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 48

Question 470

At the Bayview university campus, an eBGP neighbor begins advertising unrelated routes and R-BAY-DIST1 installs more prefixes than the agreed customer set. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. Internal routers prefer the exit with the higher approved local-preference value.
  2. BGP reaches Established over the loopback path and exchanges authorized prefixes.
  3. Routes learned from one client are appropriately reflected to other clients without a full mesh.
  4. Only the approved routes remain in the accepted BGP table after soft policy re-evaluation.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

A meaningful acceptance check at the Bayview university campus should verify the actual forwarding or control-plane outcome. Only the approved routes remain in the accepted BGP table after soft policy re-evaluation.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. Internal routers prefer the exit with the higher approved local-preference value. It would not establish the required outcome for bgp inbound prefix filtering at the Bayview university campus.

B:

The result addresses ebgp non-direct neighbor multihop, not the observed fault at the Bayview university campus. The decisive outcome is different: Only the approved routes remain in the accepted BGP table after soft policy re-evaluation.

C:

This validates an unrelated control at the Bayview university campus: Routes learned from one client are appropriately reflected to other clients without a full mesh. It would not demonstrate correction of bgp inbound prefix filtering.

Question 471

At the Foothill municipal site, an MPLS L3VPN packet reaches the provider edge but an analyst interprets the outer transport label as the customer VPN identifier. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.
  2. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs.
  3. Overlapping prefixes remain distinct and only VPNs with matching RT policy import them.
  4. The remote FEC has a label binding and a valid label-forwarding entry along the transport path.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This tests the exact behavior that was failing at the Foothill municipal site. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE. The change supporting that outcome is: Distinguish the outer label for transit forwarding from the inner VPN label used to select the egress forwarding context.

Incorrect Answers

B:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs. It would not establish the required outcome for mpls transport and service label stack at the Foothill municipal site.

C:

The result addresses route distinguisher versus route target, not the observed fault at the Foothill municipal site. The decisive outcome is different: A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.

D:

This validates an unrelated control at the Foothill municipal site: The remote FEC has a label binding and a valid label-forwarding entry along the transport path. It would not demonstrate correction of mpls transport and service label stack.

Question 472

At the Highland government office, an MPLS L3VPN packet reaches the provider edge but an analyst interprets the outer transport label as the customer VPN identifier. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. The CE installs the permitted remote subnet with the correct next hop and VRF isolation.
  2. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs.
  3. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.
  4. Overlapping prefixes remain distinct and only VPNs with matching RT policy import them.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

A meaningful acceptance check at the Highland government office should verify the actual forwarding or control-plane outcome. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The result addresses pe to ce route exchange, not the observed fault at the Highland government office. The decisive outcome is different: A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.

B:

This validates an unrelated control at the Highland government office: The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs. It would not demonstrate correction of mpls transport and service label stack.

D:

The result addresses route distinguisher versus route target, not the observed fault at the Highland government office. The decisive outcome is different: A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.

Question 473

At the Brookstone distribution branch, IGP routes between provider edge routers are present, but LDP neighbors do not form over a required MPLS-enabled transport link. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. LDP neighbors reach operational state and usable label bindings are visible for the core FECs.
  2. Overlapping prefixes remain distinct and only VPNs with matching RT policy import them.
  3. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.
  4. A labeled packet to the customer subnet exits through the correct VRF-associated interface.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

A meaningful acceptance check at the Brookstone distribution branch should verify the actual forwarding or control-plane outcome. LDP neighbors reach operational state and usable label bindings are visible for the core FECs.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The result addresses route distinguisher versus route target, not the observed fault at the Brookstone distribution branch. The decisive outcome is different: LDP neighbors reach operational state and usable label bindings are visible for the core FECs.

C:

This validates an unrelated control at the Brookstone distribution branch: A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE. It would not demonstrate correction of ldp neighbor state on the core link.

D:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. A labeled packet to the customer subnet exits through the correct VRF-associated interface. It would not establish the required outcome for ldp neighbor state on the core link at the Brookstone distribution branch.

Question 474

At the Silverstream data center, IGP routes between provider edge routers are present, but LDP neighbors do not form over a required MPLS-enabled transport link. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. The CE installs the permitted remote subnet with the correct next hop and VRF isolation.
  2. LDP neighbors reach operational state and usable label bindings are visible for the core FECs.
  3. The remote FEC has a label binding and a valid label-forwarding entry along the transport path.
  4. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

A meaningful acceptance check at the Silverstream data center should verify the actual forwarding or control-plane outcome. LDP neighbors reach operational state and usable label bindings are visible for the core FECs.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This validates an unrelated control at the Silverstream data center: The CE installs the permitted remote subnet with the correct next hop and VRF isolation. It would not demonstrate correction of ldp neighbor state on the core link.

C:

The result addresses mpls unlabelled core hop, not the observed fault at the Silverstream data center. The decisive outcome is different: LDP neighbors reach operational state and usable label bindings are visible for the core FECs.

D:

This validates an unrelated control at the Silverstream data center: A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE. It would not demonstrate correction of ldp neighbor state on the core link.

Question 475

At the Lakeside transit hub, a provider edge can resolve the remote loopback in IP routing but no MPLS label-forwarding entry exists for that remote FEC. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss.
  2. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs.
  3. A labeled packet to the customer subnet exits through the correct VRF-associated interface.
  4. The remote FEC has a label binding and a valid label-forwarding entry along the transport path.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

The stated result demonstrates that the specific condition at the Lakeside transit hub has been corrected. The remote FEC has a label binding and a valid label-forwarding entry along the transport path.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The result addresses mpls penultimate-hop popping, not the observed fault at the Lakeside transit hub. The decisive outcome is different: The remote FEC has a label binding and a valid label-forwarding entry along the transport path.

B:

This validates an unrelated control at the Lakeside transit hub: The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs. It would not demonstrate correction of mpls unlabelled core hop.

C:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. A labeled packet to the customer subnet exits through the correct VRF-associated interface. It would not establish the required outcome for mpls unlabelled core hop at the Lakeside transit hub.

Question 476

At the Southridge banking office, a provider edge can resolve the remote loopback in IP routing but no MPLS label-forwarding entry exists for that remote FEC. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. The CE installs the permitted remote subnet with the correct next hop and VRF isolation.
  2. The remote FEC has a label binding and a valid label-forwarding entry along the transport path.
  3. Overlapping prefixes remain distinct and only VPNs with matching RT policy import them.
  4. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The stated result demonstrates that the specific condition at the Southridge banking office has been corrected. The remote FEC has a label binding and a valid label-forwarding entry along the transport path.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. The CE installs the permitted remote subnet with the correct next hop and VRF isolation. It would not establish the required outcome for mpls unlabelled core hop at the Southridge banking office.

C:

This validates an unrelated control at the Southridge banking office: Overlapping prefixes remain distinct and only VPNs with matching RT policy import them. It would not demonstrate correction of mpls unlabelled core hop.

D:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs. It would not establish the required outcome for mpls unlabelled core hop at the Southridge banking office.

Question 477

At the Westlake utility network, a label trace shows the transit label removed one hop before the egress PE; an engineer reports a fault despite normal connectivity. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. The CE installs the permitted remote subnet with the correct next hop and VRF isolation.
  2. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs.
  3. The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss.
  4. Overlapping prefixes remain distinct and only VPNs with matching RT policy import them.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The stated result demonstrates that the specific condition at the Westlake utility network has been corrected. The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This validates an unrelated control at the Westlake utility network: The CE installs the permitted remote subnet with the correct next hop and VRF isolation. It would not demonstrate correction of mpls penultimate-hop popping.

B:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs. It would not establish the required outcome for mpls penultimate-hop popping at the Westlake utility network.

D:

This validates an unrelated control at the Westlake utility network: Overlapping prefixes remain distinct and only VPNs with matching RT policy import them. It would not demonstrate correction of mpls penultimate-hop popping.

Question 478

At the Pinecrest freight terminal, a label trace shows the transit label removed one hop before the egress PE; an engineer reports a fault despite normal connectivity. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. LDP neighbors reach operational state and usable label bindings are visible for the core FECs.
  2. The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss.
  3. A labeled packet to the customer subnet exits through the correct VRF-associated interface.
  4. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This tests the exact behavior that was failing at the Pinecrest freight terminal. The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss. The change supporting that outcome is: Recognize penultimate-hop popping and check whether the egress still receives enough information to complete forwarding.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The result addresses ldp neighbor state on the core link, not the observed fault at the Pinecrest freight terminal. The decisive outcome is different: The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss.

C:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. A labeled packet to the customer subnet exits through the correct VRF-associated interface. It would not establish the required outcome for mpls penultimate-hop popping at the Pinecrest freight terminal.

D:

The result addresses mpls transport and service label stack, not the observed fault at the Pinecrest freight terminal. The decisive outcome is different: The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss.

Question 479

At the Cedarfield retail branch, an MP-BGP VPNv4 route arrives at a PE, but it is absent from the intended customer VRF at the Southport warehouse. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. LDP neighbors reach operational state and usable label bindings are visible for the core FECs.
  2. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs.
  3. The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss.
  4. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The stated result demonstrates that the specific condition at the Cedarfield retail branch has been corrected. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. LDP neighbors reach operational state and usable label bindings are visible for the core FECs. It would not establish the required outcome for vpnv4 route-target mismatch at the Cedarfield retail branch.

C:

This validates an unrelated control at the Cedarfield retail branch: The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss. It would not demonstrate correction of vpnv4 route-target mismatch.

D:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE. It would not establish the required outcome for vpnv4 route-target mismatch at the Cedarfield retail branch.

Question 480

At the Bluewater clinical network, an MP-BGP VPNv4 route arrives at a PE, but it is absent from the intended customer VRF at the Central imaging hub. After remediation, which observation would most directly demonstrate the intended result?

  1. The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss.
  2. Overlapping prefixes remain distinct and only VPNs with matching RT policy import them.
  3. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs.
  4. A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The stated result demonstrates that the specific condition at the Bluewater clinical network has been corrected. The intended VPN prefix is imported into the correct VRF and not into unrelated VRFs.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This validates an unrelated control at the Bluewater clinical network: The egress PE processes the remaining packet or service label correctly with no traffic loss. It would not demonstrate correction of vpnv4 route-target mismatch.

B:

That test could pass while the specific fault remains. Overlapping prefixes remain distinct and only VPNs with matching RT policy import them. It would not establish the required outcome for vpnv4 route-target mismatch at the Bluewater clinical network.

D:

This validates an unrelated control at the Bluewater clinical network: A controlled trace shows transport-label switching in the core and VPN-context selection at the egress PE. It would not demonstrate correction of vpnv4 route-target mismatch.