Pass Your Cisco 350-401 Exam Easy!

This test measures a different behavior: Inspect live local/remote TLOC color attributes and confirm the intended transport is selected. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: confirm local feature-policy match counters change at only the intended branch.

This test measures a different behavior: Verify the intended sites receive the policy and resulting OMP/TLOC choices change only for eligible prefixes. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: confirm local feature-policy match counters change at only the intended branch.

This test measures a different behavior: Check that the second edge advertises and can use the peer circuit's extended transport location. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: confirm local feature-policy match counters change at only the intended branch.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: The backup router loses all transport connectivity when its directly attached ISP circuit fails. Here the recorded observation is: all branch routers unexpectedly change behavior after a supposed site-only QoS update. The applicable cause is: the policy was distributed centrally instead of scoped to the single local branch.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: An Internet-only traffic policy chooses an MPLS TLOC after a template update. Here the recorded observation is: all branch routers unexpectedly change behavior after a supposed site-only QoS update. The applicable cause is: the policy was distributed centrally instead of scoped to the single local branch.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: Routes stay unchanged because a drafted policy was never activated or applied to a site list. Here the recorded observation is: all branch routers unexpectedly change behavior after a supposed site-only QoS update. The applicable cause is: the policy was distributed centrally instead of scoped to the single local branch.

That control reduces a separate risk: Transport color classification or policy match does not reflect the physical circuit role. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: the policy was distributed centrally instead of scoped to the single local branch. The specific required safeguard is: verify local-vs-central template/policy scope before activation.

That control reduces a separate risk: The control policy exists but is not active for the relevant control-plane sites. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: the policy was distributed centrally instead of scoped to the single local branch. The specific required safeguard is: verify local-vs-central template/policy scope before activation.

That control reduces a separate risk: NAT mappings and data-plane tunnel reachability fail even though control connections succeeded. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: the policy was distributed centrally instead of scoped to the single local branch. The specific required safeguard is: verify local-vs-central template/policy scope before activation.

Updating or repair LISP endpoint registration and mapping-cache resolution for the new EID-to-RLOC binding would not meet the need for the fabric control-plane node/LISP mapping service for endpoint-to-RLOC lookup rather than flooding every fabric edge.

Using a fabric edge node that applies policy and VXLAN encapsulation for attached endpoint flows would not meet the need for the fabric control-plane node/LISP mapping service for endpoint-to-RLOC lookup rather than flooding every fabric edge.

Placing a properly configured fabric border node at the fabric-to-external routing boundary would not meet the need for the fabric control-plane node/LISP mapping service for endpoint-to-RLOC lookup rather than flooding every fabric edge.

This test measures a different behavior: Inspect endpoint attachment on the edge and VXLAN forwarding toward the selected remote RLOC. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: check the endpoint registration and map resolution to the correct fabric edge RLOC.

This test measures a different behavior: Verify routing exchange between fabric VNs and authorized outside networks at the border. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: check the endpoint registration and map resolution to the correct fabric edge RLOC.

This test measures a different behavior: Check control-plane host-location registration and remote cached location after a move. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: check the endpoint registration and map resolution to the correct fabric edge RLOC.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: Fabric endpoints reach one another but cannot reach the permitted external data center. Here the recorded observation is: an endpoint is reachable on its local edge but remote fabric edges cannot resolve its current location. The applicable cause is: its EID-to-RLOC registration is missing or incorrect in the fabric control plane.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: Remote traffic is bridged out an ordinary trunk rather than encapsulated through the fabric overlay. Here the recorded observation is: an endpoint is reachable on its local edge but remote fabric edges cannot resolve its current location. The applicable cause is: its EID-to-RLOC registration is missing or incorrect in the fabric control plane.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: Interfabric traffic blackholes at the old switch while the endpoint communicates locally on B. Here the recorded observation is: an endpoint is reachable on its local edge but remote fabric edges cannot resolve its current location. The applicable cause is: its EID-to-RLOC registration is missing or incorrect in the fabric control plane.

That control reduces a separate risk: The access switch was not functioning as an SD-Access fabric edge for that VLAN/virtual network. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: its EID-to-RLOC registration is missing or incorrect in the fabric control plane. The specific required safeguard is: monitor endpoint registrations after moves and ensure fabric control-plane redundancy.

That control reduces a separate risk: The host location mapping has not converged to the new edge RLOC. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: its EID-to-RLOC registration is missing or incorrect in the fabric control plane. The specific required safeguard is: monitor endpoint registrations after moves and ensure fabric control-plane redundancy.

That control reduces a separate risk: No viable border handoff/routing policy connects the fabric virtual network to the external domain. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: its EID-to-RLOC registration is missing or incorrect in the fabric control plane. The specific required safeguard is: monitor endpoint registrations after moves and ensure fabric control-plane redundancy.

Updating or repair LISP endpoint registration and mapping-cache resolution for the new EID-to-RLOC binding would not meet the need for a fabric edge node that applies policy and VXLAN encapsulation for attached endpoint flows.

Using resilient Layer 3 underlay adjacencies to carry overlay RLOC reachability between fabric devices would not meet the need for a fabric edge node that applies policy and VXLAN encapsulation for attached endpoint flows.

Using the fabric control-plane node/LISP mapping service for endpoint-to-RLOC lookup rather than flooding every fabric edge would not meet the need for a fabric edge node that applies policy and VXLAN encapsulation for attached endpoint flows.

This test measures a different behavior: Check IPv4 routing neighbors and ECMP toward remote fabric RLOC addresses. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: inspect endpoint attachment on the edge and VXLAN forwarding toward the selected remote RLOC.

This test measures a different behavior: Check the endpoint registration and map resolution to the correct fabric edge RLOC. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: inspect endpoint attachment on the edge and VXLAN forwarding toward the selected remote RLOC.

This test measures a different behavior: Check control-plane host-location registration and remote cached location after a move. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: inspect endpoint attachment on the edge and VXLAN forwarding toward the selected remote RLOC.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: VXLAN packets are dropped because the remote RLOC is absent from the underlay RIB. Here the recorded observation is: remote traffic is bridged out an ordinary trunk rather than encapsulated through the fabric overlay. The applicable cause is: the access switch was not functioning as an SD-Access fabric edge for that VLAN/virtual network.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: An endpoint is reachable on its local edge but remote fabric edges cannot resolve its current location. Here the recorded observation is: remote traffic is bridged out an ordinary trunk rather than encapsulated through the fabric overlay. The applicable cause is: the access switch was not functioning as an SD-Access fabric edge for that VLAN/virtual network.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: Interfabric traffic blackholes at the old switch while the endpoint communicates locally on B. Here the recorded observation is: remote traffic is bridged out an ordinary trunk rather than encapsulated through the fabric overlay. The applicable cause is: the access switch was not functioning as an SD-Access fabric edge for that VLAN/virtual network.

That control reduces a separate risk: The host location mapping has not converged to the new edge RLOC. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: the access switch was not functioning as an SD-Access fabric edge for that VLAN/virtual network. The specific required safeguard is: validate edge onboarding, VN assignments and overlay reachability in fabric provisioning.

That control reduces a separate risk: The device lacks routed underlay reachability rather than an end-user VLAN trunk. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: the access switch was not functioning as an SD-Access fabric edge for that VLAN/virtual network. The specific required safeguard is: validate edge onboarding, VN assignments and overlay reachability in fabric provisioning.

That control reduces a separate risk: Its EID-to-RLOC registration is missing or incorrect in the fabric control plane. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: the access switch was not functioning as an SD-Access fabric edge for that VLAN/virtual network. The specific required safeguard is: validate edge onboarding, VN assignments and overlay reachability in fabric provisioning.