20 01 2012
CCNP 642-832 EXAM 3
QUESTION 21
Following ticket consists of a problem description and existing configuration on the device.
TROUBLE TICKET STATEMENT:
“The implementation group has been using the test bed to do a ‘proof-of-concept’ that required both client 1
and client 2 to access the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. After several changed to interface status,
network addressing, routing schemes and layer 2 connectivity, at trouble ticket has been opened indicating
that client 1 cannot ping the 209.65.200.241 (internet Server)”
show run
HSRP has been configurationured between DSW1 and DSW2. DSW1 is configurationured to be active
router but it never becomes active even though the HSRP communication between DSW1 and DSW2 is
working.
Configuration on DSW1
track 1 ip route 10.1.21.128 255.255.0.0 metric threshold threshold metric up 1 down 2
!
track 10 ip route 10.2.21.128 255.255.255.0 metric threshold threshold metric up 63 down 64
!
interface Vlan10
ip address 10.2.1.1 255.255.255.0
standby 10 ip 10.2.1.254
standby 10 priority 200
standby 10 preempt
standby 10 track 1 decrement 60
Configuration on R4
interface loopback0
ip address 10.2.21.128 255.255.255.0
Fault Condition is related to which technology?
A. GLBP
B. HSRP
C. OSPF
D. Switch to Switch Connectivity
Answer: B
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
The problem in this case is that DSW1 will not become the active standby router, which is an HSRP
problem.
QUESTION 22
Following ticket consists of a problem description and existing configuration on the device.TROUBLE TICKET STATEMENT:
“The implementation group has been using the test bed to do a ‘proof-of-concept’ that required both client 1
and client 2 to access the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. After several changed to interface status,
network addressing, routing schemes and layer 2 connectivity, at trouble ticket has been opened indicating
that client 1 cannot ping the 209.65.200.241 (internet Server)”
show run
HSRP has been configurationured between DSW1 and DSW2. DSW1 is configurationured to be active
router but it never becomes active even though the HSRP communication between DSW1 and DSW2 is
working.
Configuration on DSW1
track 1 ip route 10.1.21.128 255.255.0.0 metric threshold threshold metric up 1 down 2
!
track 10 ip route 10.2.21.128 255.255.255.0 metric threshold threshold metric up 63 down 64
!
interface Vlan10
ip address 10.2.1.1 255.255.255.0
standby 10 ip 10.2.1.254
standby 10 priority 200
standby 10 preempt
standby 10 track 1 decrement 60
Configuration on R4
interface loopback0
ip address 10.2.21.128 255.255.255.0
What is the solution of fault condition?
A. Change standby priority to 140
B. Change standby priority to 260
C. Under the interface vlan 10 configuration delete the standby 10 track 1 decrement 60 command and
enter the standby 10 track 10 decrement 60 command.
D. Change standby 10 track 1 decrement 60 to standby 10 track 1 decrement 100
Answer: C
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
The reason that router DSW1 will not become the active router is because it is configured to track the
10.1.21.128 255.255.0.0 network. It should have been configured to track the 10.2.21.128 255.255.255.0
network. This can be fixed by replacing the Change "standby 10 track 1 decrement 60" command with
the "standby 10 track 10 decrement 60" command.
QUESTION 23
Following ticket consists of a problem description and existing configuration on the device.
TROUBLE TICKET STATEMENT:
“The implementation group has been using the test bed to do a ‘proof-of-concept’ that required both client 1
and client 2 to access the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. After several changed to interface status,
network addressing, routing schemes and layer 2 connectivity, at trouble ticket has been opened indicating
that client 1 cannot ping the 209.65.200.241 (internet Server)”show run
Client 1 is able to ping 209.65.200.226 but not the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. Initial troubleshooting
shows and R1 does not have any BGP routes. R1 also does not show any active BGP neighbor
Configuration on R1
router bgp 65001
no synchronization
bgp log-neighbor-changes
network 209.65.200.224 mask 255.255.255.252
neighbor 209.56.200.226 remote-as 65002
no auto-summary
On which device is the fault condition located?
A. R1
B. DSW1
C. R4
D. R2
Answer: A
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
The problem lies with router R1 as it does not have any BGP routes, and it has not successfully peered
with the other routers.
QUESTION 24
Following ticket consists of a problem description and existing configuration on the device.
TROUBLE TICKET STATEMENT:
“The implementation group has been using the test bed to do a ‘proof-of-concept’ that required both client 1
and client 2 to access the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. After several changed to interface status,
network addressing, routing schemes and layer 2 connectivity, at trouble ticket has been opened indicating
that client 1 cannot ping the 209.65.200.241 (internet Server)”
show run
Client 1 is able to ping 209.65.200.226 but not the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. Initial troubleshooting
shows and R1 does not have any BGP routes. R1 also does not show any active BGP neighbor
Configuration on R1
router bgp 65001
no synchronization
bgp log-neighbor-changes
network 209.65.200.224 mask 255.255.255.252
neighbor 209.56.200.226 remote-as 65002
no auto-summary
The Fault Condition is related to which technology?
A. EIGRP
B. HSRP
C. BGP
D. OSPFAnswer: C
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
BGP routes are missing from R1. Also, R1 does not have any BGP peers even though the router at
209.56.200.226 has been configured.
QUESTION 25
Following ticket consists of a problem description and existing configuration on the device.
TROUBLE TICKET STATEMENT:
The implementation group has been using the test bed to do a ‘proof-of-concept’ that required both client 1
and client 2 to access the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. After several changed to interface status,
network addressing, routing schemes and layer 2 connectivity, at trouble ticket has been opened indicating
that client 1 cannot ping the 209.65.200.241 (internet Server).
show run
Client 1 is able to ping 209.65.200.226 but not the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. Initial troubleshooting
shows and R1 does not have any BGP routes. R1 also does not show any active BGP neighbor.
Configuration on R1
router bgp 65001
no synchronization
bgp log-neighbor-changes
network 209.65.200.224 mask 255.255.255.252
neighbor 209.56.200.226 remote-as 65002
no auto-summary
What is the solution of the fault condition?
A. Enable BGP synchronization
B. Change neighbor 209.56.200.226 remote-as 65002 statement to neighbor 209.56.200.226 remote-as
65001
C. Under the BGP process, delete the neighbor 209.56.200.226 remote-as 65002 command enter the
neighbor 209.65.200.226 remote-as 65002 command.
D. Change neighbor 209.56.200.226 remote-as 65002 statement to neighbor 209.65.200.226 remote-as
65001
Answer: C
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
Based on the network topology, there does not appear to be any peers with an IP address of
209.56.200.226. If you examine the topology diagram you can see that the peer’s IP address should have
been configured as 209.65.200.226, which is the peer in AS 65002.
QUESTION 26
Following ticket consists of a problem description and existing configuration on the device.
TROUBLE TICKET STATEMENT:
The implementation group has been using the test bed to do a ‘proof-of-concept’ that required both client 1
and client 2 to access the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. After several changed to interface status,
network addressing, routing schemes and layer 2 connectivity, at trouble ticket has been opened indicating
that client 1 cannot ping the 209.65.200.241 (internet Server).show run
Client 1 and Client 2 are not able to reach the WebServer at 209.65.200.241. Initial troubleshooting shows
that DSW1, DSW2 and all the routers are able to reach the WebServer.
Configuration on R1
ip nat inside source list nat_pool interface Serial0/0/0/1 overload !
ip access-list standard nat_pool
permit 10.1.0.0
!
interface Serial0/0/0/1
ip address 209.65.200.224 255.255.255.252
ip nat outside
!
interfaceSerial0/0/0/0.12
ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.252
ip nat inside
ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 TSHOOT
ip ospd authentication message-digest
On Which device is the fault condition located?
A. R1
B. DSW1
C. R4
D. R2
Answer: A
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
Clients 1 and 2 belong in the 10.2.0.0 subnet, as if you observe the NAT configuration you will notice that
only 10.1.0.0 are specified in the NAT pool. Clients 1 and 2 are not being translated when they should be.
The problem is with the NAT configuration on R1.
QUESTION 27
Following ticket consists of a problem description and existing configuration on the device.
TROUBLE TICKET STATEMENT:
The implementation group has been using the test bed to do a ‘proof-of-concept’ that required both client 1
and client 2 to access the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. After several changed to interface status,
network addressing, routing schemes and layer 2 connectivity, at trouble ticket has been opened indicating
that client 1 cannot ping the 209.65.200.241 (internet Server).
show run
Client 1 and Client 2 are not able to reach the WebServer at 209.65.200.241. Initial troubleshooting shows
that DSW1, DSW2 and all the routers are able to reach the WebServer.
Configuration on R1
ip nat inside source list nat_pool interface Serial0/0/0/1 overload !
ip access-list standard nat_pool
permit 10.1.0.0
!
interface Serial0/0/0/1ip address 209.65.200.224 255.255.255.252
ip nat outside
!
interfaceSerial0/0/0/0.12
ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.252
ip nat inside
ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 TSHOOT
ip ospd authentication message-digest
The Fault Condition is related to which technology?
A. EIGRP
B. HSRP
C. BGP
D. NAT
Answer: D
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
Clients 1 and 2 belong in the 10.2.0.0 subnet, as if you observe the NAT configuration you will notice that
only 10.1.0.0 are specified in the NAT pool. Clients 1 and 2 are not being translated when they should be.
The problem is with the NAT configuration on R1.
QUESTION 28
Following ticket consists of a problem description and existing configuration on the device.
TROUBLE TICKET STATEMENT:
The implementation group has been using the test bed to do a ‘proof-of-concept’ that required both client 1
and client 2 to access the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. After several changed to interface status,
network addressing, routing schemes and layer 2 connectivity, at trouble ticket has been opened indicating
that client 1 cannot ping the 209.65.200.241 (internet Server).
show run
Client 1 and Client 2 are not able to reach the WebServer at 209.65.200.241. Initial troubleshooting shows
that DSW1, DSW2 and all the routers are able to reach the WebServer.
Configuration on R1
ip nat inside source list nat_pool interface Serial0/0/0/1 overload !
ip access-list standard nat_pool
permit 10.1.0.0
!
interface Serial0/0/0/1
ip address 209.65.200.224 255.255.255.252
ip nat outside
!
interfaceSerial0/0/0/0.12
ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.252
ip nat inside
ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 TSHOOT
ip ospd authentication message-digest
What is the solution of the fault condition?
A. Under the ip access-list standar nat_trafic configuration enter the permit 10.2.0.0 0.0.255.255 command
B. Remove permit 10.1.0.0 statement from nat_pool access-listC. Change ip nat inside source list nat_pool interface Serial0/0/0/1 overload to ip nat inside source list
nat_pool interface Serial0/0/0/0.12 overload
D. Change ip nat outside statement under Serial0/0/0/1 configuration to ip nat inside
Answer: A
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
Clients 1 and 2 belong in the 10.2.0.0 subnet, as if you observe the NAT configuration you will notice that
only 10.1.0.0 are specified in the NAT pool. Clients 1 and 2 are not being translated when they should be.
The problem is with the NAT configuration on R1. Adding the "permit 10.2.0.0" statement to the NAT pool
access list will include these two hosts to be translated, and then they should be able to ping the web
servers.
QUESTION 29
Following ticket consists of a problem description and existing configuration on the device.
TROUBLE TICKET STATEMENT:
The implementation group has been using the test bed to do a ‘proof-of-concept’ that required both client 1
and client 2 to access the Web Server at 209.65.200.241. After several changed to interface status,
network addressing, routing schemes and layer 2 connectivity, at trouble ticket has been opened indicating
that client 1 cannot ping the 209.65.200.241 (internet Server).
show run
Client 1 is not able to reach the WebServer at 209.65.200.241. Initial troubleshooting shows that R1 is also
not able to reach the WebServer. R1 also does not have any active BGP neighbor.
Configuration on R1
router bgp 65001
no synchronization
bgp log-neighbor-changes
network 209.65.200.224 mask 255.255.255.252
neighbor 209.65.200.226 remote-as 65002
no auto-summary
!
access-list 30 permit host 209.65.200.241
access-list 30 deny 10.1.0.0 0.0.255.255
access-list 30 deny 10.2.0.0 0.0.255.255
!
interface Serial0/0/0/1
ip address 209.65.200.224 255.255.255.252
ip nat outside
ip access-group 30 in
On which device is the fault condition located?
A. R1
B. DSW1
C. R4
D. R2
Answer: A
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:Since we know that R1 does not have any BGP neighbors, we can deduce that the problem lies with R1.
CCNP 642-832 EXAM 2 CCNP 642-832 EXAM 4