McAfee Secure

Cisco 300-420 Bundle

Exam Code: 300-420

Exam Name Designing Cisco Enterprise Networks (ENSLD)

Certification Provider: Cisco

Corresponding Certification: CCNP Enterprise

Cisco 300-420 Bundle $25.00
300-420 Sample 1 300-420 Sample 2 300-420 Sample 3 300-420 Sample 4 300-420 Sample 5 300-420 Sample 6 300-420 Sample 7 300-420 Sample 8 300-420 Sample 9 300-420 Sample 10

100% Cisco 300-420 Guaranteed Success With Testking Training Materials

Get Real 300-420 Exam Questions & Expert Verified Answers as Experienced on the Real Exam!

  • Questions & Answers

    300-420 Questions & Answers

    416 Questions & Answers

    The ultimate exam preparation tool, Questions & Answers mirrors the actual 300-420 exam while allowing you to hone and measure every aspect of your test-taking ability.

  • 300-420 Video Course

    300-420 Training Course

    75 Video Lectures

    300-420 Video Course is developed by Cisco Professionals to help you pass the 300-420 exam.

    Description

    This course will improve your knowledge and skills required to pass Designing Cisco Enterprise Networks (ENSLD) exam.

Designing Cisco Enterprise Networks (ENSLD) (300-420) 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

    416 Questions

    $124.99
  • 300-420 Video Course

    Training Course

    75 Video Lectures

    $39.99

Cisco 300-420 Practice Test 12

Question 110

For this Cisco ENSLD design case: During a predeployment review for a distributed retail network, the team discovers this design gap: a branch introduces a manual EIGRP summary that also covers an unconnected address range. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations.
  2. EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes.
  3. A feasible successor must meet DUAL’s feasibility condition to provide a loop-free immediate backup.
  4. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The correct engineering response is: Narrow the summary or correct allocation so the aggregate represents reachable subordinate networks. The observable check is: Traffic to each intended component prefix succeeds and unused portions of the summary are not inadvertently advertised. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

B:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

C:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: a feasible successor must meet DUAL’s feasibility condition to provide a loop-free immediate backup. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 111

During acceptance testing for this network design: During a predeployment review for a distributed retail network, the team discovers this design gap: a branch introduces a manual EIGRP summary that also covers an unconnected address range. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. Both intended qualifying paths are installed and observed utilization remains inside the design constraints.
  2. Traffic to each intended component prefix succeeds and unused portions of the summary are not inadvertently advertised. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.
  3. Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match.
  4. Hub route queries do not unnecessarily propagate through the spoke and local reachability remains intact.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Traffic to each intended component prefix succeeds and unused portions of the summary are not inadvertently advertised. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result. EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations.

Incorrect Answers

A:

EIGRP variance permits qualifying feasible routes of unequal metric to participate in load sharing; it does not waive loop-free feasibility checks. In the case being tested, EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Traffic to each intended component prefix succeeds and unused portions of the summary are not inadvertently advertised. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

C:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. In the case being tested, EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Traffic to each intended component prefix succeeds and unused portions of the summary are not inadvertently advertised. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

D:

EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes. In the case being tested, EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Traffic to each intended component prefix succeeds and unused portions of the summary are not inadvertently advertised. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

Question 112

Operations wants to avoid recurrence of this design flaw: During a predeployment review for a distributed retail network, the team discovers this design gap: a branch introduces a manual EIGRP summary that also covers an unconnected address range. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which preventive design control MOST DIRECTLY addresses this specific risk?

  1. Make EIGRP stub status part of remote-site configuration templates.
  2. Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation.
  3. Check summary coverage against the live IPAM and planned branch growth. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist.
  4. Validate EIGRP successor and backup behavior during link-failure testing.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Check summary coverage against the live IPAM and planned branch growth. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist. This control targets the underlying design risk. EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The follow-up acceptance check remains: Traffic to each intended component prefix succeeds and unused portions of the summary are not inadvertently advertised. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

A:

EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes. The repeat risk here is different: EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. A directly relevant preventive control is: Check summary coverage against the live IPAM and planned branch growth. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist.

B:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The repeat risk here is different: EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. A directly relevant preventive control is: Check summary coverage against the live IPAM and planned branch growth. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist.

D:

A feasible successor must meet DUAL’s feasibility condition to provide a loop-free immediate backup. The repeat risk here is different: EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. A directly relevant preventive control is: Check summary coverage against the live IPAM and planned branch growth. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist.

Question 113

A Cisco enterprise designer reviews the following scenario: An EIGRP migration changes metric K-values on just one of two intended peers and adjacency establishment fails. Which action MOST DIRECTLY meets the stated design requirement?

  1. Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency.
  2. Configure remote EIGRP spokes as stubs with appropriate advertised route types.
  3. Narrow the summary or correct allocation so the aggregate represents reachable subordinate networks.
  4. Design metrics and path diversity with the EIGRP feasibility condition in mind rather than assuming all backups are feasible successors.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency. This action addresses the stated design problem. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. A practical confirmation is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match.

Incorrect Answers

B:

EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The needed response is: Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency.

C:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The needed response is: Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency.

D:

A feasible successor must meet DUAL’s feasibility condition to provide a loop-free immediate backup. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The needed response is: Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency.

Question 114

The network architecture board discusses the following: An EIGRP migration changes metric K-values on just one of two intended peers and adjacency establishment fails. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations.
  2. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange.
  3. EIGRP variance permits qualifying feasible routes of unequal metric to participate in load sharing; it does not waive loop-free feasibility checks.
  4. BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The correct engineering response is: Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency. The observable check is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match.

Incorrect Answers

A:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

C:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: EIGRP variance permits qualifying feasible routes of unequal metric to participate in load sharing; it does not waive loop-free feasibility checks. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 115

The infrastructure team must validate this situation: An EIGRP migration changes metric K-values on just one of two intended peers and adjacency establishment fails. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. Traffic to each intended component prefix succeeds and unused portions of the summary are not inadvertently advertised.
  2. The topology table identifies feasible successors where available and failover measurements match expectations.
  3. Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match.
  4. The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange.

Incorrect Answers

A:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. In the case being tested, a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match.

B:

A feasible successor must meet DUAL’s feasibility condition to provide a loop-free immediate backup. In the case being tested, a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match.

D:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. In the case being tested, a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match.

Question 116

A post-incident design review discusses the following: An EIGRP migration changes metric K-values on just one of two intended peers and adjacency establishment fails. Which preventive design control MOST DIRECTLY addresses this specific risk?

  1. Make EIGRP stub status part of remote-site configuration templates.
  2. Validate EIGRP successor and backup behavior during link-failure testing.
  3. Check summary coverage against the live IPAM and planned branch growth.
  4. Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation. This control targets the underlying design risk. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The follow-up acceptance check remains: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match.

Incorrect Answers

A:

EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes. The repeat risk here is different: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. A directly relevant preventive control is: Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation.

B:

A feasible successor must meet DUAL’s feasibility condition to provide a loop-free immediate backup. The repeat risk here is different: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. A directly relevant preventive control is: Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation.

C:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The repeat risk here is different: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. A directly relevant preventive control is: Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation.

Question 117

During a network design workshop, the team finds this issue: During a predeployment review for a university backbone, the team discovers this design gap: an EIGRP migration changes metric K-values on just one of two intended peers and adjacency establishment fails. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which action MOST DIRECTLY meets the stated design requirement?

  1. Configure remote EIGRP spokes as stubs with appropriate advertised route types.
  2. Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency.
  3. Narrow the summary or correct allocation so the aggregate represents reachable subordinate networks.
  4. Design an IPv6-over-IPv4 tunnel between capable edge devices and account for MTU overhead.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency. This action addresses the stated design problem. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. A practical confirmation is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match. The university backbone acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

A:

EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The needed response is: Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency.

C:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The needed response is: Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency.

D:

An overlay tunnel encapsulates one protocol through the underlay without upgrading intermediate IPv4-only routers. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The needed response is: Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency.

Question 118

In a technical design review: During a predeployment review for a university backbone, the team discovers this design gap: an EIGRP migration changes metric K-values on just one of two intended peers and adjacency establishment fails. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. EIGRP variance permits qualifying feasible routes of unequal metric to participate in load sharing; it does not waive loop-free feasibility checks.
  2. EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes.
  3. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange.
  4. Hierarchical IPv6 prefix planning supports route summarization and stable per-link /64 subnets.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The correct engineering response is: Make EIGRP metric K-values consistent across peers that must form an adjacency. The observable check is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match. The university backbone acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

A:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: EIGRP variance permits qualifying feasible routes of unequal metric to participate in load sharing; it does not waive loop-free feasibility checks. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

B:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Hierarchical IPv6 prefix planning supports route summarization and stable per-link /64 subnets. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 119

An engineering reviewer needs objective proof for the following: During a predeployment review for a university backbone, the team discovers this design gap: an EIGRP migration changes metric K-values on just one of two intended peers and adjacency establishment fails. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. Hub route queries do not unnecessarily propagate through the spoke and local reachability remains intact.
  2. Traffic to each intended component prefix succeeds and unused portions of the summary are not inadvertently advertised.
  3. Both intended qualifying paths are installed and observed utilization remains inside the design constraints.
  4. Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match. The university backbone acceptance record also captures this result.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match. The university backbone acceptance record also captures this result. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange.

Incorrect Answers

A:

EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes. In the case being tested, a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match. The university backbone acceptance record also captures this result.

B:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. In the case being tested, a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match. The university backbone acceptance record also captures this result.

C:

EIGRP variance permits qualifying feasible routes of unequal metric to participate in load sharing; it does not waive loop-free feasibility checks. In the case being tested, a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match. The university backbone acceptance record also captures this result.

Question 120

The change advisory board sees a repeat risk in this case: During a predeployment review for a university backbone, the team discovers this design gap: an EIGRP migration changes metric K-values on just one of two intended peers and adjacency establishment fails. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which preventive design control MOST DIRECTLY addresses this specific risk?

  1. Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation. Apply the same control to the university backbone rollout checklist.
  2. Make EIGRP stub status part of remote-site configuration templates.
  3. Check summary coverage against the live IPAM and planned branch growth.
  4. Validate EIGRP successor and backup behavior during link-failure testing.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation. Apply the same control to the university backbone rollout checklist. This control targets the underlying design risk. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. The follow-up acceptance check remains: Peer adjacencies establish and routes enter the topology table after the K-values match. The university backbone acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

B:

EIGRP stub signaling discourages neighbors from querying the spoke as a transit path for remote routes. The repeat risk here is different: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. A directly relevant preventive control is: Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation. Apply the same control to the university backbone rollout checklist.

C:

EIGRP summarization can hide detailed routes; an overbroad aggregate may attract traffic to nonexistent destinations. The repeat risk here is different: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. A directly relevant preventive control is: Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation. Apply the same control to the university backbone rollout checklist.

D:

A feasible successor must meet DUAL’s feasibility condition to provide a loop-free immediate backup. The repeat risk here is different: a mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange. A directly relevant preventive control is: Enforce a single approved EIGRP metric profile via configuration validation. Apply the same control to the university backbone rollout checklist.