Pass Your Cisco 350-401 Exam Easy!

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: An unauthorized switch negotiates a trunk and carries unintended tagged traffic from an endpoint port. Here the recorded observation is: the link remains an access link despite both sides being enabled for dynamic trunking. The applicable cause is: both sides are passive in DTP dynamic auto; neither proposes trunking to the other.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: VLAN10 and VLAN20 traverse the link but hosts in VLAN30 cannot reach their remote gateway. Here the recorded observation is: the link remains an access link despite both sides being enabled for dynamic trunking. The applicable cause is: both sides are passive in DTP dynamic auto; neither proposes trunking to the other.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: One side reports trunking while the peer forwards frames as an access port. Here the recorded observation is: the link remains an access link despite both sides being enabled for dynamic trunking. The applicable cause is: both sides are passive in DTP dynamic auto; neither proposes trunking to the other.

That control reduces a separate risk: The trunk ends disagree on native VLAN, causing untagged frame classification mismatch. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: both sides are passive in DTP dynamic auto; neither proposes trunking to the other. The specific required safeguard is: document which side actively negotiates DTP and never depend on auto/auto passive negotiation for a required dynamic trunk.

That control reduces a separate risk: Dynamic trunk negotiation was left enabled on a workstation-facing interface. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: both sides are passive in DTP dynamic auto; neither proposes trunking to the other. The specific required safeguard is: document which side actively negotiates DTP and never depend on auto/auto passive negotiation for a required dynamic trunk.

That control reduces a separate risk: The switchport modes are incompatible for the intended 802.1Q trunk. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: both sides are passive in DTP dynamic auto; neither proposes trunking to the other. The specific required safeguard is: document which side actively negotiates DTP and never depend on auto/auto passive negotiation for a required dynamic trunk.

Configuring the port as a static access port in the intended VLAN and disable DTP negotiation where supported would not activate and verify the VLAN in the local VLAN database after ensuring it is approved on the trunk.

Adding VLAN30 to the correct trunk allowed list on the relevant link while retaining approved existing VLANs would not activate and verify the VLAN in the local VLAN database after ensuring it is approved on the trunk.

Setting the same authorized native VLAN on both ends of the trunk and avoid carrying unrelated user traffic untagged would not activate and verify the VLAN in the local VLAN database after ensuring it is approved on the trunk.

This test measures a different behavior: Compare native VLAN outputs and native-VLAN mismatch log messages after a controlled fix. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: compare allowed, active and STP-forwarding VLAN sets in `show interfaces trunk` output.

This test measures a different behavior: Verify the operational mode remains access when a test device sends DTP frames. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: compare allowed, active and STP-forwarding VLAN sets in `show interfaces trunk` output.

This test measures a different behavior: Check `show interfaces trunk` permits VLAN30 at both ends and test VLAN30 end-to-end. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: compare allowed, active and STP-forwarding VLAN sets in `show interfaces trunk` output.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: Frames from untagged VLAN99 are placed into the wrong VLAN by the neighbor. Here the recorded observation is: the VLAN appears in the allowed list but not in the active VLAN set. The applicable cause is: an inactive or missing VLAN in the switch VLAN database prevents forwarding on the trunk.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: VLAN10 and VLAN20 traverse the link but hosts in VLAN30 cannot reach their remote gateway. Here the recorded observation is: the VLAN appears in the allowed list but not in the active VLAN set. The applicable cause is: an inactive or missing VLAN in the switch VLAN database prevents forwarding on the trunk.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: An unauthorized switch negotiates a trunk and carries unintended tagged traffic from an endpoint port. Here the recorded observation is: the VLAN appears in the allowed list but not in the active VLAN set. The applicable cause is: an inactive or missing VLAN in the switch VLAN database prevents forwarding on the trunk.

That control reduces a separate risk: The trunk ends disagree on native VLAN, causing untagged frame classification mismatch. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: an inactive or missing VLAN in the switch VLAN database prevents forwarding on the trunk. The specific required safeguard is: reconcile permitted trunk VLANs with active VLAN creation and STP state.

That control reduces a separate risk: The trunk allowed VLAN filter omits VLAN30 despite the VLAN existing on both switches. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: an inactive or missing VLAN in the switch VLAN database prevents forwarding on the trunk. The specific required safeguard is: reconcile permitted trunk VLANs with active VLAN creation and STP state.

That control reduces a separate risk: Dynamic trunk negotiation was left enabled on a workstation-facing interface. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: an inactive or missing VLAN in the switch VLAN database prevents forwarding on the trunk. The specific required safeguard is: reconcile permitted trunk VLANs with active VLAN creation and STP state.

Setting the same authorized native VLAN on both ends of the trunk and avoid carrying unrelated user traffic untagged would not configure the port as a static access port in the intended VLAN and disable DTP negotiation where supported.

Setting a compatible explicit trunking mode on the intended switch-to-switch link and using correct VLAN/tagging settings would not configure the port as a static access port in the intended VLAN and disable DTP negotiation where supported.

The needed correction is to configure the port as a static access port in the intended VLAN and disable DTP negotiation where supported.

This test measures a different behavior: Inspect DTP negotiation counters and confirm the operational mode becomes trunk while the opposite port remains dynamic auto. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: verify the operational mode remains access when a test device sends DTP frames.

This test measures a different behavior: Verify operational trunk state and negotiated mode on both interfaces. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: verify the operational mode remains access when a test device sends DTP frames.

This test measures a different behavior: Compare allowed, active and STP-forwarding VLAN sets in `show interfaces trunk` output. It does not establish the target outcome. For the documented fault, the direct acceptance test is: verify the operational mode remains access when a test device sends DTP frames.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: The link remains an access link despite both sides being enabled for dynamic trunking. Here the recorded observation is: an unauthorized switch negotiates a trunk and carries unintended tagged traffic from an endpoint port. The applicable cause is: dynamic trunk negotiation was left enabled on a workstation-facing interface.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: One side reports trunking while the peer forwards frames as an access port. Here the recorded observation is: an unauthorized switch negotiates a trunk and carries unintended tagged traffic from an endpoint port. The applicable cause is: dynamic trunk negotiation was left enabled on a workstation-facing interface.

That diagnosis is supported by a different symptom: The VLAN appears in the allowed list but not in the active VLAN set. Here the recorded observation is: an unauthorized switch negotiates a trunk and carries unintended tagged traffic from an endpoint port. The applicable cause is: dynamic trunk negotiation was left enabled on a workstation-facing interface.

That control reduces a separate risk: Both sides are passive in DTP dynamic auto; neither proposes trunking to the other. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: dynamic trunk negotiation was left enabled on a workstation-facing interface. The specific required safeguard is: enforce port-role templates and audit DTP state when users repatch endpoints.

That control reduces a separate risk: An inactive or missing VLAN in the switch VLAN database prevents forwarding on the trunk. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: dynamic trunk negotiation was left enabled on a workstation-facing interface. The specific required safeguard is: enforce port-role templates and audit DTP state when users repatch endpoints.

That control reduces a separate risk: The switchport modes are incompatible for the intended 802.1Q trunk. For the described design, the recurring risk arises from: dynamic trunk negotiation was left enabled on a workstation-facing interface. The specific required safeguard is: enforce port-role templates and audit DTP state when users repatch endpoints.

Configuring compatible EtherChannel negotiation protocol and modes at both peers rather than mixing LACP and PAgP would not retain at least one LACP active participant and match the channel group parameters and port attributes.

Making physical member switchport settings consistent with the port-channel configuration would not retain at least one LACP active participant and match the channel group parameters and port attributes.

Using a supported port-channel with acceptable minimum-link requirements for the intended redundancy policy would not retain at least one LACP active participant and match the channel group parameters and port attributes.