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

- Free Preparation Discussions

Juniper Exam JN0-637 Topic 8 Question 14 Discussion

Actual exam question for Juniper's JN0-637 exam
Question #: 14
Topic #: 8
[All JN0-637 Questions]

Exhibit:

You are troubleshooting a new IPsec VPN that is configured between your corporate office and the RemoteSite1 SRX Series device. The VPN is not currently establishing. The RemoteSite1 device is being assigned an IP address on its gateway interface using DHCP.

Which action will solve this problem?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

Aggressive mode is required when an IP address is dynamically assigned, such as through DHCP, as it allows for faster establishment with less identity verification. More details are available in Juniper IKE and IPsec Configuration Guide.

The configuration shown in the exhibit highlights that the RemoteSite1 SRX Series device is using DHCP to obtain an IP address for its external interface (ge-0/0/2). This introduces a challenge in IPsec VPN configurations when the public IP address of the remote site is not static, as is the case here.

Aggressive mode in IKE (Internet Key Exchange) is designed for situations where one or both peers have dynamically assigned IP addresses. In this scenario, aggressive mode allows the devices to exchange identifying information, such as hostnames, rather than relying on static IP addresses, which is necessary when the remote peer (RemoteSite1) has a dynamic IP from DHCP.

Correct Action (D): Changing the IKE policy mode to aggressive will resolve the issue by allowing the two devices to establish the VPN even though one of them is using DHCP. In aggressive mode, the initiator can present its identity (hostname) during the initial handshake, enabling the VPN to be established successfully.

Incorrect Options:

Option A: Changing the external interface to st0.0 is incorrect because the st0 interface is used for the tunnel interface, not for the IKE negotiation.

Option B: Changing to IKE version 2 would not resolve the dynamic IP issue directly, and IKEv1 works in this scenario.

Option C: Changing the IKE proposal set to basic doesn't address the dynamic IP challenge in this scenario.

Juniper Reference:

Juniper IKE and VPN Documentation: Provides details on when to use aggressive mode, especially when a dynamic IP address is involved.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Dortha
4 days ago
Forget the VPN, I'm more concerned about the poor remote site's IP address assignment. Who let the DHCP genie out of the bottle?
upvoted 0 times
...
Kattie
8 days ago
Ha! Changing the IKE policy mode to aggressive? That's like trying to solve a problem with a sledgehammer. I'm going with A for this one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Willodean
19 days ago
I think C) On both devices, change the IKE policy proposal set to basic, could also be a potential solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Art
20 days ago
What a strange question! Changing the IKE policy proposal set to basic on both devices? That sounds like a recipe for disaster. I'll go with A.
upvoted 0 times
Kent
2 days ago
I think A is the best choice too. It's important to make sure the IKE gateway external interface is set correctly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rodolfo
5 days ago
I agree, changing the IKE policy proposal set to basic doesn't seem like the right move. A sounds like a better option.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lenita
29 days ago
But changing the IKE version may not necessarily solve the issue, it could be related to the IKE gateway interface.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alberto
1 months ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is B) On both devices, change the IKE version to use version 2 only.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lenita
2 months ago
I think the answer is A) On the RemoteSite1 device, change the IKE gateway external interface to st0.0.
upvoted 0 times
...
Wai
2 months ago
I think B is the right answer. Upgrading the IKE version to version 2 on both devices should fix the VPN issue.
upvoted 0 times
Teddy
20 days ago
Let's try changing the IKE policy mode to aggressive on both devices.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cassi
1 months ago
I think changing the IKE policy proposal set to basic might also help.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lucina
1 months ago
I agree, upgrading the IKE version to version 2 is the best solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Natalie
2 months ago
The answer is clearly A. Changing the IKE gateway external interface to st0.0 on the RemoteSite1 device should solve the problem.
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