SolarWinds SCP-500 Exam Dumps & Practice Test Questions

Question 1:

A network operations team wants to receive alerts only if specific servers at a remote site fail—but not if the entire site becomes unreachable due to a network outage. 

Which two actions should be configured in the network monitoring system to achieve this objective? (Select two.)

A. Enable alerting for server availability
B. Configure alerting for the site’s network connection
C. Make each server a dependency of the other servers
D. Define the site’s network connection as a dependency for each server
E. Enable alerting for the remote site’s router status

Correct Answer: A, D

Explanation:

In network monitoring, configuring alert dependencies helps prevent false alarms when the root cause of an issue is upstream from the devices being monitored. This question focuses on a common use case: avoiding alert storms when a remote site becomes unreachable due to a network failure, even though the servers at the site may still be functioning normally.

To achieve the desired behavior—alerting only when individual servers fail and not when the entire site is disconnected—two key configurations are necessary.

First, choose Option A: enabling alerting for server availability. This ensures that each monitored server at the remote site is actively tracked. If a server itself fails (due to hardware, software, or power issues), the monitoring system will detect it and send an alert as required. Without enabling monitoring on each server, there would be no way to know if they are operating or not.

Second, configure Option D: define the remote site’s network connection (such as a link or router) as a dependency for each server. This dependency tells the monitoring system that if the site’s connection is down, then alerts for the servers behind that connection should be suppressed. This avoids triggering unnecessary alerts about server unavailability when the true issue is simply that the site is unreachable due to a broader connectivity problem.

The other options are either redundant or counterproductive:

• Option B and E (alerting on the remote connection or router) contradict the team's stated goal of not receiving alerts during connection failures.

• Option C, which configures each server as a dependency of others, is incorrect. This creates irrelevant relationships between devices that don’t depend on each other and wouldn’t help suppress alerts during a network outage.

In summary, by enabling server-level monitoring and using the remote connection as a dependency, alerts will only trigger for actual server failures. If the remote connection goes down, the system understands that the servers may be unreachable due to a broader issue and suppresses those alerts accordingly. Therefore, the best configuration is A and D.

Question 2:

What is a major improvement SNMPv2c offers over SNMPv1?

A. Ability to use a username for access control
B. Introduction of the GetBulk operation
C. Support for the GetNext request
D. Use of 32-bit counters
E. Built-in authentication and encryption features

Correct Answer: B

Explanation:

SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol) is used for monitoring and managing devices on IP-based networks. Over time, several versions of SNMP have been released, each with enhancements addressing performance, scalability, and security concerns. The main advancement of SNMPv2c over SNMPv1 lies in its support for more efficient data retrieval, particularly through the GetBulk command.

The GetBulk command—Option B—is a significant improvement introduced with SNMPv2c. It enables the retrieval of large volumes of data in a single request, particularly useful when dealing with SNMP tables, such as interface statistics, routing tables, or ARP entries. Compared to SNMPv1, which requires sending multiple sequential GetNext requests to fetch multiple values, GetBulk dramatically reduces the number of round-trip communications between the SNMP manager and agent. This results in improved performance, especially on large-scale networks or when bandwidth usage must be minimized.

Let’s examine why the other options are incorrect or misleading:

• Option A, referencing a “username parameter,” is a feature found in SNMPv3, not SNMPv2c. SNMPv2c, like SNMPv1, uses community strings for access control, which lack strong authentication.

• Option C, GetNext, was already available in SNMPv1 and thus does not represent a new benefit in SNMPv2c.

• Option D, “32-bit counters,” are available in both SNMPv1 and SNMPv2c. While SNMPv2c does introduce 64-bit counters to handle high-speed interfaces better, this option as phrased does not highlight the actual enhancement.

• Option E, stating that SNMPv2c provides “authentication and encryption,” is inaccurate. These security improvements are part of SNMPv3. SNMPv2c offers no encryption or strong authentication and continues to use plaintext community strings.

In conclusion, the GetBulk operation in SNMPv2c is its most notable and practical advantage over SNMPv1. It enhances efficiency by reducing communication overhead and is especially useful in environments where rapid access to multiple SNMP variables is necessary. Therefore, B is the correct answer.

Question 3:

Which two components are essential for calculating the Percent Utilization of a network interface? (Choose two.)

A. Configured bandwidth of the interface
B. Number of packets transmitted per second
C. Buffer overrun occurrences
D. Count of interface discards
E. Data transmission rate in bits per second

Correct Answers: A, E

Explanation:

Percent Utilization is a key metric used in network performance monitoring to determine how much of a network interface’s capacity is being used over a specific period. This value is critical for understanding network congestion, planning capacity upgrades, and ensuring optimal traffic flow. The calculation is generally based on a straightforward formula:

Percent Utilization = (Actual Throughput / Maximum Configured Bandwidth) × 100

To understand the two essential components of this calculation, let’s break them down:

• Option A: Configured Bandwidth – This refers to the maximum data rate that the interface is expected to handle under normal operating conditions. It’s often manually set by the network administrator or derived from the interface specification. This value becomes the denominator in the utilization formula. Without knowing the interface’s bandwidth capacity, it’s impossible to accurately determine what percentage of it is in use.

• Option E: Bits Per Second (bps) – This represents the actual throughput or data volume passing through the interface in a given period. This value forms the numerator of the utilization formula. Most monitoring tools calculate this based on counters like octets in/out over time, then convert it to bits per second.

The other options, while useful in network diagnostics, are not used in this specific calculation:

• Option B: Packets Per Second – This metric indicates the rate of packet transmission but does not account for packet size, making it irrelevant to bandwidth consumption or utilization calculations.

• Option C: Buffer Overruns – These occur when the network interface buffer is full, and incoming packets can’t be processed. They indicate performance issues but do not factor into utilization metrics.

• Option D: Interface Discards – Discards reflect dropped packets due to congestion or policy enforcement. Like overruns, they are important for diagnostics but not part of the utilization formula.

In summary, the two critical inputs for calculating Percent Utilization are the configured bandwidth (A) and the actual throughput in bits per second (E). Monitoring this percentage helps network administrators maintain performance and avoid saturation issues.

Question 4:

After relocating Orion to a new server with a different IP address due to a crash, what two updates are necessary to maintain monitoring functionality? (Choose two.)

A. Modify access control lists (ACLs) to reflect the new IP
B. Adjust the IP address in the Orion server’s snmpd.conf file
C. Change the source IP address in NetFlow exporters
D. Inform ARIN of the new IP address change
E. Reconfigure Syslog and SNMP trap destinations on monitored devices

Correct Answers: A, E

Explanation:

When Orion—SolarWinds’ network monitoring platform—is moved to a new server with a new IP address, ensuring uninterrupted communication between Orion and your monitored network devices requires several configuration updates. These changes must be made to both the Orion environment and the devices it monitors to reestablish valid communication paths.

Option A: Update ACLs – Access Control Lists (ACLs) are used on routers, switches, and firewalls to permit or deny network traffic based on IP addresses and protocols. If Orion’s IP has changed, the ACLs that previously allowed SNMP, ICMP, or API traffic to the old IP must be revised to reflect the new one. Otherwise, Orion may be blocked from polling devices or receiving trap notifications.

Option E: Update Syslog and SNMP Trap Destinations – Most network devices are configured to send Syslog messages and SNMP traps to a predefined IP address. If Orion’s IP address changes and the devices still send logs to the old IP, the messages will never reach the new server. Thus, the destination IP for these alerts must be updated on each managed device to ensure Orion continues receiving real-time data.

Now let’s clarify why the other options are not appropriate:

• Option B: Change snmpd.conf on Orion – This file belongs to SNMP agents (typically the monitored devices), not to SNMP managers like Orion. Orion doesn’t rely on this file to function, so this step is unnecessary.

• Option C: Modify the source IP in NetFlow packets – The source IP is automatically set by the exporting device, not by Orion. The relevant configuration here would be on the devices sending NetFlow data, where the destination IP should be updated to Orion’s new address.

• Option D: Notify ARIN – ARIN (American Registry for Internet Numbers) handles public IP allocations and has no role in internal IP address management. This is a local network change and does not require ARIN involvement.

In conclusion, the two critical updates are adjusting ACLs (A) to allow Orion traffic and reconfiguring device alert destinations (E) to ensure Syslog and SNMP traps are sent to the new IP. These steps are essential to maintain full monitoring functionality after a server migration.

Question 5:

You’re tracking your internet connection, which is supposed to provide 512 Kbps as per your ISP agreement. However, the speed consistently maxes out at 256 Kbps. What is the most likely cause of this issue?

A. The ISP has incorrectly set up the connection
B. The WAN router is not properly configured
C. The NAT table is experiencing overload
D. Quality of Service (QoS) is filtering out lower-priority traffic

Answer: A

Explanation:

When your internet speed persistently reaches a maximum of 256 Kbps—even though your ISP contract guarantees 512 Kbps—it strongly indicates a static limitation in the configuration, not a performance fluctuation due to network load or congestion. The most logical explanation in this context is a misconfiguration at the ISP’s end.

Option A is the most plausible scenario. ISPs provision bandwidth by configuring service profiles for each customer. If a provisioning mistake occurs—such as assigning the wrong bandwidth profile or speed cap—the service will behave exactly as described: capped at a fixed rate like 256 Kbps, regardless of actual demand or available capacity. Because the speed consistently tops out at half of the expected rate, this likely isn’t a transient issue but a hard cap imposed by error during configuration.

Option B considers a misconfigured WAN router. While this could theoretically affect performance, most typical home or small business routers do not come with preset traffic-shaping rules that would cap bandwidth unless manually configured. Additionally, a router misconfiguration would more likely result in erratic speeds or dropped packets, not a perfectly consistent ceiling.

Option C, involving NAT table overload, is unlikely to be the cause of a persistent bandwidth cap. When a NAT table becomes overloaded, it typically results in timeouts, dropped connections, or severe latency, not a stable 256 Kbps throughput. Overloaded NAT resources impact session management more than overall throughput.

Option D refers to QoS dropping low-priority traffic. While QoS mechanisms can prioritize or de-prioritize types of traffic (such as streaming, VoIP, or bulk downloads), they don’t inherently cap total bandwidth unless configured to do so explicitly. Even then, QoS generally causes performance degradation under heavy load, not a constant speed restriction under all conditions.

In summary, the consistency of the speed cap, which never exceeds 256 Kbps, points toward a deliberate or erroneous restriction imposed upstream—most likely by the ISP’s provisioning system. No local device misconfiguration or overload is likely to produce such a stable and uniform limitation. Thus, the most accurate answer is A: The ISP has misconfigured the link.

Question 6:

Your centralized Orion NPM setup is monitoring multiple remote sites, but this approach is causing inaccurate monitoring results and high WAN bandwidth consumption. 

What are the two best solutions to improve monitoring efficiency?

A. Install Orion NPM at each remote location
B. Set up the Orion Enterprise Operations Console
C. Deploy an additional Orion Polling Engine
D. Add another Orion Web Server
E. Configure an Orion Hot Standby server

Answer: A, C

Explanation:

Monitoring geographically distributed locations from a single, centralized Orion NPM (Network Performance Monitor) server can introduce several issues. Two of the most pressing concerns are inaccurate monitoring data due to latency or dropped SNMP packets, and excessive WAN bandwidth usage caused by pulling large volumes of telemetry data across long distances.

Option A, installing Orion NPM at each remote site, localizes the monitoring operations. This setup reduces the dependency on the WAN for transmitting SNMP, NetFlow, or ICMP data, thereby increasing the reliability and timeliness of monitoring data. Each remote Orion instance can function independently, improving accuracy and reducing WAN strain. Data from all sites can later be aggregated using higher-level management tools if centralized visibility is required.

Option C, deploying an additional polling engine, is another highly effective solution. These engines extend the data collection capacity of the Orion platform by allowing remote polling tasks to be performed closer to the monitored devices. The polling engine gathers data locally and transmits only summary or consolidated data to the central Orion database. This offloads the WAN, improves monitoring accuracy, and enhances scalability.

Option B, the Enterprise Operations Console (EOC), is useful for centralizing dashboards and alert views from multiple Orion environments but does not address performance or WAN utilization. It is a visualization tool—not a data collection enhancement.

Option D, adding a Web Server, helps if many users are accessing the Orion dashboard and causing UI performance degradation, but it does not influence data accuracy or reduce WAN traffic.

Option E, a Hot Standby server, provides redundancy and failover in case the primary server fails. While it improves availability, it does nothing to reduce bandwidth usage or enhance data accuracy under normal operating conditions.

In conclusion, the most effective strategies to mitigate poor data quality and high bandwidth consumption are to deploy Orion NPM at remote sites and utilize additional polling engines. These solutions improve local responsiveness, reduce WAN dependency, and scale the monitoring infrastructure effectively across multiple locations.

Question 7

How does the Orion Universal Device Poller (UnDP) retrieve custom performance metrics from a device that are not included in Orion Network Performance Monitor's default MIB database?

A. By manually assigning the device’s OID to Orion
B. By storing the device’s MIB file on the Orion server
C. By automatically pulling updates from public MIB repositories
D. By manually compiling the device’s MIB into Orion’s database
E. By adding the OID directly into Orion’s MIB structure

Correct Answer: A

Explanation:

The Orion Universal Device Poller (UnDP) is a powerful tool in SolarWinds' Network Performance Monitor (NPM) suite that enables custom monitoring of SNMP-enabled devices beyond what is supported out-of-the-box. This feature is especially helpful when you're working with vendor-specific devices or custom SNMP variables that are not part of Orion's predefined MIB database.

The correct answer is Option A because UnDP allows network administrators to manually associate an SNMP OID (Object Identifier) with a device to monitor specific data points. These might include environmental stats (like fan speeds or power supply temperatures), proprietary metrics, or non-standard performance indicators. This OID is entered manually and then tied to the appropriate device or interface, allowing Orion to begin polling that metric regularly.

Let’s examine why the other options are incorrect:

• Option B is incorrect because simply placing a device's MIB file on the Orion server does not make that data accessible to the system. MIB files serve as dictionaries that define the structure of OIDs, but Orion does not automatically parse them for real-time monitoring without manual configuration.

• Option C is not valid because Orion does not auto-discover or sync MIBs from online repositories. Updating Orion’s SNMP capabilities still requires manual input of relevant OIDs through tools like UnDP.

• Option D suggests compiling a MIB into Orion’s internal database. Orion does not support a manual MIB compiler interface for end-users. Instead, you use the UnDP tool to define and link specific OIDs for polling.

• Option E misrepresents how Orion’s MIB structure works. OIDs are polled individually via UnDP, but they are not compiled or merged into the MIB database structure.

In summary, the primary function of the Universal Device Poller is to let users manually associate specific OIDs with devices in Orion. This extends the system’s monitoring capabilities well beyond its default library, making Option A the most accurate choice.

Question 8:

To monitor network bandwidth and performance statistics from routers and switches, which protocol should a network engineer implement?

A. ICMP
B. SNMP
C. SMTP
D. WMI

Correct Answer: B

Explanation:

When it comes to gathering performance metrics such as bandwidth usage, interface throughput, and packet error rates from network hardware like routers and switches, the most widely adopted protocol is SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol). SNMP has been an industry-standard protocol for decades and is specifically designed for managing and monitoring network devices.

Option B, SNMP, is the correct answer because it allows centralized management systems to query devices for operational data. Devices such as switches and routers have SNMP agents installed that collect statistics and organize them in structures known as Management Information Bases (MIBs). These MIBs contain OIDs (Object Identifiers) that define performance data like:

• Interface input/output in bytes or packets

• CPU and memory utilization

• Device uptime and error counters

Network monitoring tools like SolarWinds NPM, PRTG, and Nagios use SNMP to regularly poll these values, enabling admins to monitor real-time and historical performance.

Let’s analyze the incorrect choices:

• Option A (ICMP) is a control protocol used mainly for sending error messages or checking device reachability (like ping). While it can confirm whether a device is online, it does not provide detailed performance metrics such as bandwidth or resource usage.

• Option C (SMTP) stands for Simple Mail Transfer Protocol, which is exclusively used for email transmission. It plays no role in network monitoring and is completely unrelated to performance data collection.

• Option D (WMI), or Windows Management Instrumentation, is a Microsoft-specific framework used for managing and monitoring Windows systems. While WMI can provide detailed information from Windows servers, routers and switches do not support WMI natively. These network devices primarily operate using SNMP.

In conclusion, SNMP is the most appropriate and reliable protocol for gathering performance statistics from network infrastructure devices. It enables effective network health monitoring, supports proactive alerting, and provides visibility essential for capacity planning and fault diagnosis. That makes Option B the correct and practical choice for this scenario.

Question 9:

A network administrator is setting up SNMP to monitor network devices and wants to ensure the integrity of the messages being exchanged. Which SNMP version should the administrator implement to meet this requirement?

A. SNMPv1
B. SNMPv2c
C. SNMPv3
D. SNMPv4

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol) is used extensively in network management systems to collect and organize information about managed devices on IP networks. It has undergone several iterations to improve its functionality and especially its security capabilities.

SNMPv3 is the only version that provides message integrity, which ensures that messages have not been altered or tampered with during transmission. This is achieved through cryptographic hashing using algorithms like MD5 or SHA combined with HMAC. Message integrity is vital for ensuring that both the commands sent to devices and the responses received remain unmodified, which is crucial for maintaining trust in the data exchanged.

In addition to integrity, SNMPv3 also supports authentication (verifying the identity of the source) and encryption (ensuring confidentiality). These enhancements make SNMPv3 the preferred choice in secure environments where tamper-proof communication is essential.

By contrast, SNMPv1 and SNMPv2c lack these security features. They use community strings, which are simple, plaintext passwords that are easily intercepted in unencrypted traffic. These versions offer no message integrity, authentication, or privacy, which makes them unsuitable for use in modern, security-conscious network environments.

SNMPv4 does not exist at this time. Any references to SNMPv4 are either speculative or incorrect, as SNMPv3 is the most recent version standardized by the IETF.

In conclusion, to meet the requirement of maintaining message integrity, the administrator must use SNMPv3, which provides secure and reliable SNMP communication with modern cryptographic protection mechanisms.

Question 10:

A network administrator notices that the Syslog server's storage is rapidly filling up due to logs from multiple devices. What is the most effective way to address this issue?

A. Configure the Syslog server to ignore non-essential messages
B. Use TCP instead of UDP for Syslog message transmission
C. Switch to SNMPv3 for logging instead of Syslog
D. Replace Syslog with SNMP trap-based logging

Correct Answer: A

Explanation:

Syslog is a standard protocol used by devices such as routers, switches, firewalls, and servers to send logging information to a centralized Syslog server. While it provides critical insights for diagnostics and compliance, the volume of messages can quickly become overwhelming in large environments, especially when debug-level logs are enabled.

The best strategy to manage this problem is to configure the Syslog server to discard or filter out unnecessary messages. This is typically achieved by setting up message filters or severity thresholds. For example, administrators can configure the server to only store messages at "warning" or "error" level and discard informational or debugging logs. This dramatically reduces data volume while retaining the logs most critical for troubleshooting and auditing.

Option B, switching from UDP to TCP for Syslog, improves message delivery reliability, ensuring that messages are not lost in transit. However, it does not reduce the number of messages or limit database growth, which is the core issue here.

Option C, moving to SNMPv3, introduces more secure communication for monitoring but does not serve the same purpose as Syslog. SNMP and Syslog serve different functions—SNMP is better suited for polling metrics and receiving traps, not logging textual event messages.

Option D, switching to SNMP traps, may reduce Syslog volume but doesn't solve the core problem, and could introduce its own issues. SNMP traps are also capable of generating high volumes of messages, particularly in dynamic environments, and require careful tuning to avoid flooding the monitoring system.

Ultimately, the most effective and targeted solution is to filter out unneeded messages on the Syslog server. This can involve discarding logs from certain devices, limiting the severity level collected, or removing redundant log types. Doing so optimizes database usage, maintains log relevance, and ensures better performance and manageability of the logging infrastructure.