Cisco®
Oracle
CompTIA
Checkpoint
ISC
EC-Council
EXIN
Fortinet
ITIL®
Juniper
Microsoft
VMware
Avaya
SAP
Google
Salesforce
Amazon
Palo Alto Networks
ISC2
Splunk®
All Vendors
  2. Home
  3. Exams
  4. HP
  5. HPE2-W09

Free HP HPE2-W09 Exam Braindumps (page: 3)

Page 3 of 34
PDF with 129 Questions

Refer to the exhibit.

Refer to the exhibit.



You are adding a VLAN 30, subnet 10.0.30.0/24 to the network shown in the exhibit. (This network is simplified to just the relevant switches for this item.) This subnet belongs in VRF A, and you have added a Layer 3 VLAN 30 interface attached to this VRF on Switch-1. You want to make the services in this VLAN available to devices in 10.1.20.0/24 in VRF B.

Is this part of a valid setup for meeting these requirements?

Solution: Add VRF B as the secondary VRF on VLAN interface 30.

  1. Yes
  2. No

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

The solution is incorrect because adding VRF B as the secondary VRF on VLAN interface 30 is not part of a valid setup for meeting these requirements. Adding VRF B as the secondary VRF on VLAN interface 30 would allow devices in VLAN 30 to communicate with devices in VRF B, but not vice versa. Therefore, adding VRF B as the secondary VRF on VLAN interface 30 is not sufficient for meeting these requirements.

: https://www.arubanetworks.com/support-services/training-services/data-center-network- specialist/



Refer to the exhibit.



You are adding a VLAN 30, subnet 10.0.30.0/24 to the network shown in the exhibit. (This network is simplified to just the relevant switches for this item.) This subnet belongs in VRF A, and you have added a Layer 3 VLAN 30 interface attached to this VRF on Switch-1. You want to make the services in this VLAN available to devices in 10.1.20.0/24 in VRF B.

Is this part of a valid setup for meeting these requirements?

Solution: Add a route with this command: ip route 10.1.20.0/24 vlan20 vrf A

  1. Yes
  2. No

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

Adding a route with this command: ip route 10.1.20.0/24 vlan20 vrf A is not part of a valid setup for meeting these requirements. This command would add a static route for 10.1.20.0/24 in VRF A, but it would not be able to reach VLAN 20 on Switch-2 because Switch-2 does not have a VLAN interface for VLAN 20 in VRF A. To make the services in VLAN 30 available to devices in 10.1.20.0/24 in VRF B, you need to use inter-VRF routing or route leaking between VRF A and VRF B on Switch-11.



Is this part of a valid strategy for load sharing traffic across the links in an Ethernet Ring Protection Switching (ERPS) solution?

Solution: Implement Virtual Switching Extension (VSX) on pairs of ERPS switches at the same site.

  1. Yes
  2. No

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

Implementing Virtual Switching Extension (VSX) on pairs of ERPS switches at the same site is part of a valid strategy for load sharing traffic across the links in an Ethernet Ring Protection Switching (ERPS) solution. VSX allows two switches to act as a single logical device and provide active-active forwarding across both switches. This way, traffic can be load balanced across all links in the ERPS ring without creating loops1.



You plan to use multi-protocol BGP to implement dynamic VRF route leaking on an ArubaOS-CX switch.

Is this a rule for the setup?

Solution: You can only leak routes between up to three VRFs.

  1. Yes
  2. No

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

You can only leak routes between up to three VRFs is not a rule for the setup of multi-protocol BGP to implement dynamic VRF route leaking on an ArubaOS-CX switch. There is no limit on the number of VRFs that can participate in route leaking using multi-protocol BGP. You can configure multiple import and export route targets for each VRF and leak routes between any VRFs that have matching route targets1.



Viewing page 3 of 34
Viewing questions 9 - 12 out of 129 questions



Post your Comments and Discuss HP HPE2-W09 exam prep with other Community members:

HPE2-W09 Exam Discussions & Posts