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 14

Question 130

The network architecture board discusses the following: Thousands of individual access prefixes are injected between OSPF areas and cause excessive route-state churn. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed.
  2. An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas.
  3. Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies.
  4. An OSPF NSSA can originate Type 7 external information and translate it at an eligible ABR.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The correct engineering response is: Summarize contiguous routes at eligible OSPF area boundaries without masking unavailable destinations. The observable check is: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes.

Incorrect Answers

A:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

C:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: an OSPF NSSA can originate Type 7 external information and translate it at an eligible ABR. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 131

The infrastructure team must validate this situation: Thousands of individual access prefixes are injected between OSPF areas and cause excessive route-state churn. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access.
  2. ABRs report appropriate area membership and interarea routes resolve through the intended backbone.
  3. The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes.
  4. Transit neighbors reach Full state while access interfaces show no unsolicited OSPF adjacencies.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes. An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas.

Incorrect Answers

A:

An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. In the case being tested, an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes.

B:

OSPF’s normal multiarea hierarchy uses Area 0 as the backbone connecting other areas. In the case being tested, an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes.

D:

Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies. In the case being tested, an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes.

Question 132

A post-incident design review discusses the following: Thousands of individual access prefixes are injected between OSPF areas and cause excessive route-state churn. Which preventive design control MOST DIRECTLY addresses this specific risk?

  1. Review NSSA translator redundancy and route-leak policy before rollout.
  2. Review area connectivity on topology diagrams before deploying new OSPF sites.
  3. Document the stub-area boundary and check router area-type consistency.
  4. Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages. This control targets the underlying design risk. An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The follow-up acceptance check remains: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes.

Incorrect Answers

A:

An OSPF NSSA can originate Type 7 external information and translate it at an eligible ABR. The repeat risk here is different: an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. A directly relevant preventive control is: Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages.

B:

OSPF’s normal multiarea hierarchy uses Area 0 as the backbone connecting other areas. The repeat risk here is different: an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. A directly relevant preventive control is: Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages.

C:

An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The repeat risk here is different: an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. A directly relevant preventive control is: Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages.

Question 133

During a network design workshop, the team finds this issue: During a predeployment review for a manufacturing regional hub, the team discovers this design gap: thousands of individual access prefixes are injected between OSPF areas and cause excessive route-state churn. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which action MOST DIRECTLY meets the stated design requirement?

  1. Evaluate a stub-area design with all routers in the area using compatible area type.
  2. Summarize contiguous routes at eligible OSPF area boundaries without masking unavailable destinations.
  3. Use a properly designed not-so-stubby area and validate Type 7 translation at its ABR.
  4. Keep OSPF enabled only on deliberate transit interfaces and make end-user interfaces passive where supported.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Summarize contiguous routes at eligible OSPF area boundaries without masking unavailable destinations. This action addresses the stated design problem. An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. A practical confirmation is: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes. The manufacturing regional hub acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

A:

An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The needed response is: Summarize contiguous routes at eligible OSPF area boundaries without masking unavailable destinations.

C:

An OSPF NSSA can originate Type 7 external information and translate it at an eligible ABR. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The needed response is: Summarize contiguous routes at eligible OSPF area boundaries without masking unavailable destinations.

D:

Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The needed response is: Summarize contiguous routes at eligible OSPF area boundaries without masking unavailable destinations.

Question 134

In a technical design review: During a predeployment review for a manufacturing regional hub, the team discovers this design gap: thousands of individual access prefixes are injected between OSPF areas and cause excessive route-state churn. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed.
  2. Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies.
  3. An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas.
  4. A mismatch in EIGRP K-values prevents neighbor compatibility for route exchange.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The correct engineering response is: Summarize contiguous routes at eligible OSPF area boundaries without masking unavailable destinations. The observable check is: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes. The manufacturing regional hub acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

A:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

B:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. 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 135

An engineering reviewer needs objective proof for the following: During a predeployment review for a manufacturing regional hub, the team discovers this design gap: thousands of individual access prefixes are injected between OSPF areas and cause excessive route-state churn. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. Transit neighbors reach Full state while access interfaces show no unsolicited OSPF adjacencies.
  2. The local redistributed prefix appears via the correct NSSA translation behavior and prohibited external floods remain absent.
  3. The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access.
  4. The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes. The manufacturing regional hub acceptance record also captures this result.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes. The manufacturing regional hub acceptance record also captures this result. An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies. In the case being tested, an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes. The manufacturing regional hub acceptance record also captures this result.

B:

An OSPF NSSA can originate Type 7 external information and translate it at an eligible ABR. In the case being tested, an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes. The manufacturing regional hub acceptance record also captures this result.

C:

An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. In the case being tested, an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes. The manufacturing regional hub acceptance record also captures this result.

Question 136

The change advisory board sees a repeat risk in this case: During a predeployment review for a manufacturing regional hub, the team discovers this design gap: thousands of individual access prefixes are injected between OSPF areas and cause excessive route-state churn. 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. Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages. Apply the same control to the manufacturing regional hub rollout checklist.
  2. Document the stub-area boundary and check router area-type consistency.
  3. Review area connectivity on topology diagrams before deploying new OSPF sites.
  4. Use interface role templates and audit router-facing versus user-facing ports.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages. Apply the same control to the manufacturing regional hub rollout checklist. This control targets the underlying design risk. An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The follow-up acceptance check remains: The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes. The manufacturing regional hub acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

B:

An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The repeat risk here is different: an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. A directly relevant preventive control is: Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages. Apply the same control to the manufacturing regional hub rollout checklist.

C:

OSPF’s normal multiarea hierarchy uses Area 0 as the backbone connecting other areas. The repeat risk here is different: an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. A directly relevant preventive control is: Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages. Apply the same control to the manufacturing regional hub rollout checklist.

D:

Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies. The repeat risk here is different: an OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. A directly relevant preventive control is: Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages. Apply the same control to the manufacturing regional hub rollout checklist.

Question 137

A design team must resolve this enterprise network problem: A remote OSPF area must suppress external routes while retaining ordinary interarea destinations from the backbone. Which action MOST DIRECTLY meets the stated design requirement?

  1. Summarize contiguous routes at eligible OSPF area boundaries without masking unavailable destinations.
  2. Redesign area boundaries so ordinary interarea connectivity traverses the OSPF backbone.
  3. Evaluate a stub-area design with all routers in the area using compatible area type.
  4. Keep OSPF enabled only on deliberate transit interfaces and make end-user interfaces passive where supported.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Evaluate a stub-area design with all routers in the area using compatible area type. This action addresses the stated design problem. An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. A practical confirmation is: The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access.

Incorrect Answers

A:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The needed response is: Evaluate a stub-area design with all routers in the area using compatible area type.

B:

OSPF’s normal multiarea hierarchy uses Area 0 as the backbone connecting other areas. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The needed response is: Evaluate a stub-area design with all routers in the area using compatible area type.

D:

Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The needed response is: Evaluate a stub-area design with all routers in the area using compatible area type.

Question 138

The design record describes this issue: A remote OSPF area must suppress external routes while retaining ordinary interarea destinations from the backbone. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. An OSPF NSSA can originate Type 7 external information and translate it at an eligible ABR.
  2. OSPF’s normal multiarea hierarchy uses Area 0 as the backbone connecting other areas.
  3. IS-IS shortest-path selection is based on configured link-state costs, which may differ by direction.
  4. An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The correct engineering response is: Evaluate a stub-area design with all routers in the area using compatible area type. The observable check is: The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access.

Incorrect Answers

A:

An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: an OSPF NSSA can originate Type 7 external information and translate it at an eligible ABR. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

B:

An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: OSPF’s normal multiarea hierarchy uses Area 0 as the backbone connecting other areas. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

C:

An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: IS-IS shortest-path selection is based on configured link-state costs, which may differ by direction. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 139

After designing a change for the following scenario: A remote OSPF area must suppress external routes while retaining ordinary interarea destinations from the backbone. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access.
  2. The local redistributed prefix appears via the correct NSSA translation behavior and prohibited external floods remain absent.
  3. The receiving area learns appropriate aggregates and retains working reachability to included component prefixes.
  4. ABRs report appropriate area membership and interarea routes resolve through the intended backbone.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access. An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed.

Incorrect Answers

B:

An OSPF NSSA can originate Type 7 external information and translate it at an eligible ABR. In the case being tested, an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access.

C:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. In the case being tested, an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access.

D:

OSPF’s normal multiarea hierarchy uses Area 0 as the backbone connecting other areas. In the case being tested, an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access.

Question 140

A preventive architecture review covers this situation: A remote OSPF area must suppress external routes while retaining ordinary interarea destinations from the backbone. Which preventive design control MOST DIRECTLY addresses this specific risk?

  1. Use interface role templates and audit router-facing versus user-facing ports.
  2. Document the stub-area boundary and check router area-type consistency.
  3. Review area connectivity on topology diagrams before deploying new OSPF sites.
  4. Allocate prefixes by area and test summary behavior during partial site outages.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Document the stub-area boundary and check router area-type consistency. This control targets the underlying design risk. An OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. The follow-up acceptance check remains: The area has no Type 5 external LSAs and still learns expected interarea routes or default access.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Passive OSPF interfaces advertise their connected networks without forming unnecessary neighbor adjacencies. The repeat risk here is different: an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. A directly relevant preventive control is: Document the stub-area boundary and check router area-type consistency.

C:

OSPF’s normal multiarea hierarchy uses Area 0 as the backbone connecting other areas. The repeat risk here is different: an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. A directly relevant preventive control is: Document the stub-area boundary and check router area-type consistency.

D:

An OSPF ABR can aggregate interarea prefixes, reducing route detail exported to other areas. The repeat risk here is different: an OSPF stub area restricts external Type 5 LSA flooding while permitting interarea reachability as designed. A directly relevant preventive control is: Document the stub-area boundary and check router area-type consistency.