100% Latest & Updated HP HPE7-A08 Practice Test Questions, Exam Dumps & Verified Answers!
30 Days Free Updates, Instant Download!
Question 820
A branch route disappears when an OSPF neighbor stays in Down state despite physical link up. Which operational output should be inspected?
- Review active route selection and metrics
- Inspect OSPF neighbor states and timers
- Evaluate route filtering and advertisements
- Confirm ARP and next-hop resolution
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:OSPF neighbor state and timers reveal adjacency failures. Adjacency state and hello/dead timer mismatches explain missing dynamic neighbor routes.
Incorrect Answers
A:The route table identifies the selected next hop and path preference for each destination. But this does not address the case requirement to identify missing routing neighbor.
C:A missing prefix may be denied or never advertised by routing-policy configuration. But this does not address the case requirement to identify missing routing neighbor.
D:Layer 3 routes depend on successful local adjacency to a reachable next-hop MAC. But this does not address the case requirement to identify missing routing neighbor.
Question 821
Two routed switches have matching IP subnets but differing OSPF area IDs; adjacency remains absent. What configuration must be compared?
- Check interface IP addressing and subnet masks
- Review active route selection and metrics
- Confirm ARP and next-hop resolution
- Compare OSPF area and authentication
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Area and authentication settings must align on OSPF peering links. Neighbors with incompatible area IDs or authentication may fail to reach full adjacency.
Incorrect Answers
A:Inconsistent SVI or routed-port subnet assumptions can prevent connected and neighbor reachability. But this does not address the case requirement to diagnose area mismatch.
B:The route table identifies the selected next hop and path preference for each destination. But this does not address the case requirement to diagnose area mismatch.
C:Layer 3 routes depend on successful local adjacency to a reachable next-hop MAC. But this does not address the case requirement to diagnose area mismatch.
Question 822
After metrics change, the route table selects the slower backup despite a working primary. What evidence should be examined?
- Confirm ARP and next-hop resolution
- Review active route selection and metrics
- Check interface IP addressing and subnet masks
- Inspect OSPF neighbor states and timers
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Compare the installed route's metric and next-hop with the design. The route table identifies the selected next hop and path preference for each destination.
Incorrect Answers
A:Layer 3 routes depend on successful local adjacency to a reachable next-hop MAC. But this does not address the case requirement to identify incorrect route preference.
C:Inconsistent SVI or routed-port subnet assumptions can prevent connected and neighbor reachability. But this does not address the case requirement to identify incorrect route preference.
D:Adjacency state and hello/dead timer mismatches explain missing dynamic neighbor routes. But this does not address the case requirement to identify incorrect route preference.
Question 823
A static default route exists but users lose forwarding when ARP for its next hop fails. What lower-layer dependency matters?
- Review active route selection and metrics
- Evaluate route filtering and advertisements
- Confirm ARP and next-hop resolution
- Inspect OSPF neighbor states and timers
Explanation
Correct Answer
C:Check next-hop adjacency resolution and interface reachability. Layer 3 routes depend on successful local adjacency to a reachable next-hop MAC.
Incorrect Answers
A:The route table identifies the selected next hop and path preference for each destination. But this does not address the case requirement to identify ARP neighbor failure.
B:A missing prefix may be denied or never advertised by routing-policy configuration. But this does not address the case requirement to identify ARP neighbor failure.
D:Adjacency state and hello/dead timer mismatches explain missing dynamic neighbor routes. But this does not address the case requirement to identify ARP neighbor failure.
Question 824
A remote subnet is absent from a downstream site's route table although OSPF neighbors are Full. What policy should be checked?
- Confirm ARP and next-hop resolution
- Evaluate route filtering and advertisements
- Compare OSPF area and authentication
- Check interface IP addressing and subnet masks
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Review prefix advertisement and route filtering policy. A missing prefix may be denied or never advertised by routing-policy configuration.
Incorrect Answers
A:Layer 3 routes depend on successful local adjacency to a reachable next-hop MAC. But this does not address the case requirement to identify missing permitted route.
C:Neighbors with incompatible area IDs or authentication may fail to reach full adjacency. But this does not address the case requirement to identify missing permitted route.
D:Inconsistent SVI or routed-port subnet assumptions can prevent connected and neighbor reachability. But this does not address the case requirement to identify missing permitted route.
Question 825
An SVI gateway address uses /16 while the VLAN design specifies /24. What information should be validated?
- Inspect OSPF neighbor states and timers
- Review active route selection and metrics
- Confirm ARP and next-hop resolution
- Check interface IP addressing and subnet masks
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Compare live IP address and mask to approved subnet definitions. Inconsistent SVI or routed-port subnet assumptions can prevent connected and neighbor reachability.
Incorrect Answers
A:Adjacency state and hello/dead timer mismatches explain missing dynamic neighbor routes. But this does not address the case requirement to identify SVI addressing mismatch.
B:The route table identifies the selected next hop and path preference for each destination. But this does not address the case requirement to identify SVI addressing mismatch.
C:Layer 3 routes depend on successful local adjacency to a reachable next-hop MAC. But this does not address the case requirement to identify SVI addressing mismatch.
Question 826
A link stays up but OSPF adjacency flaps after hellos are intermittently delayed. Which command class should be consulted?
- Review active route selection and metrics
- Compare OSPF area and authentication
- Evaluate route filtering and advertisements
- Inspect OSPF neighbor states and timers
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Inspect OSPF neighbor status and timer counters. Adjacency state and hello/dead timer mismatches explain missing dynamic neighbor routes.
Incorrect Answers
A:The route table identifies the selected next hop and path preference for each destination. But this does not address the case requirement to diagnose protocol instability.
B:Neighbors with incompatible area IDs or authentication may fail to reach full adjacency. But this does not address the case requirement to diagnose protocol instability.
C:A missing prefix may be denied or never advertised by routing-policy configuration. But this does not address the case requirement to diagnose protocol instability.
Question 827
Traffic unexpectedly enters a low-bandwidth path after an OSPF cost adjustment. What should be examined first?
- Confirm ARP and next-hop resolution
- Check interface IP addressing and subnet masks
- Evaluate route filtering and advertisements
- Review active route selection and metrics
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Selected route and protocol metric reveal current path choice. The route table identifies the selected next hop and path preference for each destination.
Incorrect Answers
A:Layer 3 routes depend on successful local adjacency to a reachable next-hop MAC. But this does not address the case requirement to interpret forwarding-table preference.
B:Inconsistent SVI or routed-port subnet assumptions can prevent connected and neighbor reachability. But this does not address the case requirement to interpret forwarding-table preference.
C:A missing prefix may be denied or never advertised by routing-policy configuration. But this does not address the case requirement to interpret forwarding-table preference.
Question 828
One approved prefix is no longer learned after a route-map change, while other prefixes are still present. Which evidence should be checked?
- Compare OSPF area and authentication
- Evaluate route filtering and advertisements
- Confirm ARP and next-hop resolution
- Inspect OSPF neighbor states and timers
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Compare export/import filtering for the missing route. A missing prefix may be denied or never advertised by routing-policy configuration.
Incorrect Answers
A:Neighbors with incompatible area IDs or authentication may fail to reach full adjacency. But this does not address the case requirement to find route-policy exclusion.
C:Layer 3 routes depend on successful local adjacency to a reachable next-hop MAC. But this does not address the case requirement to find route-policy exclusion.
D:Adjacency state and hello/dead timer mismatches explain missing dynamic neighbor routes. But this does not address the case requirement to find route-policy exclusion.
Question 829
A video VLAN floods all ports, but show IGMP snooping groups lists no interested ports. What state should be reviewed?
- Check multicast TTL and group scope
- Inspect IGMP snooping membership
- Review multicast routing and PIM neighbors
- Monitor multicast replication and port load
Explanation
Correct Answer
B:Missing membership can lead to inefficient multicast replication. Per-VLAN group tables show which access ports have active receivers and should receive replicated frames.
Incorrect Answers
A:Source TTL or administrative scoping can intentionally prevent streams from crossing a routed boundary. But this does not address the case requirement to check listener information.
C:Multicast receivers in routed VLANs need compatible L3 multicast path construction. But this does not address the case requirement to check listener information.
D:Multicast trees can overload access ports or uplinks when content is replicated too widely. But this does not address the case requirement to check listener information.
Question 830
IGMP memberships disappear predictably after their age timer while no querier is listed. What should be tested?
- Monitor multicast replication and port load
- Inspect IGMP snooping membership
- Check multicast TTL and group scope
- Check IGMP querier function and expiry
Explanation
Correct Answer
D:Querier participation maintains valid membership state. Without group queries the switch may age listener state and stop selective multicast distribution.
Incorrect Answers
A:Multicast trees can overload access ports or uplinks when content is replicated too widely. But this does not address the case requirement to diagnose group aging.
B:Per-VLAN group tables show which access ports have active receivers and should receive replicated frames. But this does not address the case requirement to diagnose group aging.
C:Source TTL or administrative scoping can intentionally prevent streams from crossing a routed boundary. But this does not address the case requirement to diagnose group aging.
HPE Network Switching Professional (HPE7-A08) Practice Tests
