Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location PL
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Fortinet Exam NSE7_EFW-7.2 Topic 5 Question 33 Discussion

Actual exam question for Fortinet's NSE7_EFW-7.2 exam
Question #: 33
Topic #: 5
[All NSE7_EFW-7.2 Questions]

Refer to the exhibit, which shows a partial routing table.

What two conclusions can you draw from the FortiGate output shown in the

exhibit? (Choose two.)

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A, D

In IKE version 2, not all packets are fragmentable. Only certain messages within the IKE negotiation process can be fragmented. Additionally, there is a limit to the number of fragments that IKE version 2 can handle, which is 128. This is specified in the Fortinet documentation and ensures that the IKE negotiation process can proceed even in networks that have issues with large packets. The reassembly timeout and the layer at which fragmentation occurs are not specified in this context within Fortinet documentation.


by Lizette at Feb 10, 2025, 06:25 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium NSE7_EFW-7.2 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Arlene
1 months ago
I bet the answer is 'All of the above' and 'None of the above' at the same time. That's how these certification exams like to keep us on our toes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Louvenia
1 months ago
I wonder if the exam writer was on a coffee break when they came up with this one. 'Partial routing table'? Really? They couldn't find a more complete exhibit?
upvoted 0 times
Leota
3 days ago
A) FortiGate creates separate virtual interfaces for each VPN client.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lorriane
2 months ago
Ha, this is too easy! The answer is clearly A. Everyone knows FortiGate creates separate virtual interfaces for each VPN client. That's like Networking 101.
upvoted 0 times
Brendan
30 days ago
User 3: Hmm, I'm not sure. I think it might be C. FortiGate is not using the destination subnets of the quick mode selectors to populate the routing table.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristel
1 months ago
User 2: I agree with Kristel. B seems like the correct answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melinda
1 months ago
User 1: Actually, I think it's B. add-route is enabled in the tunnel IPSec phase 1 configuration.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Latia
2 months ago
Hold on, I'm not sure. The exhibit shows a partial routing table, so I think C might be the correct answer. The FortiGate seems to be ignoring the destination subnets.
upvoted 0 times
Aliza
18 days ago
I think we need to consider both B and C as possible conclusions based on the exhibit.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paris
1 months ago
I agree with you, C does make sense given the information in the routing table.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wayne
1 months ago
I'm not so sure, I think B could also be a valid conclusion based on the exhibit.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alishia
1 months ago
I think you might be right, C does seem like a possible conclusion.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ahmed
2 months ago
Ah, so it's all about the routing table! I bet the answer is either B or D, since the question mentions the IPSec configuration.
upvoted 0 times
Luisa
26 days ago
User 2: Yeah, the question does mention the IPSec configuration.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marshall
28 days ago
User 1: I think you're right, it must be either B or D.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lenora
2 months ago
I believe the answer is C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Billye
2 months ago
I agree with you, Georgene. The add-route is enabled in the tunnel IPSec phase 1 configuration.
upvoted 0 times
...
Georgene
2 months ago
I think the answer is B.
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