100% Latest & Updated HP HPE7-A08 Practice Test Questions, Exam Dumps & Verified Answers!
30 Days Free Updates, Instant Download!
Question 660
Receivers on the same VLAN play live video but receivers on another routed VLAN receive nothing. Which capability may be missing?
- Absent IGMP querier where required
- RPF check or upstream route mismatch
- Excessive sender bit rate
- No routed multicast forwarding
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Multicast routing/PIM is required across an L3 boundary. Receiver VLANs cannot receive routed group traffic if multicast routing/PIM path is absent.
Incorrect Answers
A:Membership state may age without periodic queries on a snooped broadcast domain. But this does not address the case requirement to identify absent routed multicast support.
B:An arriving multicast flow can be discarded when its source fails reverse-path forwarding validation. But this does not address the case requirement to identify absent routed multicast support.
C:A source can overwhelm access bandwidth independently of multicast group membership controls. But this does not address the case requirement to identify absent routed multicast support.
Question 661
A routed multicast packet arrives from an unexpected interface and is dropped even though a group is joined. What check is failing?
- Missing IGMP snooping listener state
- No routed multicast forwarding
- Excessive sender bit rate
- RPF check or upstream route mismatch
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Reverse-path-forwarding validation may reject the source path. An arriving multicast flow can be discarded when its source fails reverse-path forwarding validation.
Incorrect Answers
A:Without correct listener entries, a VLAN may flood multicast or fail to deliver streams efficiently. But this does not address the case requirement to identify upstream RPF mismatch.
B:Receiver VLANs cannot receive routed group traffic if multicast routing/PIM path is absent. But this does not address the case requirement to identify upstream RPF mismatch.
C:A source can overwhelm access bandwidth independently of multicast group membership controls. But this does not address the case requirement to identify upstream RPF mismatch.
Question 662
A 900Mbps video feed enters a 100Mbps edge port with no other multicast listeners. What primarily causes latency and loss?
- Absent IGMP querier where required
- Missing IGMP snooping listener state
- Excessive sender bit rate
- RPF check or upstream route mismatch
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:The sender itself exceeds the access-port capacity. A source can overwhelm access bandwidth independently of multicast group membership controls.
Incorrect Answers
A:Membership state may age without periodic queries on a snooped broadcast domain. But this does not address the case requirement to identify source rate oversubscription.
B:Without correct listener entries, a VLAN may flood multicast or fail to deliver streams efficiently. But this does not address the case requirement to identify source rate oversubscription.
D:An arriving multicast flow can be discarded when its source fails reverse-path forwarding validation. But this does not address the case requirement to identify source rate oversubscription.
Question 663
An administrator sets multicast stream TTL to 1, then expects a receiver beyond a router to receive it. Which limitation applies?
- Absent IGMP querier where required
- RPF check or upstream route mismatch
- Multicast TTL or scope restriction
- No routed multicast forwarding
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:The scope and TTL prevent the packet traversing the routed hop. A deliberately low TTL or scope limit can prevent delivery beyond its intended segment.
Incorrect Answers
A:Membership state may age without periodic queries on a snooped broadcast domain. But this does not address the case requirement to identify multicast TTL reach restriction.
B:An arriving multicast flow can be discarded when its source fails reverse-path forwarding validation. But this does not address the case requirement to identify multicast TTL reach restriction.
D:Receiver VLANs cannot receive routed group traffic if multicast routing/PIM path is absent. But this does not address the case requirement to identify multicast TTL reach restriction.
Question 664
An IGMP-enabled switch unexpectedly floods all multicast after snooping entries disappear. Which membership mechanism should be checked?
- RPF check or upstream route mismatch
- Multicast TTL or scope restriction
- Excessive sender bit rate
- Missing IGMP snooping listener state
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Valid receiver state is needed to prune multicast replication. Without correct listener entries, a VLAN may flood multicast or fail to deliver streams efficiently.
Incorrect Answers
A:An arriving multicast flow can be discarded when its source fails reverse-path forwarding validation. But this does not address the case requirement to identify missing IGMP listener tables.
B:A deliberately low TTL or scope limit can prevent delivery beyond its intended segment. But this does not address the case requirement to identify missing IGMP listener tables.
C:A source can overwhelm access bandwidth independently of multicast group membership controls. But this does not address the case requirement to identify missing IGMP listener tables.
Question 665
A PIM topology has correct receiver joins but upstream multicast flows fail the RPF interface check. What performance symptom follows?
- Multicast TTL or scope restriction
- No routed multicast forwarding
- RPF check or upstream route mismatch
- Excessive sender bit rate
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Traffic can be dropped despite successful downstream group membership. An arriving multicast flow can be discarded when its source fails reverse-path forwarding validation.
Incorrect Answers
A:A deliberately low TTL or scope limit can prevent delivery beyond its intended segment. But this does not address the case requirement to identify RPF-validation loss.
B:Receiver VLANs cannot receive routed group traffic if multicast routing/PIM path is absent. But this does not address the case requirement to identify RPF-validation loss.
D:A source can overwhelm access bandwidth independently of multicast group membership controls. But this does not address the case requirement to identify RPF-validation loss.
Question 666
A switch shows IGMP membership expiring periodically with no querier address on the VLAN. What is the most direct root cause?
- Excessive sender bit rate
- Missing IGMP snooping listener state
- Absent IGMP querier where required
- RPF check or upstream route mismatch
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Absent regular IGMP queries lead to stale/expired listeners. Membership state may age without periodic queries on a snooped broadcast domain.
Incorrect Answers
A:A source can overwhelm access bandwidth independently of multicast group membership controls. But this does not address the case requirement to identify the querier dependency.
B:Without correct listener entries, a VLAN may flood multicast or fail to deliver streams efficiently. But this does not address the case requirement to identify the querier dependency.
D:An arriving multicast flow can be discarded when its source fails reverse-path forwarding validation. But this does not address the case requirement to identify the querier dependency.
Question 667
Campus OSPF adjacencies reset every minute and data freezes during reconvergence. Which issue best explains the instability?
- Missing routing summary
- Next-hop adjacency instability
- Frequent OSPF neighbor resets
- BGP policy-induced path change
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Repeated neighbor resets force forwarding-state recalculation. Neighbor flapping triggers route recalculation and transient forwarding interruptions.
Incorrect Answers
A:Many individual prefixes may increase control-state scale and update overhead. But this does not address the case requirement to identify OSPF flapping.
B:An ARP or L2 neighbor that repeatedly expires can cause transient packet loss despite steady route entries. But this does not address the case requirement to identify OSPF flapping.
D:Changed import/export preferences can select an unintended longer path for some destinations. But this does not address the case requirement to identify OSPF flapping.
Question 668
After a routing-cost change, traffic takes a 100Mbps backup path instead of a 10Gbps primary. What causes the delay?
- Unexpected OSPF metric or ECMP selection
- Control-plane CPU exhaustion
- Next-hop adjacency instability
- Missing routing summary
Explanation
Correct Answer
A:An unintended OSPF metric steers packets onto the slower route. Changed path cost can redirect traffic over a slower or congested link.
Incorrect Answers
B:Excessive protocol or exception traffic can delay routing convergence and administrative responsiveness. But this does not address the case requirement to identify bad routing preference.
C:An ARP or L2 neighbor that repeatedly expires can cause transient packet loss despite steady route entries. But this does not address the case requirement to identify bad routing preference.
D:Many individual prefixes may increase control-state scale and update overhead. But this does not address the case requirement to identify bad routing preference.
Question 669
Under a flood of exception packets, the switch CPU reaches 100% and OSPF hellos miss deadlines. What capacity issue is responsible?
- Unexpected OSPF metric or ECMP selection
- Next-hop adjacency instability
- BGP policy-induced path change
- Control-plane CPU exhaustion
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Control-plane saturation can disrupt protocol processing. Excessive protocol or exception traffic can delay routing convergence and administrative responsiveness.
Incorrect Answers
A:Changed path cost can redirect traffic over a slower or congested link. But this does not address the case requirement to identify CPU exhaustion from control traffic.
B:An ARP or L2 neighbor that repeatedly expires can cause transient packet loss despite steady route entries. But this does not address the case requirement to identify CPU exhaustion from control traffic.
C:Changed import/export preferences can select an unintended longer path for some destinations. But this does not address the case requirement to identify CPU exhaustion from control traffic.
Question 670
A core receives tens of thousands of more specific routes than the design planned and route update load increases. What design omission contributes?
- Next-hop adjacency instability
- Frequent OSPF neighbor resets
- BGP policy-induced path change
- Missing routing summary
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:The lack of appropriate route summarization increases state. Many individual prefixes may increase control-state scale and update overhead.
Incorrect Answers
A:An ARP or L2 neighbor that repeatedly expires can cause transient packet loss despite steady route entries. But this does not address the case requirement to identify inefficient prefix aggregation.
B:Neighbor flapping triggers route recalculation and transient forwarding interruptions. But this does not address the case requirement to identify inefficient prefix aggregation.
C:Changed import/export preferences can select an unintended longer path for some destinations. But this does not address the case requirement to identify inefficient prefix aggregation.
HPE Network Switching Professional (HPE7-A08) Practice Tests