Independence Day Deal! Unlock 25% OFF Today – Limited-Time Offer - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Cisco Exam 300-420 Topic 7 Question 96 Discussion

Actual exam question for Cisco's 300-420 exam
Question #: 96
Topic #: 7
[All 300-420 Questions]

A network engineer must segregate three interconnected campus networks using IS-IS routing. A two-layer hierarchy must be used to support large routing domains and to avoid more specific routes from each campus network being advertised to other campus network routers automatically. Which two actions does the engineer take to accomplish this segregation? (Choose two.)

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

Contribute your Thoughts:

Desmond
1 months ago
Ah, the joys of campus networking. It's like herding IS-IS cats, isn't it?
upvoted 0 times
Cristal
3 days ago
D: D) Utilize different MTU values for each campus network segment. Level 2 backbone routers must utilize a larger MTU size of 9216.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jina
9 days ago
C: E) Assign a unique IS-IS NET value for each campus, and configure internal campus routers with Level 1 routing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rebeca
13 days ago
B: B) Designate two IS-IS routers from each campus to act as Level 1/Level 2 backbone routers at the edge of each campus network.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jonell
14 days ago
A: A) Designate two IS-IS routers as BDR routers at the edge of each campus, and configure one BDR for all Level 1 routers and one BDR for all Level 2 routers.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ashanti
1 months ago
D is an interesting option, but I'm not convinced that different MTU values are the way to go here. Seems a bit of a hack, if you ask me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Evelynn
1 months ago
E seems like the way to go. Assigning a unique IS-IS NET value for each campus and configuring internal routers with Level 1 routing should do the trick.
upvoted 0 times
Georgeanna
1 days ago
A: It's important to make sure each campus has its own identity in the routing domain.
upvoted 0 times
...
Julie
9 days ago
B: Definitely, configuring internal routers with Level 1 routing will help keep the networks separate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Francis
14 days ago
A: I agree, assigning a unique IS-IS NET value for each campus is key for segregation.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lavonne
2 months ago
I'm not sure about option C. Wouldn't using the same IS-IS NET value for each campus cause routing issues and prevent proper segregation?
upvoted 0 times
Brandon
15 days ago
A: Definitely, assigning unique values will help prevent any routing conflicts between the interconnected campus networks.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jenifer
18 days ago
B: I agree, using a unique IS-IS NET value for each campus would be a better approach to ensure proper segregation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lazaro
19 days ago
A: Option C could potentially cause routing issues if the same IS-IS NET value is used for each campus.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Coletta
2 months ago
Option B looks good to me. Having two Level 1/Level 2 backbone routers at the edge of each campus network should segregate the routing domains nicely.
upvoted 0 times
Margarett
24 days ago
D: Agreed, it's important to have a clear hierarchy in place for routing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ryan
1 months ago
C: Designating those routers will definitely help with the segregation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ronna
1 months ago
B: Yeah, having two Level 1/Level 2 backbone routers at the edge of each campus network is a smart move.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mabelle
2 months ago
A: I think option B is a good choice. It helps segregate the routing domains.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Candra
2 months ago
But shouldn't we also assign a unique IS-IS NET value for each campus to ensure proper segregation?
upvoted 0 times
...
Elden
2 months ago
I agree with Willow. That way we can have one BDR for all Level 1 routers and one BDR for all Level 2 routers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Willow
3 months ago
I think we should designate two IS-IS routers as BDR routers at the edge of each campus.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77