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 21

Question 200

The change advisory board sees a repeat risk in this case: During a predeployment review for a multisite healthcare network, the team discovers this design gap: a partner sends default and private internal prefixes but the enterprise should learn only approved service aggregates. 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. Maintain peer-specific prefix inventories and review BGP filters before provider changes. Apply the same control to the multisite healthcare network rollout checklist.
  2. Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests.
  3. Track advertised AS paths and validate ingress behavior with both providers after changes.
  4. Document and audit local preference policy consistently at ingress border peers.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Maintain peer-specific prefix inventories and review BGP filters before provider changes. Apply the same control to the multisite healthcare network rollout checklist. This control targets the underlying design risk. Route policy can prevent undesired BGP NLRI from entering the local routing system. The follow-up acceptance check remains: Only approved partner prefixes are accepted and excess or private prefixes are rejected and logged. The multisite healthcare network acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

B:

BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The repeat risk here is different: Route policy can prevent undesired BGP NLRI from entering the local routing system. A directly relevant preventive control is: Maintain peer-specific prefix inventories and review BGP filters before provider changes. Apply the same control to the multisite healthcare network rollout checklist.

C:

AS-path length can influence outside-AS best-path selection but remote networks keep final policy authority. The repeat risk here is different: Route policy can prevent undesired BGP NLRI from entering the local routing system. A directly relevant preventive control is: Maintain peer-specific prefix inventories and review BGP filters before provider changes. Apply the same control to the multisite healthcare network rollout checklist.

D:

BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred. The repeat risk here is different: Route policy can prevent undesired BGP NLRI from entering the local routing system. A directly relevant preventive control is: Maintain peer-specific prefix inventories and review BGP filters before provider changes. Apply the same control to the multisite healthcare network rollout checklist.

Question 201

A design team must resolve this enterprise network problem: Two equal-cost eBGP uplinks are supposed to share traffic, but only one eligible path is installed. Which action MOST DIRECTLY meets the stated design requirement?

  1. Set higher BGP local preference for the desired exit within the local AS.
  2. Consider controlled AS-path prepending on the less-preferred advertisement while acknowledging external policy can override it.
  3. Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy.
  4. Use an appropriate IS-IS overload-bit maintenance procedure before removing the router from transit service.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy. This action addresses the stated design problem. BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. A practical confirmation is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan.

Incorrect Answers

A:

BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The needed response is: Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy.

B:

AS-path length can influence outside-AS best-path selection but remote networks keep final policy authority. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The needed response is: Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy.

D:

The IS-IS overload bit discourages other routers from selecting the device as intermediate transit when a valid alternative exists. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The needed response is: Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy.

Question 202

The design record describes this issue: Two equal-cost eBGP uplinks are supposed to share traffic, but only one eligible path is installed. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. BGP paths require a reachable next hop in the forwarding plane; distributing the prefix alone is not sufficient.
  2. BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred.
  3. Contiguous nonoverlapping prefixes can be summarized at a network boundary, reducing routing-table complexity.
  4. BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The correct engineering response is: Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy. The observable check is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan.

Incorrect Answers

A:

BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: BGP paths require a reachable next hop in the forwarding plane; distributing the prefix alone is not sufficient. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

B:

BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. 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.

C:

BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Contiguous nonoverlapping prefixes can be summarized at a network boundary, reducing routing-table complexity. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 203

After designing a change for the following scenario: Two equal-cost eBGP uplinks are supposed to share traffic, but only one eligible path is installed. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan.
  2. Only approved partner prefixes are accepted and excess or private prefixes are rejected and logged.
  3. External route collectors and measured ingress traffic show whether the intended path preference is achieved.
  4. Only expected authenticated IS-IS peers form adjacencies and unauthorized join attempts fail.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan. BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Route policy can prevent undesired BGP NLRI from entering the local routing system. In the case being tested, BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan.

C:

AS-path length can influence outside-AS best-path selection but remote networks keep final policy authority. In the case being tested, BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan.

D:

Routing protocol authentication helps prevent unauthenticated devices from injecting link-state information. In the case being tested, BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan.

Question 204

A preventive architecture review covers this situation: Two equal-cost eBGP uplinks are supposed to share traffic, but only one eligible path is installed. Which preventive design control MOST DIRECTLY addresses this specific risk?

  1. Document and audit local preference policy consistently at ingress border peers.
  2. Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests.
  3. Test route-reflector redundancy and loop-prevention identifiers before scale-out.
  4. Maintain peer-specific prefix inventories and review BGP filters before provider changes.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests. This control targets the underlying design risk. BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The follow-up acceptance check remains: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan.

Incorrect Answers

A:

BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred. The repeat risk here is different: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. A directly relevant preventive control is: Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests.

C:

Route reflectors reduce the need for every iBGP speaker to peer with every other speaker, while preserving iBGP route propagation rules. The repeat risk here is different: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. A directly relevant preventive control is: Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests.

D:

Route policy can prevent undesired BGP NLRI from entering the local routing system. The repeat risk here is different: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. A directly relevant preventive control is: Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests.

Question 205

A new campus or WAN review presents this constraint: During a predeployment review for a distributed retail network, the team discovers this design gap: two equal-cost eBGP uplinks are supposed to share traffic, but only one eligible path is installed. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which action MOST DIRECTLY meets the stated design requirement?

  1. Set higher BGP local preference for the desired exit within the local AS.
  2. Apply explicit BGP inbound prefix filtering and route limits to the partner adjacency.
  3. Replan branches with contiguous, hierarchical address blocks and advertise appropriately scoped summaries.
  4. Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy. This action addresses the stated design problem. BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. A practical confirmation is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

A:

BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The needed response is: Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy.

B:

Route policy can prevent undesired BGP NLRI from entering the local routing system. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The needed response is: Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy.

C:

Contiguous nonoverlapping prefixes can be summarized at a network boundary, reducing routing-table complexity. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The needed response is: Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy.

Question 206

For this Cisco ENSLD design case: During a predeployment review for a distributed retail network, the team discovers this design gap: two equal-cost eBGP uplinks are supposed to share traffic, but only one eligible path is installed. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough.
  2. BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred.
  3. AS-path length can influence outside-AS best-path selection but remote networks keep final policy authority.
  4. Route policy can prevent undesired BGP NLRI from entering the local routing system.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The correct engineering response is: Verify BGP multipath eligibility and configure supported maximum-path behavior with consistent policy. The observable check is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

B:

BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. 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.

C:

BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: AS-path length can influence outside-AS best-path selection but remote networks keep final policy authority. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Route policy can prevent undesired BGP NLRI from entering the local routing system. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 207

During acceptance testing for this network design: During a predeployment review for a distributed retail network, the team discovers this design gap: two equal-cost eBGP uplinks are supposed to share traffic, but only one eligible path is installed. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. Routers across the AS select the intended exit for qualifying routes and fail over to the other when required.
  2. The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.
  3. Clients receive intended reachable prefixes through both reflectors and reflector failure does not isolate the control plane.
  4. Clients resolve the advertised BGP next hop and forward through the intended border router.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result. BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough.

Incorrect Answers

A:

BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred. In the case being tested, BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

C:

Route reflectors reduce the need for every iBGP speaker to peer with every other speaker, while preserving iBGP route propagation rules. In the case being tested, BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

D:

BGP paths require a reachable next hop in the forwarding plane; distributing the prefix alone is not sufficient. In the case being tested, BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The necessary acceptance evidence is: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

Question 208

Operations wants to avoid recurrence of this design flaw: During a predeployment review for a distributed retail network, the team discovers this design gap: two equal-cost eBGP uplinks are supposed to share traffic, but only one eligible path is installed. 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. Document and audit local preference policy consistently at ingress border peers.
  2. Test route-reflector redundancy and loop-prevention identifiers before scale-out.
  3. Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist.
  4. Track advertised AS paths and validate ingress behavior with both providers after changes.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist. This control targets the underlying design risk. BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. The follow-up acceptance check remains: The installed route shows eligible multiple next hops and traffic distribution stays within the link capacity plan. The distributed retail network acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

A:

BGP local preference is used within an AS to prefer an outbound path, with higher values preferred. The repeat risk here is different: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. A directly relevant preventive control is: Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist.

B:

Route reflectors reduce the need for every iBGP speaker to peer with every other speaker, while preserving iBGP route propagation rules. The repeat risk here is different: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. A directly relevant preventive control is: Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist.

D:

AS-path length can influence outside-AS best-path selection but remote networks keep final policy authority. The repeat risk here is different: BGP multipath requires compatible selected paths under the platform’s path-equivalence rules; mere coexistence of peers is not enough. A directly relevant preventive control is: Validate multipath equivalence and hashing behavior during capacity tests. Apply the same control to the distributed retail network rollout checklist.

Question 209

A Cisco enterprise designer reviews the following scenario: A new service needs native IPv6 end-to-end while some clients still require IPv4 service continuity. Which action MOST DIRECTLY meets the stated design requirement?

  1. Deploy dual stack across participating links and hosts with distinct IPv4 and IPv6 routing and security controls.
  2. Prioritize native IPv6 for new workloads while preserving explicit interworking boundaries for legacy IPv4 dependencies.
  3. Design an IPv6-over-IPv4 tunnel between capable edge devices and account for MTU overhead.
  4. Evaluate a DNS64/NAT64 boundary where application protocols and addressing meet the translation requirements.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Deploy dual stack across participating links and hosts with distinct IPv4 and IPv6 routing and security controls. This action addresses the stated design problem. Dual stack runs both protocol families natively; it does not translate IPv4 packets into IPv6 packets. A practical confirmation is: The same service is reachable over IPv4 and IPv6, and separate policy logs show both paths allowed.

Incorrect Answers

B:

IPv6 migration can use native dual stack, overlays, or translation boundaries according to transport capabilities. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Dual stack runs both protocol families natively; it does not translate IPv4 packets into IPv6 packets. The needed response is: Deploy dual stack across participating links and hosts with distinct IPv4 and IPv6 routing and security controls.

C:

An overlay tunnel encapsulates one protocol through the underlay without upgrading intermediate IPv4-only routers. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Dual stack runs both protocol families natively; it does not translate IPv4 packets into IPv6 packets. The needed response is: Deploy dual stack across participating links and hosts with distinct IPv4 and IPv6 routing and security controls.

D:

DNS64 can synthesize AAAA records and NAT64 translates eligible IPv6 flows to IPv4; it is not ordinary dual stack. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Dual stack runs both protocol families natively; it does not translate IPv4 packets into IPv6 packets. The needed response is: Deploy dual stack across participating links and hosts with distinct IPv4 and IPv6 routing and security controls.

Question 210

The network architecture board discusses the following: A new service needs native IPv6 end-to-end while some clients still require IPv4 service continuity. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. DNS64 can synthesize AAAA records and NAT64 translates eligible IPv6 flows to IPv4; it is not ordinary dual stack.
  2. Dual stack runs both protocol families natively; it does not translate IPv4 packets into IPv6 packets.
  3. IPv6 migration can use native dual stack, overlays, or translation boundaries according to transport capabilities.
  4. An overlay tunnel encapsulates one protocol through the underlay without upgrading intermediate IPv4-only routers.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Dual stack runs both protocol families natively; it does not translate IPv4 packets into IPv6 packets. The correct engineering response is: Deploy dual stack across participating links and hosts with distinct IPv4 and IPv6 routing and security controls. The observable check is: The same service is reachable over IPv4 and IPv6, and separate policy logs show both paths allowed.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Dual stack runs both protocol families natively; it does not translate IPv4 packets into IPv6 packets. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: DNS64 can synthesize AAAA records and NAT64 translates eligible IPv6 flows to IPv4; it is not ordinary dual stack. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

C:

Dual stack runs both protocol families natively; it does not translate IPv4 packets into IPv6 packets. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: IPv6 migration can use native dual stack, overlays, or translation boundaries according to transport capabilities. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

Dual stack runs both protocol families natively; it does not translate IPv4 packets into IPv6 packets. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: an overlay tunnel encapsulates one protocol through the underlay without upgrading intermediate IPv4-only routers. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.