McAfee Secure

Cisco 300-715 Bundle

Exam Code: 300-715

Exam Name Implementing and Configuring Cisco Identity Services Engine (300-715 SISE)

Certification Provider: Cisco

Corresponding Certification: CCNP Security

Cisco 300-715 Bundle $25.00
300-715 Sample 1 300-715 Sample 2 300-715 Sample 3 300-715 Sample 4 300-715 Sample 5 300-715 Sample 6 300-715 Sample 7 300-715 Sample 8 300-715 Sample 9 300-715 Sample 10

100% Cisco 300-715 Guaranteed Success With Testking Training Materials

Get Real 300-715 Exam Questions & Expert Verified Answers as Experienced on the Real Exam!

  • Questions & Answers

    300-715 Questions & Answers

    433 Questions & Answers

    The ultimate exam preparation tool, Questions & Answers mirrors the actual 300-715 exam while allowing you to hone and measure every aspect of your test-taking ability.

  • 300-715 Video Course

    300-715 Training Course

    73 Video Lectures

    300-715 Video Course is developed by Cisco Professionals to help you pass the 300-715 exam.

    Description

    This course will improve your knowledge and skills required to pass Implementing and Configuring Cisco Identity Services Engine (300-715 SISE) exam.

Implementing and Configuring Cisco Identity Services Engine (300-715 SISE) (300-715) 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

    433 Questions

    $124.99
  • 300-715 Video Course

    Training Course

    73 Video Lectures

    $39.99

Cisco 300-715 Practice Test 18

Question 170

During a Cisco ISE postchange review, the following is observed: A switch migrates from legacy interface commands to IBNS 2.0 policy maps, and 802.1X sessions remain stale after ISE sends a reauthentication indication. What is the most appropriate next configuration or repair?

  1. Use a supported monitor-mode 802.1X deployment to collect authentication evidence before enforcing restrictive authorization.
  2. Apply an appropriate closed-mode wired 802.1X configuration with necessary tightly controlled exceptions.
  3. Narrow the policy-set conditions using authentic network-device group, SSID, and protocol attributes before evaluating its detailed rules.
  4. Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. This is appropriate because event-driven IBNS 2.0 control policy governs how authentication state changes after RADIUS events; a static VLAN command alone does not define transitions. It should be verified by this evidence: An approved CoA request causes the target port session to reauthenticate and receive fresh ISE authorization.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Monitor accounting packet delivery separately from successful authentication counts. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

B:

Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Apply an appropriate closed-mode wired 802.1X configuration with necessary tightly controlled exceptions. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

C:

Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Narrow the policy-set conditions using authentic network-device group, SSID, and protocol attributes before evaluating its detailed rules. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 171

A security policy owner must resolve this specific case: A switch migrates from legacy interface commands to IBNS 2.0 policy maps, and 802.1X sessions remain stale after ISE sends a reauthentication indication. What is the key technical principle in this situation?

  1. An authentication-server-unavailable event can invoke configured IBNS 2.0 service templates; it should not be confused with a successful identity decision.
  2. Low-impact mode permits constrained preliminary access while authentication completes, unlike granting unrestricted traffic before the ISE decision.
  3. Event-driven IBNS 2.0 control policy governs how authentication state changes after RADIUS events; a static VLAN command alone does not define transitions.
  4. TrustSec labels traffic with logical security group identity so enforcement can follow roles rather than changing IP addressing.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Event-driven IBNS 2.0 control policy governs how authentication state changes after RADIUS events; a static VLAN command alone does not define transitions. This behavior directly governs the stated requirement. The recommended action is: Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. The acceptance result is: An approved CoA request causes the target port session to reauthenticate and receive fresh ISE authorization.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Define an explicit critical-authentication event action and constrained access policy for loss of all authorized RADIUS servers. In the case being tested, Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Event-driven IBNS 2.0 control policy governs how authentication state changes after RADIUS events; a static VLAN command alone does not define transitions.

B:

Use a carefully scoped low-impact 802.1X design with a preauthentication ACL limited to required bootstrap services. In the case being tested, Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Event-driven IBNS 2.0 control policy governs how authentication state changes after RADIUS events; a static VLAN command alone does not define transitions.

D:

Assign suitable Security Group Tags in ISE and apply group-based Cisco TrustSec enforcement using supported security group ACL policies. In the case being tested, Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. The necessary acceptance evidence is: Event-driven IBNS 2.0 control policy governs how authentication state changes after RADIUS events; a static VLAN command alone does not define transitions.

Question 172

A network identity engineer receives the following requirement: A switch migrates from legacy interface commands to IBNS 2.0 policy maps, and 802.1X sessions remain stale after ISE sends a reauthentication indication. What result should be documented before closing the issue?

  1. An unauthenticated client obtains only approved bootstrap services and receives full permitted access after a successful 802.1X decision.
  2. An approved CoA request causes the target port session to reauthenticate and receive fresh ISE authorization.
  3. Access logs show which endpoint identities would authenticate while pilot users retain the defined non-disruptive connectivity.
  4. The scanner's received identifier resolves to the intended internal endpoint record and authorization profile.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

An approved CoA request causes the target port session to reauthenticate and receive fresh ISE authorization. The required remediation is: Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. It works because event-driven IBNS 2.0 control policy governs how authentication state changes after RADIUS events; a static VLAN command alone does not define transitions.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Use a carefully scoped low-impact 802.1X design with a preauthentication ACL limited to required bootstrap services. The repeat risk here is different: Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. A directly relevant preventive control is: An approved CoA request causes the target port session to reauthenticate and receive fresh ISE authorization.

C:

The offered option specifies “Access logs show which endpoint identities would authenticate while pilot users retain the defined non-disruptive connectivity”. The question requires “An approved CoA request causes the target port session to reauthenticate and receive fresh ISE authorization”: Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. These are not equivalent responses to the stated requirement.

D:

Normalize and validate the NAD's MAC calling-station identifier format against ISE's accepted endpoint identity handling. The repeat risk here is different: Inspect the IBNS 2.0 event and action mapping for reauthentication and apply a supported CoA-triggered session transition. A directly relevant preventive control is: An approved CoA request causes the target port session to reauthenticate and receive fresh ISE authorization.

Question 173

An enterprise access-control incident describes: A switch migrates from legacy interface commands to IBNS 2.0 policy maps, and 802.1X sessions remain stale after ISE sends a reauthentication indication. Which durable safeguard best prevents a recurrence?

  1. Measure actual method fallback time when onboarding new non-supplicant device types.
  2. Record method-specific identity and privileges for every non-802.1X device class.
  3. Validate directory organizational-unit moves against ISE LDAP search filters before cutover.
  4. Keep IBNS 2.0 event policy and NAC server CoA behaviors under joint change testing.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Keep IBNS 2.0 event policy and NAC server CoA behaviors under joint change testing. This control addresses recurrence of the observed failure. The governing behavior is: Event-driven IBNS 2.0 control policy governs how authentication state changes after RADIUS events; a static VLAN command alone does not define transitions. The ongoing acceptance check remains: An approved CoA request causes the target port session to reauthenticate and receive fresh ISE authorization.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The needed response is: Keep IBNS 2.0 event policy and NAC server CoA behaviors under joint change testing.

B:

Define an explicit critical-authentication event action and constrained access policy for loss of all authorized RADIUS servers. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The needed response is: Keep IBNS 2.0 event policy and NAC server CoA behaviors under joint change testing.

C:

Validate directory organizational-unit moves against ISE LDAP search filters before cutover. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The needed response is: Keep IBNS 2.0 event policy and NAC server CoA behaviors under joint change testing.

Question 174

A Cisco ISE operations team investigates this site issue: An IoT sensor sends no EAPOL frames, and a switch waits indefinitely for 802.1X before attempting MAB, exceeding the device's allowed service-restoration interval. Which implementation decision directly satisfies the stated requirement?

  1. Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval.
  2. Add an explicitly authorized MAB method and appropriate event-driven policy handling for devices that cannot perform 802.1X.
  3. Define an explicit critical-authentication event action and constrained access policy for loss of all authorized RADIUS servers.
  4. Use a supported session reauthentication or RADIUS CoA after the endpoint identity and profile classification change.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. This is appropriate because 802.1X supplicant timeout and method sequencing determine when MAB can be attempted on a silent endpoint. It should be verified by this evidence: The sensor reaches its limited-access policy inside the allowed time while a normal 802.1X laptop still authenticates securely.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Add an explicitly authorized MAB method and appropriate event-driven policy handling for devices that cannot perform 802.1X. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

C:

Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Define an explicit critical-authentication event action and constrained access policy for loss of all authorized RADIUS servers. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Use a supported session reauthentication or RADIUS CoA after the endpoint identity and profile classification change. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 175

At a distributed Cisco ISE deployment, a security review finds: An IoT sensor sends no EAPOL frames, and a switch waits indefinitely for 802.1X before attempting MAB, exceeding the device's allowed service-restoration interval. Which technical behavior is MOST relevant to this design?

  1. 802.1X supplicant timeout and method sequencing determine when MAB can be attempted on a silent endpoint.
  2. Low-impact mode permits constrained preliminary access while authentication completes, unlike granting unrestricted traffic before the ISE decision.
  3. Closed mode restricts ordinary data access before a valid authentication result, enforcing the port's intended admission barrier.
  4. ISE's native AD integration depends on DNS discovery and communication with eligible domain services, not just a username and password.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

802.1X supplicant timeout and method sequencing determine when MAB can be attempted on a silent endpoint. This behavior directly governs the stated requirement. The recommended action is: Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The acceptance result is: The sensor reaches its limited-access policy inside the allowed time while a normal 802.1X laptop still authenticates securely.

Incorrect Answers

B:

Use a carefully scoped low-impact 802.1X design with a preauthentication ACL limited to required bootstrap services. In the case being tested, Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The necessary acceptance evidence is: 802.1X supplicant timeout and method sequencing determine when MAB can be attempted on a silent endpoint.

C:

Apply an appropriate closed-mode wired 802.1X configuration with necessary tightly controlled exceptions. In the case being tested, Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The necessary acceptance evidence is: 802.1X supplicant timeout and method sequencing determine when MAB can be attempted on a silent endpoint.

D:

Separate initial-node bootstrap rights from production policy-administration privileges. In the case being tested, Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. The necessary acceptance evidence is: 802.1X supplicant timeout and method sequencing determine when MAB can be attempted on a silent endpoint.

Question 176

An ISE administrator troubleshoots the following: An IoT sensor sends no EAPOL frames, and a switch waits indefinitely for 802.1X before attempting MAB, exceeding the device's allowed service-restoration interval. Which readback demonstrates that the actual problem was solved?

  1. An unrecognized laptop cannot reach protected destinations, and a managed authenticated laptop obtains its authorized access.
  2. The phone and PC each have the intended separate voice and data authorization sessions without allowing unlimited piggyback clients.
  3. The sensor reaches its limited-access policy inside the allowed time while a normal 802.1X laptop still authenticates securely.
  4. The named lab user authenticates in the lab policy while production policy does not accept that account.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The sensor reaches its limited-access policy inside the allowed time while a normal 802.1X laptop still authenticates securely. The required remediation is: Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. It works because 802.1X supplicant timeout and method sequencing determine when MAB can be attempted on a silent endpoint.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Apply an appropriate closed-mode wired 802.1X configuration with necessary tightly controlled exceptions. The repeat risk here is different: Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. A directly relevant preventive control is: The sensor reaches its limited-access policy inside the allowed time while a normal 802.1X laptop still authenticates securely.

B:

Select a supported 802.1X host mode such as multi-domain when one voice endpoint and one data endpoint must authenticate separately. The repeat risk here is different: Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. A directly relevant preventive control is: The sensor reaches its limited-access policy inside the allowed time while a normal 802.1X laptop still authenticates securely.

D:

Expire temporary local users and prevent test identity stores from matching production requests. The repeat risk here is different: Tune supported authentication method order and timer behavior so the permitted MAB fallback starts within the required interval. A directly relevant preventive control is: The sensor reaches its limited-access policy inside the allowed time while a normal 802.1X laptop still authenticates securely.

Question 177

An access-security change request states: An IoT sensor sends no EAPOL frames, and a switch waits indefinitely for 802.1X before attempting MAB, exceeding the device's allowed service-restoration interval. What validation should be repeated before subsequent rollouts?

  1. Maintain explicit exit criteria and a dated transition from monitor to enforced modes.
  2. Record method-specific identity and privileges for every non-802.1X device class.
  3. Measure actual method fallback time when onboarding new non-supplicant device types.
  4. Test MAC formatting from each switch family before importing large device inventories.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Measure actual method fallback time when onboarding new non-supplicant device types. This control addresses recurrence of the observed failure. The governing behavior is: 802.1X supplicant timeout and method sequencing determine when MAB can be attempted on a silent endpoint. The ongoing acceptance check remains: The sensor reaches its limited-access policy inside the allowed time while a normal 802.1X laptop still authenticates securely.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Use a carefully scoped low-impact 802.1X design with a preauthentication ACL limited to required bootstrap services. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The needed response is: Measure actual method fallback time when onboarding new non-supplicant device types.

B:

Define an explicit critical-authentication event action and constrained access policy for loss of all authorized RADIUS servers. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The needed response is: Measure actual method fallback time when onboarding new non-supplicant device types.

D:

Reduce the MAB role to least privilege and supplement admission with profiling, port context, or stronger supported controls where feasible. The actual fault is governed by a different mechanism: Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The needed response is: Measure actual method fallback time when onboarding new non-supplicant device types.

Question 178

An enterprise access-control incident describes: An industrial printer has no supplicant and is denied by 802.1X, but security policy permits the printer only to a designated print server. What should the team change before declaring this work complete?

  1. Normalize and validate the NAD's MAC calling-station identifier format against ISE's accepted endpoint identity handling.
  2. Reduce the MAB role to least privilege and supplement admission with profiling, port context, or stronger supported controls where feasible.
  3. Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile.
  4. Use approved TrustSec policy distribution and verify that devices receive and enforce the current SGACL definition and matrix updates.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. This is appropriate because mAC Authentication Bypass uses the endpoint MAC identifier as an authentication basis, so access must be constrained because MACs can be impersonated. It should be verified by this evidence: The approved printer reaches its print server and an unregistered MAC cannot access the protected network.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Normalize and validate the NAD's MAC calling-station identifier format against ISE's accepted endpoint identity handling. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

B:

Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Reduce the MAB role to least privilege and supplement admission with profiling, port context, or stronger supported controls where feasible. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

D:

Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The offered choice instead concerns a different principle: Use approved TrustSec policy distribution and verify that devices receive and enforce the current SGACL definition and matrix updates. Those technical conditions are not interchangeable.

Question 179

In a staged Cisco ISE network access rollout, the team observes: An industrial printer has no supplicant and is denied by 802.1X, but security policy permits the printer only to a designated print server. What underlying Cisco ISE dependency explains this result?

  1. RADIUS session authorization can remain cached on the network access device after ISE's endpoint classification changes.
  2. MAB is a weaker identity signal than cryptographic EAP; permissive default rules let unrecognized devices receive unwarranted access.
  3. MAC Authentication Bypass uses the endpoint MAC identifier as an authentication basis, so access must be constrained because MACs can be impersonated.
  4. An SGT is a classification label; actual permission between groups is enforced by group-based access control policies.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

MAC Authentication Bypass uses the endpoint MAC identifier as an authentication basis, so access must be constrained because MACs can be impersonated. This behavior directly governs the stated requirement. The recommended action is: Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The acceptance result is: The approved printer reaches its print server and an unregistered MAC cannot access the protected network.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Use a supported session reauthentication or RADIUS CoA after the endpoint identity and profile classification change. In the case being tested, Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The necessary acceptance evidence is: MAC Authentication Bypass uses the endpoint MAC identifier as an authentication basis, so access must be constrained because MACs can be impersonated.

B:

Replace the catch-all MAB authorization with an explicit known-endpoint group and a deny or isolation result for unknown MACs. In the case being tested, Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The necessary acceptance evidence is: MAC Authentication Bypass uses the endpoint MAC identifier as an authentication basis, so access must be constrained because MACs can be impersonated.

D:

Configure the intended source-SGT to destination-SGT permission using a suitable SGACL in the TrustSec policy matrix. In the case being tested, Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. The necessary acceptance evidence is: MAC Authentication Bypass uses the endpoint MAC identifier as an authentication basis, so access must be constrained because MACs can be impersonated.

Question 180

An identity and device-administration engineer evaluates: An industrial printer has no supplicant and is denied by 802.1X, but security policy permits the printer only to a designated print server. Which measurable outcome proves the intended behavior?

  1. A forged address lacks access to sensitive destinations even when it can mimic the printer's MAC identity.
  2. A registered scanner receives the approved restricted access while an arbitrary new MAC is denied or quarantined.
  3. The phone and PC each have the intended separate voice and data authorization sessions without allowing unlimited piggyback clients.
  4. The approved printer reaches its print server and an unregistered MAC cannot access the protected network.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

The approved printer reaches its print server and an unregistered MAC cannot access the protected network. The required remediation is: Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. It works because mAC Authentication Bypass uses the endpoint MAC identifier as an authentication basis, so access must be constrained because MACs can be impersonated.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Reduce the MAB role to least privilege and supplement admission with profiling, port context, or stronger supported controls where feasible. The repeat risk here is different: Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. A directly relevant preventive control is: The approved printer reaches its print server and an unregistered MAC cannot access the protected network.

B:

Replace the catch-all MAB authorization with an explicit known-endpoint group and a deny or isolation result for unknown MACs. The repeat risk here is different: Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. A directly relevant preventive control is: The approved printer reaches its print server and an unregistered MAC cannot access the protected network.

C:

Select a supported 802.1X host mode such as multi-domain when one voice endpoint and one data endpoint must authenticate separately. The repeat risk here is different: Register the printer's endpoint MAC as an authorized internal endpoint and configure a tightly scoped MAB authorization profile. A directly relevant preventive control is: The approved printer reaches its print server and an unregistered MAC cannot access the protected network.