Pass Your Cisco 350-501 Exam Easy!

This concern applies to Y.1731 Ethernet delay measurement in a different scenario where operators need to measure frame delay and loss across a provisioned Ethernet service. For the deployed 802.1ad Q-in-Q tag separation approach, the relevant caution is instead that link MTU must allow the additional Ethernet tag bytes.

This concern applies to VRF customer routing isolation in a different scenario where operators need to prevent two subscribers with overlapping private addresses from mixing their forwarding routes. For the deployed 802.1ad Q-in-Q tag separation approach, the relevant caution is instead that link MTU must allow the additional Ethernet tag bytes.

This concern applies to MPLS L3VPN label stack in a different scenario where operators need to carry a VPN packet through a core that does not hold customer routes. For the deployed 802.1ad Q-in-Q tag separation approach, the relevant caution is instead that link MTU must allow the additional Ethernet tag bytes.

802.1ad Q-in-Q tag separation instead addresses a different condition: carry duplicate customer VLAN IDs from multiple subscribers over a provider Ethernet access network. It would instead require you to push a provider service VLAN tag while preserving each customer's C-tag, not the stated goal to reduce provider core visibility into customer MAC addresses for a large Ethernet service.

PIM-SSM source-specific join instead addresses a different condition: let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. It would instead require you to use SSM with source-aware membership such as IGMPv3 on supported receivers, not the stated goal to reduce provider core visibility into customer MAC addresses for a large Ethernet service.

controlled Internet breakout instead addresses a different condition: provide Internet access for an L3VPN tenant without leaking private customer prefixes. It would instead require you to place an explicit default-route or shared-services handoff inside the authorized VPN routing design, not the stated goal to reduce provider core visibility into customer MAC addresses for a large Ethernet service.

The proposed step is for 802.1ad Q-in-Q tag separation, whose purpose is to carry duplicate customer VLAN IDs from multiple subscribers over a provider Ethernet access network. It would not perform the necessary 802.1ah provider backbone bridging operation: apply PBB service encapsulation with backbone MAC and service identifiers where supported.

The proposed step is for PIM-SSM source-specific join, whose purpose is to let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. It would not perform the necessary 802.1ah provider backbone bridging operation: apply PBB service encapsulation with backbone MAC and service identifiers where supported.

The proposed step is for controlled Internet breakout, whose purpose is to provide Internet access for an L3VPN tenant without leaking private customer prefixes. It would not perform the necessary 802.1ah provider backbone bridging operation: apply PBB service encapsulation with backbone MAC and service identifiers where supported.

The observation would verify 802.1ad Q-in-Q tag separation under the separate requirement to carry duplicate customer VLAN IDs from multiple subscribers over a provider Ethernet access network. It does not demonstrate the needed 802.1ah provider backbone bridging result: the core switches backbone encapsulation while customer identities stay at the edge.

The observation would verify PIM-SSM source-specific join under the separate requirement to let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. It does not demonstrate the needed 802.1ah provider backbone bridging result: the core switches backbone encapsulation while customer identities stay at the edge.

The observation would verify controlled Internet breakout under the separate requirement to provide Internet access for an L3VPN tenant without leaking private customer prefixes. It does not demonstrate the needed 802.1ah provider backbone bridging result: the core switches backbone encapsulation while customer identities stay at the edge.

This defect belongs to 802.1ad Q-in-Q tag separation, where the affected outcome is to carry duplicate customer VLAN IDs from multiple subscribers over a provider Ethernet access network. It is not the direct failure mode identified for the 802.1ah provider backbone bridging design in this case: the provider core learns every subscriber MAC despite planned PBB isolation.

This defect belongs to PIM-SSM source-specific join, where the affected outcome is to let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. It is not the direct failure mode identified for the 802.1ah provider backbone bridging design in this case: the provider core learns every subscriber MAC despite planned PBB isolation.

This defect belongs to controlled Internet breakout, where the affected outcome is to provide Internet access for an L3VPN tenant without leaking private customer prefixes. It is not the direct failure mode identified for the 802.1ah provider backbone bridging design in this case: the provider core learns every subscriber MAC despite planned PBB isolation.

This concern applies to 802.1ad Q-in-Q tag separation in a different scenario where operators need to carry duplicate customer VLAN IDs from multiple subscribers over a provider Ethernet access network. For the deployed 802.1ah provider backbone bridging approach, the relevant caution is instead that edge encapsulation points and service ID mapping require consistent configuration.

This concern applies to PIM-SSM source-specific join in a different scenario where operators need to let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. For the deployed 802.1ah provider backbone bridging approach, the relevant caution is instead that edge encapsulation points and service ID mapping require consistent configuration.

This concern applies to controlled Internet breakout in a different scenario where operators need to provide Internet access for an L3VPN tenant without leaking private customer prefixes. For the deployed 802.1ah provider backbone bridging approach, the relevant caution is instead that edge encapsulation points and service ID mapping require consistent configuration.

VLAN tag pop at handoff instead addresses a different condition: deliver untagged Ethernet to a customer while transporting a provider service tag. It would instead require you to apply an explicit VLAN tag rewrite pop operation at the intended EFP boundary, not the stated goal to protect a Carrier Ethernet ring from forwarding loops during normal operation.

PIM-SSM source-specific join instead addresses a different condition: let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. It would instead require you to use SSM with source-aware membership such as IGMPv3 on supported receivers, not the stated goal to protect a Carrier Ethernet ring from forwarding loops during normal operation.

traffic shaping smoothing instead addresses a different condition: smooth an egress stream to a slower contracted handoff rather than dropping every burst. It would instead require you to configure class-based shaping with an appropriate target rate, not the stated goal to protect a Carrier Ethernet ring from forwarding loops during normal operation.

The proposed step is for VLAN tag pop at handoff, whose purpose is to deliver untagged Ethernet to a customer while transporting a provider service tag. It would not perform the necessary G.8032 Ethernet ring protection operation: configure Ethernet ring protection with its ring protection link behavior.

The proposed step is for PIM-SSM source-specific join, whose purpose is to let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. It would not perform the necessary G.8032 Ethernet ring protection operation: configure Ethernet ring protection with its ring protection link behavior.

The proposed step is for traffic shaping smoothing, whose purpose is to smooth an egress stream to a slower contracted handoff rather than dropping every burst. It would not perform the necessary G.8032 Ethernet ring protection operation: configure Ethernet ring protection with its ring protection link behavior.

The observation would verify VLAN tag pop at handoff under the separate requirement to deliver untagged Ethernet to a customer while transporting a provider service tag. It does not demonstrate the needed G.8032 Ethernet ring protection result: one designated ring section is blocked in steady state and opens for a failure.

The observation would verify PIM-SSM source-specific join under the separate requirement to let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. It does not demonstrate the needed G.8032 Ethernet ring protection result: one designated ring section is blocked in steady state and opens for a failure.

The observation would verify traffic shaping smoothing under the separate requirement to smooth an egress stream to a slower contracted handoff rather than dropping every burst. It does not demonstrate the needed G.8032 Ethernet ring protection result: one designated ring section is blocked in steady state and opens for a failure.

This defect belongs to VLAN tag pop at handoff, where the affected outcome is to deliver untagged Ethernet to a customer while transporting a provider service tag. It is not the direct failure mode identified for the G.8032 Ethernet ring protection design in this case: all ring links forward at once and create an Ethernet broadcast loop.

This defect belongs to PIM-SSM source-specific join, where the affected outcome is to let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. It is not the direct failure mode identified for the G.8032 Ethernet ring protection design in this case: all ring links forward at once and create an Ethernet broadcast loop.

This defect belongs to traffic shaping smoothing, where the affected outcome is to smooth an egress stream to a slower contracted handoff rather than dropping every burst. It is not the direct failure mode identified for the G.8032 Ethernet ring protection design in this case: all ring links forward at once and create an Ethernet broadcast loop.

This concern applies to VLAN tag pop at handoff in a different scenario where operators need to deliver untagged Ethernet to a customer while transporting a provider service tag. For the deployed G.8032 Ethernet ring protection approach, the relevant caution is instead that ring protection timers determine switchover and transient disruption.

This concern applies to PIM-SSM source-specific join in a different scenario where operators need to let subscribers request an explicitly selected multicast source and group pair. For the deployed G.8032 Ethernet ring protection approach, the relevant caution is instead that ring protection timers determine switchover and transient disruption.

This concern applies to traffic shaping smoothing in a different scenario where operators need to smooth an egress stream to a slower contracted handoff rather than dropping every burst. For the deployed G.8032 Ethernet ring protection approach, the relevant caution is instead that ring protection timers determine switchover and transient disruption.