McAfee Secure

Exam Code: JN0-364

Exam Name: Service Provider Routing and Switching, Specialist (JNCIS-SP)

Certification Provider: Juniper

Questions & Answers

Juniper JN0-364 Questions & Answers

Study with Up-To-Date REAL Exam Questions and Answers from the ACTUAL Test

Questions & Answers

69 Questions & Answers with Testing Engine

"Service Provider Routing and Switching, Specialist (JNCIS-SP) Exam", also known as JN0-364 exam, is a Juniper certification exam.

Pass your tests with the always up-to-date JN0-364 Exam Engine. Your JN0-364 training materials keep you at the head of the pack!

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
Was: $137.49
Now: $124.99

Juniper JN0-364 Practice Test 23

Question 220

At fictional Summit Gate Network, during a dual-stack transit pilot, engineers report: A firewall filter matches inbound customer traffic, yet there is no forwarding-class-based table selection, so special traffic follows the global route. Which observation would most directly establish that the reported failure has been repaired?

  1. The shared connected route exists in both intended RIBs without broadly importing unrelated customer prefixes.
  2. Only the selected traffic uses the inspection forwarding table while unmatched traffic follows the ordinary destination route.
  3. The inappropriate prefix is absent or rejected while legitimate provider routes remain eligible and active.
  4. Maximum expected encapsulated packets cross the tunnel without fragmentation blackholes or oversized drop counters.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Only the selected traffic uses the inspection forwarding table while unmatched traffic follows the ordinary destination route. It tests the failed behavior itself rather than merely confirming that a configuration was committed. Filter-based forwarding selects a routing lookup table using packet classification; it does not rewrite the global best route for every packet.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The shared connected route exists in both intended RIBs without broadly importing unrelated customer prefixes. That establishes RIB group route sharing rather than a repaired filter-based forwarding table selection path. The reported failure still requires this evidence: only the selected traffic uses the inspection forwarding table while unmatched traffic follows the ordinary destination route.

C:

The check is meaningful for martian source address rejection, but it does not prove that filter-based forwarding table selection was repaired. Filter-based forwarding selects a routing lookup table using packet classification; it does not rewrite the global best route for every packet.

D:

The check is meaningful for GRE tunnel path MTU, but it does not prove that filter-based forwarding table selection was repaired. Filter-based forwarding selects a routing lookup table using packet classification; it does not rewrite the global best route for every packet.

Question 221

During a network change window at fictional Kingfisher Wholesale, the team observes: A downstream provider switch advertises superior BPDUs and unexpectedly becomes spanning-tree root for a customer segment. Which ongoing control would most directly detect or prevent the same failure from recurring?

  1. Audit VSTP per-VLAN root topology after new VLAN or trunk additions.
  2. Monitor root-bridge identity and test controlled superior-BPDU attempts at trust boundaries.
  3. Test one-way BPDU loss and confirm correct port role and loop-protection state during maintenance.
  4. Validate node-SID uniqueness, advertised SRGB ranges and effective label forwarding after upgrades.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Monitor root-bridge identity and test controlled superior-BPDU attempts at trust boundaries. This monitors the behavior that failed at Kingfisher Wholesale; the most useful acceptance signal is that the approved root remains root despite inferior-site superior-BPDU injection, and the boundary behaves as designed.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The control protects VSTP per-VLAN root choice. It does not establish the ongoing RSTP root protection behavior required in this network. Root protection blocks acceptance of an unexpected superior root across designated boundary ports; it is not the same as BPDU edge protection.

C:

Test one-way BPDU loss and confirm correct port role and loop-protection state during maintenance. That ongoing check is for RSTP loop protection; it would not reliably detect recurrence of RSTP root protection. Root protection blocks acceptance of an unexpected superior root across designated boundary ports; it is not the same as BPDU edge protection.

D:

The control protects segment routing prefix SID. It does not establish the ongoing RSTP root protection behavior required in this network. Root protection blocks acceptance of an unexpected superior root across designated boundary ports; it is not the same as BPDU edge protection.

Question 222

A fictional service-provider team at Unionpoint Mobile is reviewing a redundant core router pair. The finding is: A service edge expects a summary to be visible, but the aggregate is inactive because no qualifying component route contributes to it. Which observation would most directly establish that the reported failure has been repaired?

  1. The intended destination appears as an active route with a resolvable next hop in the routing table and forwarding table.
  2. The aggregate is active only with the expected contributors and disappears when the contributor precondition is removed.
  3. The forwarding table contains the intended next-hop set and several independent flows distribute across healthy equal-cost paths.
  4. BGP peers exchange the intended IPv6 NLRI and establish resolvable IPv6 next hops.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The aggregate is active only with the expected contributors and disappears when the contributor precondition is removed. It tests the failed behavior itself rather than merely confirming that a configuration was committed. An aggregate route is conditional on active contributing routes and normally uses a discard or reject next hop to avoid creating a forwarding loop. Applied here, the relevant facts are: A service edge expects a summary to be visible, but the aggregate is inactive because no qualifying component route contributes to it. The question asks which observation would most directly establish that the reported failure has been repaired.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The check is meaningful for static route next-hop resolution, but it does not prove that aggregate route contributor was repaired. An aggregate route is conditional on active contributing routes and normally uses a discard or reject next hop to avoid creating a forwarding loop.

C:

The check is meaningful for equal-cost forwarding flow hashing, but it does not prove that aggregate route contributor was repaired. An aggregate route is conditional on active contributing routes and normally uses a discard or reject next hop to avoid creating a forwarding loop.

D:

BGP peers exchange the intended IPv6 NLRI and establish resolvable IPv6 next hops. That establishes multiprotocol BGP IPv6 AFI rather than a repaired aggregate route contributor path. The reported failure still requires this evidence: the aggregate is active only with the expected contributors and disappears when the contributor precondition is removed.

Question 223

The operations group at fictional Skybridge Metro, working on an intercity fiber refresh, finds: After a provider line-card replacement, control-plane label bindings remain visible yet actual packets drop at an incorrect label next hop. Which networking principle most accurately explains the observed failure?

  1. An adjacency SID steers traffic across a specific link, whereas a prefix SID steers toward a node or prefix along shortest paths.
  2. Control-plane LSP state and data-plane label forwarding entries are separate checks; an Up session does not prove the FIB is correct.
  3. SR-MPLS prefix SIDs and the segment routing global block provide IGP-signaled reachability without relying on LDP for each FEC.
  4. Generated routes can derive their next-hop behavior from qualifying contributing routes, unlike aggregate discard summaries.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

Control-plane LSP state and data-plane label forwarding entries are separate checks; an Up session does not prove the FIB is correct. That is the specific distinction behind the observed outage. The targeted fix is to inspect transit MPLS forwarding entries and repair the mismatched label-to-next-hop mapping or underlying interface path.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This principle matters when troubleshooting segment routing adjacency SID, but using it here mistakes a different failure mode for MPLS label forwarding table mismatch. The relevant distinction is: control-plane LSP state and data-plane label forwarding entries are separate checks; an Up session does not prove the FIB is correct.

C:

SR-MPLS prefix SIDs and the segment routing global block provide IGP-signaled reachability without relying on LDP for each FEC. That describes segment routing prefix SID, whereas the observed symptoms are caused by MPLS label forwarding table mismatch; it does not predict the reported behavior.

D:

This principle matters when troubleshooting generated route qualified next hop, but using it here mistakes a different failure mode for MPLS label forwarding table mismatch. The relevant distinction is: control-plane LSP state and data-plane label forwarding entries are separate checks; an Up session does not prove the FIB is correct.

Question 224

At fictional Silverstone Wireless, during a wholesale access handoff, engineers report: A GRE tunnel interface shows configured addresses but no traffic passes after the remote outer IP endpoint loses reachability. Which focused engineering action would best correct the fault?

  1. Apply a scoped OSPF export policy to originate only the approved active source prefix and confirm the receiving routers learn it.
  2. Install and verify independent underlay reachability for the GRE outer destination, preventing recursive use of the tunnel.
  3. Account for GRE/IP header overhead in tunnel MTU and path-MTU handling, then test large representative packets.
  4. Restore underlay IP reachability between GRE tunnel endpoints and validate encapsulated probe traffic.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

Restore underlay IP reachability between GRE tunnel endpoints and validate encapsulated probe traffic. This treats the fault shown by Silverstone Wireless: GRE encapsulates packets between outer IP endpoints; the underlay must route the outer destination before inner traffic can succeed. Confirm success when packets to the remote outer endpoint resolve through an ordinary underlay route and GRE probes reach the peer.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Apply a scoped OSPF export policy to originate only the approved active source prefix and confirm the receiving routers learn it. That could help in a case involving OSPF external route export. This failure instead depends on GRE endpoint underlay routing; GRE encapsulates packets between outer IP endpoints; the underlay must route the outer destination before inner traffic can succeed.

B:

Install and verify independent underlay reachability for the GRE outer destination, preventing recursive use of the tunnel. That could help in a case involving GRE recursive route avoidance. This failure instead depends on GRE endpoint underlay routing; GRE encapsulates packets between outer IP endpoints; the underlay must route the outer destination before inner traffic can succeed.

C:

Account for GRE/IP header overhead in tunnel MTU and path-MTU handling, then test large representative packets. Its normal acceptance signal would be maximum expected encapsulated packets cross the tunnel without fragmentation blackholes or oversized drop counters. Here the deciding check is different: packets to the remote outer endpoint resolve through an ordinary underlay route and GRE probes reach the peer. Applied here, the relevant facts are: A GRE tunnel interface shows configured addresses but no traffic passes after the remote outer IP endpoint loses reachability. The question asks which focused engineering action would best correct the fault.

Question 225

During a multi-tenant service turn-up at fictional Jasper Data Works, the team observes: Two gateway routers use inconsistent VRRP group IDs and therefore fail to provide a common active virtual router. Which networking principle most accurately explains the observed failure?

  1. BFD provides rapid bidirectional path liveness detection; it triggers routing response but is not by itself a replacement route.
  2. VRRP coordinates an active virtual default gateway among participating routers, unlike independent physical interface addresses.
  3. NSR uses GRES infrastructure while preserving routing protocol state on the backup Routing Engine, avoiding reliance on neighbor restart helpers.
  4. MED is a BGP path hint with lower values generally preferred when compared; it is not a guarantee of inbound routing across arbitrary networks.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

VRRP coordinates an active virtual default gateway among participating routers, unlike independent physical interface addresses. That is the specific distinction behind the observed outage. The targeted fix is to align VRRP group, virtual gateway addressing and priority settings and verify master-to-backup handover. Applied here, the relevant facts are: Two gateway routers use inconsistent VRRP group IDs and therefore fail to provide a common active virtual router. The question asks which networking principle most accurately explains the observed failure.

Incorrect Answers

A:

BFD provides rapid bidirectional path liveness detection; it triggers routing response but is not by itself a replacement route. That describes BFD fast failure detection, whereas the observed symptoms are caused by VRRP virtual gateway failover; it does not predict the reported behavior.

C:

NSR uses GRES infrastructure while preserving routing protocol state on the backup Routing Engine, avoiding reliance on neighbor restart helpers. Those conditions do not account for the specific VRRP virtual gateway failover problem reported by Jasper Data Works.

D:

Although BGP MED neighbor consideration needs this consideration, the failure at issue has a different cause. VRRP coordinates an active virtual default gateway among participating routers, unlike independent physical interface addresses.

Question 226

A fictional service-provider team at Coastline Carrier is reviewing an intercity fiber refresh. The finding is: Two VLANs need separate planned roots, but a single global STP assumption makes both take the same undesirable transit path. Which networking principle most accurately explains the observed failure?

  1. The MPLS S bit identifies the final label in a stack; it does not describe label priority or path preference.
  2. Root protection blocks acceptance of an unexpected superior root across designated boundary ports; it is not the same as BPDU edge protection.
  3. Edge BPDU protection is intended for ports expected to connect to hosts, not for ordinary switch-to-switch links that exchange BPDUs.
  4. VSTP maintains spanning-tree behavior per VLAN; one VLAN's root decision does not automatically govern every VLAN.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

VSTP maintains spanning-tree behavior per VLAN; one VLAN's root decision does not automatically govern every VLAN. That is the specific distinction behind the observed outage. The targeted fix is to configure and verify the intended VSTP instance and per-VLAN root priorities for the affected VLANs.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The MPLS S bit identifies the final label in a stack; it does not describe label priority or path preference. Those conditions do not account for the specific VSTP per-VLAN root choice problem reported by Coastline Carrier.

B:

Root protection blocks acceptance of an unexpected superior root across designated boundary ports; it is not the same as BPDU edge protection. That describes RSTP root protection, whereas the observed symptoms are caused by VSTP per-VLAN root choice; it does not predict the reported behavior.

C:

Edge BPDU protection is intended for ports expected to connect to hosts, not for ordinary switch-to-switch links that exchange BPDUs. Those conditions do not account for the specific VSTP per-VLAN root choice problem reported by Coastline Carrier.

Question 227

The operations group at fictional Beacon Data Exchange, working on a carrier peering cutover, finds: After a core migration, route selection changes while neighbors remain Full because interface cost on the new links was not adjusted. Which observation would most directly establish that the reported failure has been repaired?

  1. The two peers progress through database synchronization to Full and agree on reachable link-state information.
  2. The best route's cumulative OSPF cost selects the approved path and changes predictably when the alternative fails.
  3. Every router has a distinct planned router ID and the LSDB tracks the appropriate originating router consistently.
  4. The forwarding table has a valid outgoing label for the selected next hop and labeled traffic reaches the intended prefix.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The best route's cumulative OSPF cost selects the approved path and changes predictably when the alternative fails. It tests the failed behavior itself rather than merely confirming that a configuration was committed. OSPF chooses lowest-cost paths computed from link-state topology; a Full adjacency alone does not guarantee the desired route preference.

Incorrect Answers

A:

The two peers progress through database synchronization to Full and agree on reachable link-state information. That establishes OSPF MTU negotiation rather than a repaired OSPF interface metric selection path. The reported failure still requires this evidence: the best route's cumulative OSPF cost selects the approved path and changes predictably when the alternative fails.

C:

The check is meaningful for stable OSPF router identifier, but it does not prove that OSPF interface metric selection was repaired. OSPF chooses lowest-cost paths computed from link-state topology; a Full adjacency alone does not guarantee the desired route preference.

D:

This measurement tests LDP label binding completeness; it cannot distinguish success from failure for the observed OSPF interface metric selection condition. OSPF chooses lowest-cost paths computed from link-state topology; a Full adjacency alone does not guarantee the desired route preference.

Question 228

At fictional Everfield Rail, during an intercity fiber refresh, engineers report: A service VLAN has working MAC learning, yet its default gateway is configured on the wrong IRB interface and inter-VLAN routing fails. Which observation would most directly establish that the reported failure has been repaired?

  1. Hosts reach the expected IRB gateway and traffic between approved subnets is routed rather than bridged blindly.
  2. The correct single- and double-tagged service units receive traffic matching their configured VLAN identifiers.
  3. External route advertisements show the intended relative AS-path lengths and measured inbound behavior is compared with the goal.
  4. Untagged frames map to the intended VLAN on both devices while explicitly tagged VLAN traffic remains isolated.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

Hosts reach the expected IRB gateway and traffic between approved subnets is routed rather than bridged blindly. It tests the failed behavior itself rather than merely confirming that a configuration was committed. IRB provides an L3 interface for a Layer 2 VLAN bridge domain; MAC learning alone cannot perform inter-subnet routing. Applied here, the relevant facts are: A service VLAN has working MAC learning, yet its default gateway is configured on the wrong IRB interface and inter-VLAN routing fails. The question asks which observation would most directly establish that the reported failure has been repaired.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The check is meaningful for flexible VLAN encapsulation alignment, but it does not prove that integrated routing and bridging was repaired. IRB provides an L3 interface for a Layer 2 VLAN bridge domain; MAC learning alone cannot perform inter-subnet routing.

C:

External route advertisements show the intended relative AS-path lengths and measured inbound behavior is compared with the goal. That establishes AS-path prepend inbound influence rather than a repaired integrated routing and bridging path. The reported failure still requires this evidence: hosts reach the expected IRB gateway and traffic between approved subnets is routed rather than bridged blindly.

D:

Untagged frames map to the intended VLAN on both devices while explicitly tagged VLAN traffic remains isolated. It would validate a separate native untagged VLAN drift operation, not the change needed here. Confirm instead that hosts reach the expected IRB gateway and traffic between approved subnets is routed rather than bridged blindly.

Question 229

During a virtual-router integration at fictional Highpoint Exchange, the team observes: A backbone migration changes one router's circuit type to Level 2 while the other endpoint remains Level 1, leaving the IS-IS adjacency absent. Which networking principle most accurately explains the observed failure?

  1. IS-IS peers must support a common adjacency level; active Ethernet transport does not compensate for a level mismatch.
  2. The IS-IS NET encodes area membership and system identity, which must be consistent with the planned level and unique per node.
  3. IS-IS exports externally originated routes through routing policy; forming an adjacency does not redistribute every route automatically.
  4. Q-in-Q carries an additional provider VLAN tag around customer-tagged traffic to isolate services with overlapping customer VLAN numbers.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

IS-IS peers must support a common adjacency level; active Ethernet transport does not compensate for a level mismatch. That is the specific distinction behind the observed outage. The targeted fix is to set compatible IS-IS circuit levels on both ends of the interface and verify hello and neighbor state.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The IS-IS NET encodes area membership and system identity, which must be consistent with the planned level and unique per node. Those conditions do not account for the specific IS-IS adjacency circuit level problem reported by Highpoint Exchange.

C:

This principle matters when troubleshooting IS-IS route redistribution policy, but using it here mistakes a different failure mode for IS-IS adjacency circuit level. The relevant distinction is: IS-IS peers must support a common adjacency level; active Ethernet transport does not compensate for a level mismatch.

D:

Q-in-Q carries an additional provider VLAN tag around customer-tagged traffic to isolate services with overlapping customer VLAN numbers. That describes provider Q-in-Q tagging, whereas the observed symptoms are caused by IS-IS adjacency circuit level; it does not predict the reported behavior.

Question 230

A fictional service-provider team at Cypress Fiber is reviewing a regional backbone upgrade. The finding is: A redundant Routing Engine pair has GRES enabled, yet BGP peers reset on switchover because routing protocol state is not synchronized. Which observation would most directly establish that the reported failure has been repaired?

  1. During a controlled primary RE loss, eligible routing adjacencies continue using state maintained by the backup RE.
  2. Maximum expected encapsulated packets cross the tunnel without fragmentation blackholes or oversized drop counters.
  3. A controlled Routing Engine switchover retains forwarding and the planned bridge or routing state without unexpected protocol resets.
  4. During a controlled routing restart, participating neighbors retain forwarding state only for the permitted grace interval and then converge correctly.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

During a controlled primary RE loss, eligible routing adjacencies continue using state maintained by the backup RE. It tests the failed behavior itself rather than merely confirming that a configuration was committed. NSR uses GRES infrastructure while preserving routing protocol state on the backup Routing Engine, avoiding reliance on neighbor restart helpers. Applied here, the relevant facts are: A redundant Routing Engine pair has GRES enabled, yet BGP peers reset on switchover because routing protocol state is not synchronized. The question asks which observation would most directly establish that the reported failure has been repaired.

Incorrect Answers

B:

The check is meaningful for GRE tunnel path MTU, but it does not prove that NSR protocol state replication was repaired. NSR uses GRES infrastructure while preserving routing protocol state on the backup Routing Engine, avoiding reliance on neighbor restart helpers.

C:

A controlled Routing Engine switchover retains forwarding and the planned bridge or routing state without unexpected protocol resets. That establishes GRES preserves forwarding not protocols rather than a repaired NSR protocol state replication path. The reported failure still requires this evidence: during a controlled primary RE loss, eligible routing adjacencies continue using state maintained by the backup RE.

D:

During a controlled routing restart, participating neighbors retain forwarding state only for the permitted grace interval and then converge correctly. It would validate a separate graceful restart peer assistance operation, not the change needed here. Confirm instead that during a controlled primary RE loss, eligible routing adjacencies continue using state maintained by the backup RE.

Service Provider Routing and Switching, Specialist (JNCIS-SP) (JN0-364) Practice Tests