— 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 —
Refer to the Exhibit.
Given test route 192.168.1.0/24 and the configuration shown in the exhibit, what is the expected
result?

— Exhibit –-

— Exhibit —

Refer to the Exhibit.
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?

— Exhibit –(MSTI 2 regional root: 16386.2c:6b:f5:3e:f8:01)
{master:0}
user@switch> show spanning-tree interface
Spanning tree interface parameters for instance 0
Interface Port ID Designated Designated Port State Role
port ID bridge ID Cost
ge-0/0/6.0 128:519 128:519 16384.80711fbc 20000 BLK ALT
ge-0/0/9.0 128:522 128:522 53248.2c6bf591a441 20000 FWD DESG
ge-0/0/10.0 128:523 128:523 8192.80711fbe8110 20000 FWD ROOT
ge-0/0/12.0 128:525 128:525 49152.2c6bf53ef801 20000 BLK ALT
[…]
— Exhibit —

Refer to the Exhibit.
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?

— Exhibit –-

— Exhibit —

Refer to the Exhibit.
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 —

Refer to the 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 —

Refer to the 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 exhibit.
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 —

Refer to the 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?

— Exhibit —
user@router# show class-of-service
classifiers {
inet-precedence ipp-test {
import default;
forwarding-class best-effort {
loss-priority low code-points be;
}
forwarding-class expedited-forwarding {
loss-priority low code-points af21;
}

forwarding-class assured-forwarding {
loss-priority low code-points af11;
}
forwarding-class network-control {
loss-priority low code-points nc1;
}
}
}
user@router# show firewall
filter MF {
term 1 {
from {
precedence 0;
}
then forwarding-class best-effort;
}
term 2 {
from {
precedence 5;
}
then forwarding-class expedited-forwarding;
}
term 3 {
from {
precedence 2;
}

then forwarding-class assured-forwarding;
}
term 4 {
from {
precedence 6;
}
then forwarding-class network-control;
}
term 5 {
then accept;
}
}
user@router> show class-of-service
…
Code point type: inet-precedence
Alias Bit pattern
af11 001
af21 010
af31 011
af41 100
be 000
cs6 110
cs7 111
ef 101
nc1 110
nc2 111

— Exhibit —

Refer to the Exhibit.
Traffic with the IPP value af21 should be assigned to the expedited forwarding queue; however,
this traffic is not being assigned to that queue.
Referring to the exhibit, what is causing this behavior?

— Exhibit —

user@router# show class-of-service
classifiers {
inet-precedence ipp-test {
import default;
forwarding-class best-effort {
loss-priority low code-points be;
}
forwarding-class expedited-forwarding {
loss-priority low code-points af21;
}
forwarding-class assured-forwarding {
loss-priority low code-points af11;
}

forwarding-class network-control {
loss-priority low code-points nc1;
}
}
}
interfaces {
ge-* {
scheduler-map map-test;
unit * {
classifiers {
inet-precedence ipp-test;
}
rewrite-rules {
inet-precedence ipp-rw-test;
inet-precedence default;
}
}
}
}
…
rewrite-rules {
inet-precedence ipp-rw-test {
forwarding-class best-effort {
loss-priority low code-point be;
loss-priority high code-point af21;
}
forwarding-class expedited-forwarding {

loss-priority high code-point af21;
loss-priority low code-point be;
}
forwarding-class assured-forwarding {
loss-priority low code-point af11;
loss-priority high code-point af11;
}
forwarding-class network-control {
loss-priority low code-point nc1;
loss-priority high code-point nc1;
}
}
}
user@router> show class-of-service
…
Code point type: inet-precedence
Alias Bit pattern
af11 001
af21 010
af31 011
af41 100
be 000
cs6 110
cs7 111
ef 101
nc1 110

nc2 111
— Exhibit —

Refer to the Exhibit.
Traffic with the IP precedence value af21 ingresses the router and should be rewritten with the
same value as it egresses; however, this traffic is rewritten to a different value.
Referring to the exhibit, what is the source of this problem?

— Exhibit —

user@R1> show class-of-service interface ge-0/0/0
Physical interface: ge-0/0/0, Index: 134
Queues supporteD. 8, Queues in use: 4
Scheduler map: , Index: 2
Congestion-notification: Disabled
Logical interface: ge-0/0/0.0, Index: 69
Object Name Type Index
Classifier ipprec-compatibility ip 13
— Exhibit —

Refer to the Exhibit.
You are sending traffic to the ge-0/0/0 interface on R1 with the expedited forwarding (101) IP
precedence bits. However, the counters on the router show that it is not processing any traffic in
the expedited forwarding queue.
Referring to the exhibit, what is causing the problem?