what is the shortest path to reach R3 from R1?
— Exhibit –
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
Based on the SPF calculation in the exhibit, what is the shortest path to reach R3 from R1?
why is the BGP neighbor not in Established state?
— Exhibit —
Mar 16 18:39:15.800390 BGP RECV 172.14.10.2+57785 -> 172.14.10.1+179
Mar 16 18:39:15.800932 BGP RECV message type 1 (Open) length 59
Mar 16 18:39:15.800995 BGP RECV version 4 as 2 holdtime 90 id 192.168.5.1 parmlen 30
Mar 16 18:39:15.801064 BGP RECV MP capability AFI=2, SAFI=1
Mar 16 18:39:15.801112 BGP RECV Refresh capability, code=128
Mar 16 18:39:15.801172 BGP RECV Refresh capability, code=2
Mar 16 18:39:15.801224 BGP RECV Restart capability, code=64, time=120, flags=
Mar 16 18:39:15.801289 BGP RECV 4 Byte AS-Path capability (65), as_num 2
Mar 16 18:39:15.801705 advertising receiving-speaker only capabilty to neighbor 172.14.10.2
(External AS 2)
Mar 16 18:39:15.801787 bgp_senD. sending 59 bytes to 172.14.10.2 (External AS 2)
Mar 16 18:39:15.801845
Mar 16 18:39:15.801845 BGP SEND 172.14.10.1+179 -> 172.14.10.2+57785
Mar 16 18:39:15.801933 BGP SEND message type 1 (Open) length 59
Mar 16 18:39:15.801991 BGP SEND version 4 as 1 holdtime 90 id 192.168.2.1 parmlen 30
Mar 16 18:39:15.802054 BGP SEND MP capability AFI=1, SAFI=1
Mar 16 18:39:15.802115 BGP SEND Refresh capability, code=128
Mar 16 18:39:15.802176 BGP SEND Refresh capability, code=2
Mar 16 18:39:15.802227 BGP SEND Restart capability, code=64, time=120, flags=
Mar 16 18:39:15.802292 BGP SEND 4 Byte AS-Path capability (65), as_num 1
Mar 16 18:39:15.802615 bgp_process_caps: mismatch NLRI with 172.14.10.2 (External AS 2):
peer: <inet6-unicast>(16) us: <inet-unicast>(1)
Mar 16 18:39:15.802763 bgp_process_caps:2561: NOTIFICATION sent to 172.14.10.2 (External
AS 2): code 2 (Open Message Error) subcode 7 (unsupported capability) value 1
Mar 16 18:39:15.802913 bgp_senD. sending 23 bytes to 172.14.10.2 (External AS 2)
Mar 16 18:39:15.802969
Mar 16 18:39:15.802969 BGP SEND 172.14.10.1+179 -> 172.14.10.2+57785
Mar 16 18:39:15.803057 BGP SEND message type 3 (Notification) length 23
Mar 16 18:39:15.803113 BGP SEND Notification code 2 (Open Message Error) subcode 7
(unsupported capability)
Mar 16 18:39:15.803179 BGP SEND Data (2 bytes): 00 01
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
Looking at the traceoptions output in the exhibit, why is the BGP neighbor not in Established
state?
which statement about the ABR between Area 8 and Area 2 is true?
— Exhibit –
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
In the exhibit, which statement about the ABR between Area 8 and Area 2 is true?
why are you seeing drops in the best-effort queue on the SRX Series platform?
— Exhibit —
user@router> show class-of-service scheduler-map two
Scheduler map: two, Index: 56974
Scheduler: sch-best-effort, Forwarding class: best-effort, Index: 26057
Transmit ratE. 1 percent, Rate Limit: exact, Buffer sizE. remainder,
Buffer Limit: exact, Priority: low
Excess Priority: unspecified
Drop profiles:
Loss priority Protocol Index Name
Low any 1 <default-drop-profile>
Medium low any 1 <default-drop-profile>
Medium high any 1 <default-drop-profile>
High any 1 <default-drop-profile>
Scheduler: sch-expedited-forwarding, Forwarding class:
expedited-forwarding, Index: 10026
Transmit ratE. 1 percent, Rate Limit: none, Buffer sizE. 1 percent,
Buffer Limit: none, Priority: high
Excess Priority: unspecified
Drop profiles:
Loss priority Protocol Index Name
Low any 1 <default-drop-profile>
Medium low any 1 <default-drop-profile>
Medium high any 1 <default-drop-profile>
High any 1 <default-drop-profile>
user@router> show interfaces ge-0/0/1 extensive | find “CoS Information”
CoS information:
Direction : Output
CoS transmit queue Bandwidth Buffer
Priority Limit
% bps % usec
0 best-effort 1 10000000 r 0
low exact
1 expedited-forwarding 1 10000000 1 0
high none
Logical interface ge-0/0/1.823 (Index 74) (SNMP ifIndex 506) (Generation
139)
Flags: SNMP-Traps 0x4000 VLAN-Tag [ 0x8100.823 ] Encapsulation: ENET2
Traffic statistics:
Input bytes : 1820224529
Output bytes : 6505980
Input packets: 1436371
Output packets: 75905
(… output truncated …)
user@router> show interfaces ge-0/0/1 extensive | find “Queue Counters”
Queue counters: Queued packets Transmitted packets Dropped packets
0 best-effort 1343970 1343970 7105
1 expedited-fo 53987 53987
0
2 assured-forw 0 0
0
3 network-cont 0 0
0
Queue number: Mapped forwarding classes
0 best-effort
1 expedited-forwarding
2 assured-forwarding
3 network-control
Active alarms : None
Active defects : None
(… output truncated …)
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
Based on the configuration in the exhibit, why are you seeing drops in the best-effort queue on the
SRX Series platform?
why is the BGP neighbor not in Established state?
— Exhibit —
[edit protocols bgp]
user@router# show
group ext-peer2 {
type external;
peer-as 1;
neighbor 192.168.2.1;
}
[edit protocols bgp]
user@router# run show route 192.168.2.1
inet.0: 9 destinations, 10 routes (7 active, 0 holddown, 2 hidden)
+ = Active Route, – = Last Active, * = Both
192.168.2.1/32 *[Static/5] 00:01:56
> to 172.14.10.1 via ge-0/0/1.0
[edit protocols bgp]
user@router# run show bgp summary
Groups: 1 Peers: 1 Down peers: 1
Table Tot Paths Act Paths Suppressed History Damp State Pending
inet.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
inet6.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Peer AS InPkt OutPkt OutQ Flaps Last Up/Dwn State|#Active/Received/Accepted/Damped…
192.168.2.1 1 0 0 0 0 14 Idle
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
Looking at the output in the exhibit, why is the BGP neighbor not in Established state?
which three statements describe correct behavior of Switch A?
— Exhibit —
user@SwitchA# show protocols dot1x
authenticator {
authentication-profile-name dot1x;
interface {
ge-0/0/0.0 {
supplicant single;
}
ge-0/0/1.0 {
supplicant single-secure;
}
ge-0/0/2.0 {
supplicant multiple;
}
}
}
{master:0}[edit]
user@SwitchA# show access
radius-server {
172.27.14.226 {
port 1812;
secret “$9$vqs8xd24Zk.5bs.5QFAtM8X”; ## SECRET-DATA
}
}
profile dot1x {
authentication-order radius;
radius {
authentication-server 172.27.14.226;
accounting-server 172.27.14.226;
}
accounting {
order radius;
immediate-update;
}
}
{master:0}[edit]
user@SwitchA#
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
Referring to the exhibit, which three statements describe correct behavior of Switch A? (Choose
three.)
why are the OSPF routers stuck in Init state?
— Exhibit —
Mar 16 17:48:06.145257 OSPF periodic xmit from 172.14.10.1 to 224.0.0.5 (IFL 69 area 0.0.0.1)
Mar 16 17:48:12.404986 ospf_trigger_build_telink_lsas : No peer found
Mar 16 17:48:13.013420 ospf_trigger_build_telink_lsas : No peer found
Mar 16 17:48:13.013555 ospf_set_lsdb_statE. Router LSA 192.168.2.1 adv-rtr 192.168.2.1 state
QUIET->GEN_PENDING
Mar 16 17:48:13.013661 OSPF trigger router LSA 0x156d0f0 build for area 0.0.0.1 lsa-id
192.168.2.1
Mar 16 17:48:13.017494 ospf_set_lsdb_statE. Router LSA 192.168.2.1 adv-rtr 192.168.2.1 state
GEN_PENDING->QUIET
Mar 16 17:48:13.017636 OSPF built router LSA, area 0.0.0.1, link count 2
Mar 16 17:48:13.017954 OSPF sent Hello 172.14.10.1 -> 224.0.0.5 (ge-0/0/1.0 IFL 69 area
0.0.0.1)
Mar 16 17:48:13.018023 Version 2, length 44, ID 192.168.2.1, area 0.0.0.1
Mar 16 17:48:13.018111 mask 255.255.255.0, hello_ivl 10, opts 0x2, prio 128
Mar 16 17:48:13.018162 dead_ivl 40, DR 172.14.10.1, BDR 0.0.0.0
Mar 16 17:48:13.018613 OSPF DR is 192.168.2.1, BDR is 0.0.0.0
Mar 16 17:48:13.018900 OSPF sent Hello 172.14.10.1 -> 224.0.0.5 (ge-0/0/1.0 IFL 69 area
0.0.0.1)
Mar 16 17:48:13.018968 Version 2, length 44, ID 192.168.2.1, area 0.0.0.1
Mar 16 17:48:13.019032 mask 255.255.255.0, hello_ivl 10, opts 0x2, prio 128
Mar 16 17:48:13.019118 dead_ivl 40, DR 172.14.10.1, BDR 0.0.0.0
Mar 16 17:48:13.028426 OSPF DR is 192.168.2.1, BDR is 0.0.0.0
Mar 16 17:48:13.432025 OSPF packet ignoreD. area mismatch (0.0.0.0) from 172.14.10.2 on intf
ge-0/0/1.0 area 0.0.0.1
Mar 16 17:48:13.432135 OSPF rcvd Hello 172.14.10.2 -> 224.0.0.5 (ge-0/0/1.0 IFL 69 area
0.0.0.1)
Mar 16 17:48:13.432189 Version 2, length 44, ID 192.168.5.1, area 0.0.0.0
Mar 16 17:48:13.432274 checksum 0x8065, authtype 0
Mar 16 17:48:13.432346 mask 255.255.255.0, hello_ivl 10, opts 0x2, prio 128
Mar 16 17:48:13.432398 dead_ivl 40, DR 172.14.10.2, BDR 0.0.0.0
commit complete
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
Looking at the traceoptions output in the exhibit, why are the OSPF routers stuck in Init state?
Which configuration accomplishes this goal?
— Exhibit –
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
A customer is trying to configure a router to peer using EBGP to a neighbor. As shown in the
exhibit, two links are being used for this configuration. The goal of this configuration is to loadbalance traffic across both EBGP links.
Which configuration accomplishes this goal?
Which two solutions meet this requirement?
— Exhibit –
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
In the exhibit, R5 is receiving five 200.1.1.x routes from the RIP router, and is advertising them into
Area 1 using an export policy. You do not want any of the RIP routes to be in the routing table of
R1.
Which two solutions meet this requirement? (Choose two.)
Which configuration accomplishes this goal?
— Exhibit –
— Exhibit —
Click the Exhibit button.
In the exhibit, a customer wants to configure an EBGP connection to two different routers in a
neighboring autonomous system. The goal of this configuration is to use per-prefix load balancing
across both EBGP links.
Which configuration accomplishes this goal?