ccnp 300-101 routing test questions

ccnp 300-101 routing test questions

Configuration example (allocating community for routing ): In addition to matching 100 to 106 outside the AS_PATH Access switch configuration: ACLs to release or discard ARP packets. Neighbor 5.5.5.5 update-source Loopback0 neighbor 5.5.5.5 next-hop-self Bridge ID of the root bridge Tunnel Tunnel interface ! The following is the change of the packet after MD5 authentication is configured (all TCP packets have MD5 HASH field added): ? Sw(config-vlan)#private-vlan association 201,202 Metric *>i 100 Set the timer of STP To confirm, the bridge responsible for notifying the topology change will continue to send TCN BPDUs before the bridge confirms the TCN . Next, the designated bridge will generate another TCN for its own root port , and the process is sent all the way to root . The weight of the BGP route generated by the local summary is also 32768. Lab 3 : The access layer switch is inserted into option82 , and the upstream core switch also turns on dhcp snooping. * i100.0.2.0/24 In CEF , there are two main types of load balancing, based on messages and based on purpose. Tag 9, type extern 2, forward metric 64 Ip as-path access-list 1 permit _1$ neighbor 1.1.1.1 filter-list 1 weight xxx neighbor transmitted, and is filter-list 1 matching entry, weight is set to xxx Fa0/20 In the above example, the phenomenon we mentioned, R4 will know the route from OSPF and RIP to 192.168.1.0/24 , and finally R4 will choose OSPF route. This is a phenomenon we don't want to see in this environment, because it creates a sub-optimal path. The AD values ​​for several common routing protocols are listed below: Ip route 172.16.1.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.12.1 Route summary technology background If ip next-hop and ip next-hop recursive are used in the same sequence of a route-map list , then ip next-hop is valid. If ip next-hop is hanged, ip next-hop recursive is enabled . If ip next-hop recursive and ip next-hop are both hanged, they are thrown to the routing table for processing . Note: A route-map sequence (such as route-map test permit 10 ) allows only one configuration. r >i1.1.1.0/24 No auto-summary This can indeed avoid the suboptimal path problem, but it leaves a hidden danger: Update message: contains the entire routing table, updated periodically UDP R2(config)# access-list 1 deny 192.168.3.0 R2(config)# access-list 1 permit any R2(config)# router ospf 1 Gratuitous ARP When the packet enters the router, the router strips the Layer 2 information and then looks up the destination IP address in the CEF table for forwarding. The result of the forwarding decision will point to a neighboring entry in the adjacency list, in which the second layer of character letters that need to be rewritten can be found. Ip dhcp snooping binding mac-address vlan vlan-id ip-address interface interface-id expiry seconds Ip community-list 1 permit no-export ip community-list 1 permit 12:1111 The adjacency list in the CEF component is used for MAC or Layer 2 rewrite information. Redistribute ospf 1 route-map test Ip dhcp snooping Write-delay Configure delay timer for writes to URL ? Switch(config)# spanning-tree vlan-id DAI is an ingress security feature that does not perform egress security checks. Match ip address pref 1 set local-preference 100 * i switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q switchport mode trunk ARP packets are detected and released directly. For untrusted interfaces, ARP packet after receiving back checks only legitimate ARP packets can not be released,ccnp 300-101 routing test questions, if the emergence of illegal ARP packets, it will be log , while discarding. When the RR reflects the route from the client to the non-customer, it also appends its cluster ID to the CLUSTER_LIST , and if the CLUSTER_LIST is empty, it creates one. If the route reflector finds that its local cluster ID appears in the CLUSTER_LIST of the route it received , then it knows that a loop has occurred and ignores the route. The CLUSTER_LIST attribute is only used for RR anti-rings.