McAfee Secure

Cisco 300-410 Bundle

Exam Code: 300-410

Exam Name Implementing Cisco Enterprise Advanced Routing and Services (ENARSI)

Certification Provider: Cisco

Corresponding Certification: CCNP Enterprise

Cisco 300-410 Bundle $25.00
300-410 Sample 1 300-410 Sample 2 300-410 Sample 3 300-410 Sample 4 300-410 Sample 5 300-410 Sample 6 300-410 Sample 7 300-410 Sample 8 300-410 Sample 9 300-410 Sample 10

100% Cisco 300-410 Guaranteed Success With Testking Training Materials

Get Real 300-410 Exam Questions & Expert Verified Answers as Experienced on the Real Exam!

  • Questions & Answers

    300-410 Questions & Answers

    498 Questions & Answers

    The ultimate exam preparation tool, Questions & Answers mirrors the actual 300-410 exam while allowing you to hone and measure every aspect of your test-taking ability.

  • 300-410 Video Course

    300-410 Training Course

    129 Video Lectures

    300-410 Video Course is developed by Cisco Professionals to help you pass the 300-410 exam.

    Description

    This course will improve your knowledge and skills required to pass Implementing Cisco Enterprise Advanced Routing and Services (ENARSI) exam.

Implementing Cisco Enterprise Advanced Routing and Services (ENARSI) (300-410) Practice Tests

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Money Back Guarantee

Testking provides hassle-free money back guarantee with our products. That is because we have 100% trust in the abilities of our professional and experience product team, and our record is a proof of that.

99.6% PASS RATE
Total Cost: $164.98
Bundle Price: $139.98

Purchase Individually

  • Questions & Answers

    Questions & Answers

    498 Questions

    $124.99
  • 300-410 Video Course

    Training Course

    129 Video Lectures

    $39.99

Cisco 300-410 Practice Test 22

Question 210

At the Lakeside transit hub, OSPF routes enter EIGRP through R-LAK-CORE1 and are later returned to OSPF at the East depot network, producing unstable preferred paths to 10.32.0.0/16. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router.
  2. EIGRP needs a usable metric for routes introduced from a different source before they can be advertised.
  3. Mutual redistribution without route-origin controls allows a route to be injected back into its source domain.
  4. The redistribution policy tests an unrelated set of routes rather than the intended matching prefixes.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The evidence at the Lakeside transit hub supports this condition: Mutual redistribution without route-origin controls allows a route to be injected back into its source domain. The associated fix is: Tag redistributed routes at entry and filter those tags from re-entering their origin protocol.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router. The reported symptom at the Lakeside transit hub instead concerns redistribution loop route tagging.

B:

That diagnosis belongs to seed metric on eigrp redistribution, while the observation at the Lakeside transit hub points to redistribution loop route tagging.

D:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: The redistribution policy tests an unrelated set of routes rather than the intended matching prefixes. The reported symptom at the Lakeside transit hub instead concerns redistribution loop route tagging.

Question 211

At the Pinecrest freight terminal, R-PIN-WAN1 can see connected routes in its table, but EIGRP neighbors never learn them after redistribution is enabled without a metric. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet.
  2. EIGRP needs a usable metric for routes introduced from a different source before they can be advertised.
  3. Mutual redistribution without route-origin controls allows a route to be injected back into its source domain.
  4. OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

EIGRP needs a usable metric for routes introduced from a different source before they can be advertised. That explains the specific symptom at the Pinecrest freight terminal. A direct corrective action is: Provide an explicit valid EIGRP seed metric for redistributed routes or configure an appropriate default metric.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The observation at the Pinecrest freight terminal does not point to summary black hole from missing component; it points to a different condition. EIGRP needs a usable metric for routes introduced from a different source before they can be advertised.

C:

That diagnosis belongs to redistribution loop route tagging, while the observation at the Pinecrest freight terminal points to seed metric on eigrp redistribution.

D:

The observation at the Pinecrest freight terminal does not point to ospf area range configured on wrong border; it points to a different condition. EIGRP needs a usable metric for routes introduced from a different source before they can be advertised.

Question 212

At the Westlake utility network, R-WLK-EDGE1 can see connected routes in its table, but EIGRP neighbors never learn them after redistribution is enabled without a metric. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router.
  2. EIGRP needs a usable metric for routes introduced from a different source before they can be advertised.
  3. An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet.
  4. The redistribution policy tests an unrelated set of routes rather than the intended matching prefixes.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The evidence at the Westlake utility network supports this condition: EIGRP needs a usable metric for routes introduced from a different source before they can be advertised. The associated fix is: Provide an explicit valid EIGRP seed metric for redistributed routes or configure an appropriate default metric.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That diagnosis belongs to ospf area range configured on wrong border, while the observation at the Westlake utility network points to seed metric on eigrp redistribution.

C:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet. The reported symptom at the Westlake utility network instead concerns seed metric on eigrp redistribution.

D:

That diagnosis belongs to route-map match direction in redistribution, while the observation at the Westlake utility network points to seed metric on eigrp redistribution.

Question 213

At the Bluewater clinical network, a route map on R-BLU-PE1 was intended to admit a partner prefix into OSPF, but it matches a different address-family prefix list. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. EIGRP needs a usable metric for routes introduced from a different source before they can be advertised.
  2. Mutual redistribution without route-origin controls allows a route to be injected back into its source domain.
  3. The redistribution policy tests an unrelated set of routes rather than the intended matching prefixes.
  4. An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The evidence at the Bluewater clinical network supports this condition: The redistribution policy tests an unrelated set of routes rather than the intended matching prefixes. The associated fix is: Bind the route-map match statement to the correct prefix-list for the redistributed address family.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: EIGRP needs a usable metric for routes introduced from a different source before they can be advertised. The reported symptom at the Bluewater clinical network instead concerns route-map match direction in redistribution.

B:

That diagnosis belongs to redistribution loop route tagging, while the observation at the Bluewater clinical network points to route-map match direction in redistribution.

D:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet. The reported symptom at the Bluewater clinical network instead concerns route-map match direction in redistribution.

Question 214

At the Cedarfield retail branch, a route map on R-CED-BR1 was intended to admit a partner prefix into OSPF, but it matches a different address-family prefix list. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. The alternate path fails the strict EIGRP feasibility condition because 130 is not below 100.
  2. Mutual redistribution without route-origin controls allows a route to be injected back into its source domain.
  3. The redistribution policy tests an unrelated set of routes rather than the intended matching prefixes.
  4. The EIGRP route metric reflects interface delay as well as bandwidth under standard metric settings.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

This diagnosis fits the symptoms at the Cedarfield retail branch. The redistribution policy tests an unrelated set of routes rather than the intended matching prefixes. The remedial action is: Bind the route-map match statement to the correct prefix-list for the redistributed address family.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The observation at the Cedarfield retail branch does not point to eigrp feasible successor inequality; it points to a different condition. The redistribution policy tests an unrelated set of routes rather than the intended matching prefixes.

B:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: Mutual redistribution without route-origin controls allows a route to be injected back into its source domain. The reported symptom at the Cedarfield retail branch instead concerns route-map match direction in redistribution.

D:

The observation at the Cedarfield retail branch does not point to eigrp delay in composite metric; it points to a different condition. The redistribution policy tests an unrelated set of routes rather than the intended matching prefixes.

Question 215

At the Ironwood training campus, R-IRN-RT1 originates an aggregate toward the Central learning center; one subnet inside the summary was removed locally, yet traffic for that subnet keeps arriving and is discarded. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. The OSPF Hello options differ because one router does not agree that the area is a stub.
  2. IGP hello/dead timers alone are too slow to detect the observed forwarding-path failure.
  3. OSPF prefers intra-area routes to inter-area routes for the same prefix even when cost figures differ.
  4. An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This diagnosis fits the symptoms at the Ironwood training campus. An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet. The remedial action is: Align the advertised summary with reachable component routes or provide a valid destination for every advertised component.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That diagnosis belongs to ospf stub area options mismatch, while the observation at the Ironwood training campus points to summary black hole from missing component.

B:

The observation at the Ironwood training campus does not point to bfd independent fast failure detection; it points to a different condition. An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet.

C:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: OSPF prefers intra-area routes to inter-area routes for the same prefix even when cost figures differ. The reported symptom at the Ironwood training campus instead concerns summary black hole from missing component.

Question 216

At the Harborview media campus, R-HAR-DIST1 originates an aggregate toward the Inland content hub; one subnet inside the summary was removed locally, yet traffic for that subnet keeps arriving and is discarded. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. OSPF prefers intra-area routes to inter-area routes for the same prefix even when cost figures differ.
  2. An exact-mask prefix-list statement does not match longer component prefixes unless its length conditions allow them.
  3. An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet.
  4. OSPF neighbor packets describe incompatible area membership for a common link.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The evidence at the Harborview media campus supports this condition: An aggregate advertisement masks loss of a more specific reachable route and attracts traffic to an unreachable subnet. The associated fix is: Align the advertised summary with reachable component routes or provide a valid destination for every advertised component.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: OSPF prefers intra-area routes to inter-area routes for the same prefix even when cost figures differ. The reported symptom at the Harborview media campus instead concerns summary black hole from missing component.

B:

That diagnosis belongs to prefix-list mask-length filtering, while the observation at the Harborview media campus points to summary black hole from missing component.

D:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: OSPF neighbor packets describe incompatible area membership for a common link. The reported symptom at the Harborview media campus instead concerns summary black hole from missing component.

Question 217

At the Northport logistics site, engineers add an OSPF area-range command to an internal router, but the intended inter-area summary never appears at the ABR facing the Richmond distribution center. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router.
  2. EIGRP peers in different AS configurations will not establish the intended neighbor relationship.
  3. BGP local preference is examined before AS-path length, and the present attributes favor the wrong exit.
  4. OSPF prefers intra-area routes to inter-area routes for the same prefix even when cost figures differ.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

The evidence at the Northport logistics site supports this condition: OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router. The associated fix is: Configure the summary at the appropriate OSPF area border router for that source area.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: EIGRP peers in different AS configurations will not establish the intended neighbor relationship. The reported symptom at the Northport logistics site instead concerns ospf area range configured on wrong border.

C:

That diagnosis belongs to bgp local preference path policy, while the observation at the Northport logistics site points to ospf area range configured on wrong border.

D:

The observation at the Northport logistics site does not point to ospf intra-area route preference; it points to a different condition. OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router.

Question 218

At the Hillcrest research lab, engineers add an OSPF area-range command to an internal router, but the intended inter-area summary never appears at the ABR facing the Coastal compute center. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. An exact-mask prefix-list statement does not match longer component prefixes unless its length conditions allow them.
  2. The EIGRP route metric reflects interface delay as well as bandwidth under standard metric settings.
  3. Mutual redistribution without route-origin controls allows a route to be injected back into its source domain.
  4. OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This diagnosis fits the symptoms at the Hillcrest research lab. OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router. The remedial action is: Configure the summary at the appropriate OSPF area border router for that source area.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That diagnosis belongs to prefix-list mask-length filtering, while the observation at the Hillcrest research lab points to ospf area range configured on wrong border.

B:

The observation at the Hillcrest research lab does not point to eigrp delay in composite metric; it points to a different condition. OSPF inter-area summary generation belongs to the ABR, not an arbitrary internal area router.

C:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: Mutual redistribution without route-origin controls allows a route to be injected back into its source domain. The reported symptom at the Hillcrest research lab instead concerns ospf area range configured on wrong border.

Question 219

At the Granite manufacturing plant, R-GRA-PE1 has a correct PBR route map, but client traffic entering the LAN interface still follows the normal routing table toward the Meridian corporate campus. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. VRF-Lite intentionally isolates routing tables, and sharing needs a configured route exchange.
  2. The interface was not placed in the customer VRF, so routing separation is ineffective for that link.
  3. IGP hello/dead timers alone are too slow to detect the observed forwarding-path failure.
  4. The policy is defined but not applied on the interface where the targeted packets enter.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

The policy is defined but not applied on the interface where the targeted packets enter. That explains the specific symptom at the Granite manufacturing plant. A direct corrective action is: Apply the PBR route map to the correct incoming interface with the appropriate policy command.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This diagnoses a different mechanism: VRF-Lite intentionally isolates routing tables, and sharing needs a configured route exchange. The reported symptom at the Granite manufacturing plant instead concerns policy-based routing ingress application.

B:

That diagnosis belongs to vrf-lite interface assignment, while the observation at the Granite manufacturing plant points to policy-based routing ingress application.

C:

The observation at the Granite manufacturing plant does not point to bfd independent fast failure detection; it points to a different condition. The policy is defined but not applied on the interface where the targeted packets enter.

Question 220

At the Elmfield engineering office, R-ELM-EDGE1 has a correct PBR route map, but client traffic entering the LAN interface still follows the normal routing table toward the Midtown engineering center. Which underlying technical condition best accounts for this evidence?

  1. VRF-Lite intentionally isolates routing tables, and sharing needs a configured route exchange.
  2. The policy is defined but not applied on the interface where the targeted packets enter.
  3. The interface was not placed in the customer VRF, so routing separation is ineffective for that link.
  4. A static policy next hop is being used without confirming that forwarding through it is possible.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The policy is defined but not applied on the interface where the targeted packets enter. That explains the specific symptom at the Elmfield engineering office. A direct corrective action is: Apply the PBR route map to the correct incoming interface with the appropriate policy command.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The observation at the Elmfield engineering office does not point to vrf route leaking; it points to a different condition. The policy is defined but not applied on the interface where the targeted packets enter.

C:

That diagnosis belongs to vrf-lite interface assignment, while the observation at the Elmfield engineering office points to policy-based routing ingress application.

D:

The observation at the Elmfield engineering office does not point to pbr next-hop reachability; it points to a different condition. The policy is defined but not applied on the interface where the targeted packets enter.