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 38

Question 370

The network architecture board discusses the following: Two campus sites interconnect over a routed WAN but the design extends every employee VLAN across sites. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas.
  2. Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch.
  3. A documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths.
  4. Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The correct engineering response is: Use routed Layer 3 boundaries and local VLANs unless a justified extension requirement exists. The observable check is: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

C:

Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: a documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 371

The infrastructure team must validate this situation: Two campus sites interconnect over a routed WAN but the design extends every employee VLAN across sites. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. The core retains working building aggregates without unnecessary component-prefix churn.
  2. Tenant prefixes remain isolated while selected shared-service routes appear only where authorized.
  3. A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable.
  4. Simulated hub failure preserves required cross-campus flows within latency and convergence targets.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable. Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas. In the case being tested, Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The necessary acceptance evidence is: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable.

B:

VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices. In the case being tested, Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The necessary acceptance evidence is: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable.

D:

A documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths. In the case being tested, Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The necessary acceptance evidence is: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable.

Question 372

A post-incident design review discusses the following: Two campus sites interconnect over a routed WAN but the design extends every employee VLAN across sites. Which preventive design control MOST DIRECTLY addresses this specific risk?

  1. Review cross-VRF route targets or leaks as formal security change requests.
  2. Reassess traffic matrices and failure domains after each new campus onboarding.
  3. Maintain a centralized redistribution matrix and prevent untagged re-imports.
  4. Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements. This control targets the underlying design risk. Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The follow-up acceptance check remains: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable.

Incorrect Answers

A:

VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices. The repeat risk here is different: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. A directly relevant preventive control is: Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements.

B:

A documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths. The repeat risk here is different: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. A directly relevant preventive control is: Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements.

C:

Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The repeat risk here is different: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. A directly relevant preventive control is: Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements.

Question 373

During a network design workshop, the team finds this issue: During a predeployment review for a regional distribution facility, the team discovers this design gap: two campus sites interconnect over a routed WAN but the design extends every employee VLAN across sites. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which action MOST DIRECTLY meets the stated design requirement?

  1. Control redistribution with route tagging, filtering and clearly defined ownership of redistributed prefixes.
  2. Use routed Layer 3 boundaries and local VLANs unless a justified extension requirement exists.
  3. Use VRFs with explicit route-leak policy only for approved shared services.
  4. Summarize routes at each building’s Layer 3 aggregation boundary using valid address plan blocks.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Use routed Layer 3 boundaries and local VLANs unless a justified extension requirement exists. This action addresses the stated design problem. Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. A practical confirmation is: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable. The regional distribution facility acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The needed response is: Use routed Layer 3 boundaries and local VLANs unless a justified extension requirement exists.

C:

VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The needed response is: Use routed Layer 3 boundaries and local VLANs unless a justified extension requirement exists.

D:

Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The needed response is: Use routed Layer 3 boundaries and local VLANs unless a justified extension requirement exists.

Question 374

In a technical design review: During a predeployment review for a regional distribution facility, the team discovers this design gap: two campus sites interconnect over a routed WAN but the design extends every employee VLAN across sites. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices.
  2. Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas.
  3. Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch.
  4. DHCP snooping separates trusted DHCP sources from untrusted access ports and can block rogue server messages.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The correct engineering response is: Use routed Layer 3 boundaries and local VLANs unless a justified extension requirement exists. The observable check is: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable. The regional distribution facility acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

B:

Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: DHCP snooping separates trusted DHCP sources from untrusted access ports and can block rogue server messages. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 375

An engineering reviewer needs objective proof for the following: During a predeployment review for a regional distribution facility, the team discovers this design gap: two campus sites interconnect over a routed WAN but the design extends every employee VLAN across sites. An approval gate requires both a measurable acceptance check and a durable prevention control. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. Simulated hub failure preserves required cross-campus flows within latency and convergence targets.
  2. The core retains working building aggregates without unnecessary component-prefix churn.
  3. Tenant prefixes remain isolated while selected shared-service routes appear only where authorized.
  4. A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable. The regional distribution facility acceptance record also captures this result.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable. The regional distribution facility acceptance record also captures this result. Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch.

Incorrect Answers

A:

A documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths. In the case being tested, Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The necessary acceptance evidence is: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable. The regional distribution facility acceptance record also captures this result.

B:

Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas. In the case being tested, Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The necessary acceptance evidence is: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable. The regional distribution facility acceptance record also captures this result.

C:

VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices. In the case being tested, Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The necessary acceptance evidence is: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable. The regional distribution facility acceptance record also captures this result.

Question 376

The change advisory board sees a repeat risk in this case: During a predeployment review for a regional distribution facility, the team discovers this design gap: two campus sites interconnect over a routed WAN but the design extends every employee VLAN across sites. 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. Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements. Apply the same control to the regional distribution facility rollout checklist.
  2. Review cross-VRF route targets or leaks as formal security change requests.
  3. Reassess traffic matrices and failure domains after each new campus onboarding.
  4. Tie building subnet allocation rules to tested summarization policies.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements. Apply the same control to the regional distribution facility rollout checklist. This control targets the underlying design risk. Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The follow-up acceptance check remains: A local Layer 2 fault does not propagate across the site interconnect and routed applications remain reachable. The regional distribution facility acceptance record also captures this result.

Incorrect Answers

B:

VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices. The repeat risk here is different: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. A directly relevant preventive control is: Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements. Apply the same control to the regional distribution facility rollout checklist.

C:

A documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths. The repeat risk here is different: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. A directly relevant preventive control is: Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements. Apply the same control to the regional distribution facility rollout checklist.

D:

Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas. The repeat risk here is different: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. A directly relevant preventive control is: Review each proposed VLAN extension against documented mobility or application requirements. Apply the same control to the regional distribution facility rollout checklist.

Question 377

A design team must resolve this enterprise network problem: A regional aggregation campus redistributes the same prefixes between OSPF and EIGRP at two locations, risking feedback loops. Which action MOST DIRECTLY meets the stated design requirement?

  1. Summarize routes at each building’s Layer 3 aggregation boundary using valid address plan blocks.
  2. Choose a hierarchical dual-hub or partial-mesh routed topology based on traffic, latency and resilience requirements.
  3. Control redistribution with route tagging, filtering and clearly defined ownership of redistributed prefixes.
  4. Use routed Layer 3 boundaries and local VLANs unless a justified extension requirement exists.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Control redistribution with route tagging, filtering and clearly defined ownership of redistributed prefixes. This action addresses the stated design problem. Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. A practical confirmation is: Test prefixes appear only in approved protocols with expected tags and no persistent route oscillation.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The needed response is: Control redistribution with route tagging, filtering and clearly defined ownership of redistributed prefixes.

B:

A documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The needed response is: Control redistribution with route tagging, filtering and clearly defined ownership of redistributed prefixes.

D:

Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The needed response is: Control redistribution with route tagging, filtering and clearly defined ownership of redistributed prefixes.

Question 378

The design record describes this issue: A regional aggregation campus redistributes the same prefixes between OSPF and EIGRP at two locations, risking feedback loops. Which technical principle BEST explains the design decision?

  1. A documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths.
  2. Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch.
  3. VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices.
  4. Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The correct engineering response is: Control redistribution with route tagging, filtering and clearly defined ownership of redistributed prefixes. The observable check is: Test prefixes appear only in approved protocols with expected tags and no persistent route oscillation.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: a documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

B:

Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Routing boundaries limit broadcast and spanning-tree failure domains compared with indiscriminate Layer 2 stretch. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

C:

Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 379

After designing a change for the following scenario: A regional aggregation campus redistributes the same prefixes between OSPF and EIGRP at two locations, risking feedback loops. Which acceptance observation BEST establishes the intended result?

  1. Test prefixes appear only in approved protocols with expected tags and no persistent route oscillation.
  2. Tenant prefixes remain isolated while selected shared-service routes appear only where authorized.
  3. Simulated hub failure preserves required cross-campus flows within latency and convergence targets.
  4. The core retains working building aggregates without unnecessary component-prefix churn.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Test prefixes appear only in approved protocols with expected tags and no persistent route oscillation. Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards.

Incorrect Answers

B:

VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices. In the case being tested, Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Test prefixes appear only in approved protocols with expected tags and no persistent route oscillation.

C:

A documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths. In the case being tested, Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Test prefixes appear only in approved protocols with expected tags and no persistent route oscillation.

D:

Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas. In the case being tested, Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Test prefixes appear only in approved protocols with expected tags and no persistent route oscillation.

Question 380

A preventive architecture review covers this situation: A regional aggregation campus redistributes the same prefixes between OSPF and EIGRP at two locations, risking feedback loops. Which preventive design control MOST DIRECTLY addresses this specific risk?

  1. Review cross-VRF route targets or leaks as formal security change requests.
  2. Maintain a centralized redistribution matrix and prevent untagged re-imports.
  3. Tie building subnet allocation rules to tested summarization policies.
  4. Reassess traffic matrices and failure domains after each new campus onboarding.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Maintain a centralized redistribution matrix and prevent untagged re-imports. This control targets the underlying design risk. Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. The follow-up acceptance check remains: Test prefixes appear only in approved protocols with expected tags and no persistent route oscillation.

Incorrect Answers

A:

VRFs maintain logically separate routing and forwarding contexts on capable shared devices. The repeat risk here is different: Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. A directly relevant preventive control is: Maintain a centralized redistribution matrix and prevent untagged re-imports.

C:

Route summarization reduces upstream route detail and contains changes within appropriate campus areas. The repeat risk here is different: Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. A directly relevant preventive control is: Maintain a centralized redistribution matrix and prevent untagged re-imports.

D:

A documented hierarchy can limit topology complexity while preserving critical backup paths. The repeat risk here is different: Two-way redistribution can reintroduce routes into their source protocol without policy guards. A directly relevant preventive control is: Maintain a centralized redistribution matrix and prevent untagged re-imports.