— Exhibit —
[edit routing-instances]
user@router# show vr1 routing-options
instance-import [ vr1 vr2 ];

[edit routing-instances]
user@router# show vr2 routing-options
instance-import [ vr1 vr2 ];
[edit routing-instances]
user@router# top show policy-options policy-statement vr1
term 1 {
from instance vr1;
then accept;
}
term 2 {
then reject;
}
[edit routing-instances]
user@router# top show policy-options policy-statement vr2
term 1 {
from instance vr2;
then accept;
}
term 2 {
then reject;
}
— Exhibit —
A network engineer wants to leak routes between routing instances vr1 and vr2. No routes from vr2
are showing up in vr1. Which change should the engineer make to accomplish this task?

— Exhibit —
protocols {
bgp {
group isps {
type external;

peer-as 13090194;
multipath multiple-as;
neighbor ;
neighbor ;
}
}
}
— Exhibit —
The exhibit shows the complete BGP configuration for a router. The network operator reports that
both peering sessions are up, but the router is not conducting per-flow load balancing over the
connections to these two peers. What are two causes for this behavior? (Choose two.)

— Exhibit —
policy-options {
policy-statement accept-static {
from protocol static;
then accept;
}
}
— Exhibit —
The policy shown in the exhibit is deployed on a router and used as the only BGP export policy. The
router is sending only one BGP route to its peers. However, when you run the CLI command test
policy accept-static 0.0.0.0/0, the policy matches thousands of routes. Which statement explains this
discrepancy?

— Exhibit —
policy-statement test_route_filter {
term 1 {
from {
route-filter 192.168.0.0/16 longer;
route-filter 192.168.1.0/24 longer {
metric 5;
accept;
}
route-filter 192.168.0.0/8 orlonger accept;
}
then {
metric 10;
accept;
}
}
term 2 {
then {
metric 20;
accept;
}
}
}
— Exhibit —
Given test route 192.168.1.0/24 and the configuration shown in the Above, what is the expected
result?

Click the Exhibit button.

Your network has two connections to your ISP. You have been asked to load-balance traffic across
both links that connect to your ISP. You have enabled multipath for this peer, but you are still not
getting the expected load balancing. Given the information shown in the exhibit, what else must you
do?

Click the Exhibit button.

While troubleshooting an MSTP operation in your network, you see the output shown in the exhibit
on one of your switches. You know that the MSTI 2 regional root bridge ID is
16386.2c:6b:f5:3e:f8:01. Which port is attached to the root bridge of MSTI 2?

Click the Exhibit button.

The exhibit shows a small switched network, some details about the MSTP configuration in the
network, and the VLANs that are trunked over each link. When Switch2 reboots, users in VLAN 400
on Switch3 report that they lose connectivity to resources in VLAN 400 on Switch4. What is the
cause of this problem?

— Exhibit —
user@switch>show dot1x interface ge-0/0/1 detail
ge-0/0/1.0
Role: Authenticator
Administrative state: Auto
Supplicant mode: Multiple
Number of retries: 3
Quiet perioD. 60 seconds
Transmit perioD. 30 seconds
Mac Radius: Enabled
Mac Radius Restrict: Enabled
Reauthentication: Disabled
Configured Reauthentication interval: 3600 seconds
Supplicant timeout: 30 seconds
Server timeout: 30 seconds
Maximum EAPOL requests: 2
Guest VLAN member:
Number of connected supplicants: 0
— Exhibit —
You are asked to troubleshoot an access control issue on your EX Series switch. The user connecting
through port ge-0/0/1 indicates that their 802.1X supplicant is failing authentication and they are
not able to connect to the network. Referring to the exhibit, what is causing the 802.1X supplicant to
fail?

— Exhibit —
{master:0}[edit ethernet-switching-options secure-access-port]

user@switch# show
interface ge-0/0/1.0 {
static-ip 172.27.0.2 vlan v11 mac 00:0c:29:b5:89:7c;
no-dhcp-trusted;
}
vlan v11 {
arp-inspection;
}
interface ge-0/0/2.0 {
dhcp-trusted;
}
user@switch> show log messages | match arp
Feb 8 14:31:45 switch eswd[1280]: ESWD_DAI_FAILED. 3 ARP_REQUEST received, interface ge-
0/0/1.0[index 73], vlan v11[index 5], sender ip/mac 172.27.0.2/00:0c:29:b5:89:7d, receiver ip/mac
172.27.0.1/00:00:00:00:00:00
Feb 8 14:34:05 switch eswd[1280]: ESWD_DAI_FAILED. 3 ARP_REQUEST received, interface ge-
0/0/1.0[index 73], vlan v11[index 5], sender ip/mac 172.27.0.2/00:0c:29:b5:89:7d, receiver ip/mac
172.27.0.1/00:00:00:00:00:00
Feb 8 14:36:05 switch eswd[1280]: ESWD_DAI_FAILED. 3 ARP_REQUEST received, interface ge-
0/0/1.0[index 73], vlan v11[index 5], sender ip/mac 172.27.0.2/00:0c:29:b5:89:7d, receiver ip/mac
172.27.0.1/00:00:00:00:00:00
— Exhibit —
You have been asked to troubleshoot a problem where a user is not able to send traffic through your
switch. While troubleshooting, you see the log messages shown in the above. What is causing the
problem?

— Exhibit —
user@switch# show vlans
ws {
vlan-id 23;
interface {
ge-0/0/12.0;
ge-0/0/6.0;
}
dot1q-tunneling;
no-mac-learning;
}
— Exhibit —

Referring to the exhibit, an administrator notices that all traffic is flooded out of all the ports in VLAN
ws. What would cause this problem?