjacency state depends on the link type and protocol roles.
Incorrect Answers
B:The failure may lie beyond the local Ethernet neighbor. It would not resolve the documented symptom; route preference cannot repair neighbor negotiation.
C:Default-router discovery is commonly RA-based. In this situation, route preference cannot repair neighbor negotiation.
D:Prefix length is evaluated before comparing routes to a different prefix. Here, however, route preference cannot repair neighbor negotiation.
Question 475
An OSPF neighbor remains stuck in a two-way state on a point-to-point campus interconnect. What precaution is most important before the change is expanded?
- Document resolver dependencies and request owner review of future shared routes
- Capacity-plan for hash skew and a full single-link failure
- Review all affected gateway route tables before adding another branch
- Change only the mismatched parameter in a controlled window
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Broad OSPF edits can destabilize unrelated neighbors. Peer-level evidence reveals incompatible adjacency expectations.
Incorrect Answers
A:A minimal import list is easier to audit. In this situation, broad OSPF edits can destabilize unrelated neighbors.
B:Effective redundancy requires enough surviving bandwidth. It would not resolve the documented symptom; broad OSPF edits can destabilize unrelated neighbors.
C:Route completeness should be tested as part of expansion. By contrast, broad OSPF edits can destabilize unrelated neighbors.
Question 476
A new routed connection has OSPF neighbors using different area IDs and no routes are exchanged. Which configuration decision most directly resolves the situation?
- Restrict redistribution with reviewed prefix policies and source tags
- Design an appropriate area hierarchy and summarize where supported
- Ensure each loopback has valid underlay reachability and the intended source address
- Align the intended area and relevant authentication/hello settings
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:OSPF peers require matching area membership before adjacency. A direct capture identifies the advertised area values.
Incorrect Answers
A:Uncontrolled mutual redistribution can reintroduce and amplify routes. It would not resolve the documented symptom; oSPF peers require matching area membership before adjacency.
B:Area planning can reduce excessive topology information and control scope. By contrast, oSPF peers require matching area membership before adjacency.
C:Stable BGP endpoint identity still depends on forwarding routes. The relevant technical distinction is that oSPF peers require matching area membership before adjacency.
Question 477
A new routed connection has OSPF neighbors using different area IDs and no routes are exchanged. Which check most directly demonstrates the desired network behavior?
- Compare destination lookups for addresses within and outside the old prefix
- Inspect hello packets and neighbor logs for area mismatch
- Trace source gateway, route lookup and a permitted destination test
- Trace a test session in both directions and check the destination route table
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:A direct capture identifies the advertised area values. OSPF peers require matching area membership before adjacency.
Incorrect Answers
A:Different route lengths can create partial outages. Here, however, a direct capture identifies the advertised area values.
C:Working local VLAN membership alone does not establish inter-subnet forwarding. By contrast, a direct capture identifies the advertised area values.
D:The missing return entry reveals why clients see timeouts. The relevant technical distinction is that a direct capture identifies the advertised area values.
Question 478
A new routed connection has OSPF neighbors using different area IDs and no routes are exchanged. Which assumption would be most misleading when investigating this situation?
- Assume IPv6 DHCP options alone necessarily supply the default route in all implementations
- Set OSPF hello and dead timers to arbitrary very low values without peer coordination
- Assume two active SVIs automatically allow all interdepartment traffic despite routing or policy restrictions
- Add static routes and assume the OSPF area mismatch is repaired
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Static forwarding can mask but not correct the broken adjacency. OSPF peers require matching area membership before adjacency.
Incorrect Answers
A:Default-router discovery is commonly RA-based. Here, however, static forwarding can mask but not correct the broken adjacency.
B:Unsupported aggressive timers can flap healthy adjacencies. In this situation, static forwarding can mask but not correct the broken adjacency.
C:Layer 3 forwarding and access controls can still block sessions. The relevant technical distinction is that static forwarding can mask but not correct the broken adjacency.
Question 479
A new routed connection has OSPF neighbors using different area IDs and no routes are exchanged. Which safeguard best reduces the deployment risk in this case?
- Review all affected gateway route tables before adding another branch
- Review overlapping prefixes and preserve rollback if a dependent application remains
- Test failure of the preferred carrier and verify the alternate route takes over
- Coordinate the area change across both sides and validate failover routes
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:One-sided routing changes can cause temporary loss of reachability. A direct capture identifies the advertised area values.
Incorrect Answers
A:Route completeness should be tested as part of expansion. In this situation, one-sided routing changes can cause temporary loss of reachability.
B:A single static exception may still be needed for a legacy service. It would not resolve the documented symptom; one-sided routing changes can cause temporary loss of reachability.
C:A preference policy should not eliminate internet resilience. Here, however, one-sided routing changes can cause temporary loss of reachability.
Question 480
A campus uses redundant OSPF paths but traffic takes a slower WAN despite a better fiber circuit. What is the most appropriate first technical change?
- Set appropriate interface costs based on documented path preference
- Advertise a conditional or monitored default route using a supported mechanism
- Verify both transit VLAN reachability and consistent OSPF interface settings
- Align the supported interface MTU and review OSPF database exchange diagnostics
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:OSPF best-path selection responds to cumulative metric rather than raw physical label. The route table verifies that the intended path wins.
Incorrect Answers
B:The default should not persist when the upstream exit is unavailable. By contrast, oSPF best-path selection responds to cumulative metric rather than raw physical label.
C:Protocol adjacency requires both Layer 2 transport and compatible routing configuration. It would not resolve the documented symptom; oSPF best-path selection responds to cumulative metric rather than raw physical label.
D:Incompatible MTUs can interrupt database synchronization on some platforms. In this situation, oSPF best-path selection responds to cumulative metric rather than raw physical label.
HPE Network Campus Access Professional (HPE7-A01) Practice Tests
