Pass the Cisco CCNP Enterprise 300-420 Questions and answers with Dumpstech

An on-change telemetry subscription is the best solution when the team needs device state data while limiting impact on the device. With periodic telemetry, the device sends subscribed data at a configured interval regardless of whether the value has changed. For state such as shared memory utilization, aggressive periodic polling or streaming can create unnecessary CPU, memory, and bandwidth overhead, especially at scale. On-change telemetry sends an update only when the subscribed data changes, or when a relevant event occurs according to the model and platform behavior. This reduces needless data transmission while still providing timely visibility into meaningful state changes. IPFIX is designed for flow information and traffic accounting rather than detailed device state telemetry. Static telemetry is not the best characterization of the efficient event-driven behavior required here. A periodic subscription can provide the data, but it continuously streams updates and therefore has greater device and collector impact. Cisco model-driven telemetry design favors on-change subscriptions when the operational requirement is state awareness with minimal repeated polling.

Implementing network summarization on the edge routers is the correct EIGRP design action to reduce query range and improve convergence. In EIGRP, when a route is lost and no feasible successor exists, DUAL sends queries to neighbors. If the network is large or poorly summarized, those queries can propagate widely and increase convergence time. Hierarchical addressing allows each office or edge block to advertise a summary instead of many specific prefixes. If a specific subnet inside an office fails, the summary can remain stable toward the rest of the network, preventing the failure from triggering unnecessary queries across the dark-fiber interoffice topology. Stub routing can also reduce query scope, but the option says to configure stub areas on non-edge routers, which is not the right EIGRP terminology or placement. Different EIGRP processes add redistribution complexity, and route filtering alone does not provide the same clean convergence boundary as summarization. Reference topics: EIGRP summarization, DUAL query scope, hierarchical addressing, convergence optimization, dark-fiber campus routing.

The design should combine IP SLA with Enhanced Object Tracking on router R1. HSRP by itself tracks the health of the local interface and peer state, but it may not detect a remote WAN failure beyond the directly connected segment. IP SLA can actively probe a target through WAN 1, such as an upstream next hop or reachable service address. Enhanced Object Tracking then tracks the IP SLA result and adjusts the HSRP priority when the probe fails. If R1 loses WAN 1 reachability, its HSRP priority is decremented, allowing R2 to become the active default gateway. A floating static route can provide routing backup, but it does not directly trigger HSRP state change for gateway failover. Policy-based routing and IP source routing are not appropriate high-availability mechanisms for this requirement. The correct design pattern is therefore IP SLA plus object tracking integrated with HSRP. The architect should set preemption, decrement values, timers, and tracked destinations carefully to avoid false failovers during transient loss. Reference topics: HSRP, IP SLA, Enhanced Object Tracking, first-hop redundancy, WAN failure detection.

MSDP is the correct feature when multicast receivers in one autonomous system must be able to learn and receive content from sources in another autonomous system. The scenario describes separate multicast frameworks close to the receivers in each AS and requires source resiliency across AS boundaries. In PIM Sparse Mode, a local RP learns about sources registered in its own domain. MSDP allows RPs in different domains to exchange Source-Active information, enabling receivers in one domain to discover and join toward sources that exist in another domain. Anycast RP is primarily a redundancy and load-sharing technique for RPs, often inside a multicast domain, but it does not by itself provide interdomain source discovery for independent ASs. SSM can be efficient when receivers know the source, but the question emphasizes RP-based framework placement and source availability between ASs. BIDIR-PIM is for scalable many-to-many shared-tree forwarding, not interdomain source discovery. Therefore, the design should include MSDP. Reference topics: MSDP, interdomain multicast, PIM-SM, Source-Active exchange, RP resilience across autonomous systems.

The drag-and-drop mapping separates WAN connectivity technologies by the service characteristics they deliver. Cisco enterprise WAN designs distinguish private WAN options, such as MPLS Layer 3 VPN, Ethernet WAN, VPLS, and VPWS, from Internet-based options such as broadband, LTE, and VPN overlays. Layer 3 MPLS VPN gives the provider responsibility for routing between customer sites and is commonly used when private any-to-any routing, QoS treatment, and segmentation are required. Layer 2 services such as VPWS and VPLS extend customer Layer 2 adjacency across a provider network; VPWS is point-to-point, while VPLS is multipoint. Internet and cellular links are typically lower-cost and fast to deploy, but they require overlay security, such as IPsec, DMVPN, or SD-WAN encryption, when used for enterprise private traffic. The selected mapping therefore aligns each description with the WAN category that actually provides that behavior. In design work, the architect must compare latency, resiliency, SLA, QoS preservation, encryption requirements, routing control, and operational ownership before selecting the WAN type. Reference topics: enterprise WAN connectivity, MPLS VPN, VPLS, VPWS, Internet VPN, cellular backup.

Bidirectional PIM is the multicast protocol mode designed for many-to-many applications where many receivers may also act as sources. In traditional PIM Sparse Mode, multicast forwarding can use shared trees through an RP and source-specific shortest-path trees. As the number of sources grows, maintaining source-specific state can increase routing table and control-plane scale requirements. BIDIR-PIM avoids source trees by using a shared bidirectional tree rooted at the rendezvous point address. Traffic from sources and traffic toward receivers uses the shared tree, which allows the multicast group to scale to a large number of sources without creating per-source state in the network. This aligns directly with the requirement that most multicast sources also receive multicast traffic and that source trees must not be used. PIM-SSM explicitly uses source-specific forwarding and requires receivers to know the source. PIM-SM may switch to source trees depending on behavior and policy. MSDP is used to exchange source information between PIM-SM domains, not to replace source trees inside one domain. Therefore, BIDIR-PIM is the correct design choice.

A routed access topology is the underlay design that removes the normal need for first-hop redundancy protocols. In a traditional Layer 2 access design, end hosts usually rely on HSRP, VRRP, or GLBP at the distribution layer because the default gateway is shared across redundant distribution switches. In a routed access design, the Layer 3 boundary is pushed down to the access layer. The access switch routes toward the distribution layer using point-to-point routed links, so uplink failures are handled by the routing protocol instead of spanning tree and first-hop redundancy. Cisco campus design guidance highlights routed access as a way to improve convergence, avoid Layer 2 loop exposure across uplinks, and simplify resiliency by using equal-cost routed paths. Virtualized topology is too broad and does not inherently remove FHRP. A Layer 2 topology normally increases dependence on STP and gateway redundancy. A logical fabric topology is not the generic underlay topology described by the question. The correct choice is therefore routed access. Reference topics: routed access campus, Layer 3 access, FHRP elimination, routed underlay resiliency.

The valid EIGRP stub options listed are receive-only and summary. Cisco EIGRP stub routing lets a remote or spoke router advertise only selected route types to upstream neighbors, which reduces query scope and improves stability in hub-and-spoke designs. The summary option permits the stub router to advertise summary routes. The receive-only option makes the router receive routes but not advertise routes, which is useful when the device should not be considered a transit or route source. “External” is also a real EIGRP stub keyword in Cisco IOS, but in this specific option set the verified pair expected by the question is receive-only and summary. “Summary-only” is not the correct EIGRP stub keyword. “Totally-stubby” and “not-so-stubby” are OSPF area concepts, not EIGRP stub router options. In design terms, EIGRP stub routing is used to prevent unnecessary queries from being sent toward routers that cannot provide alternate paths. This is especially important for low-resource branch routers and DMVPN spokes, where limiting control-plane workload directly improves convergence behavior.

A policy-based IPsec tunnel with static routing is the simplest secure design for connecting two hosts in two companies when no additional future connectivity is planned. The requirement is narrow: one host in Company A must communicate with one host in Company B over a single encrypted Internet connection. Policy-based IPsec is straightforward for this type of point-to-point encryption because crypto ACLs define exactly which interesting traffic should be protected. Static routing is sufficient because there is no complex topology, no dynamic path selection requirement, and no anticipated expansion. A DMVPN design would add unnecessary NHRP, multipoint GRE, and dynamic routing complexity. A routed IPsec tunnel with OSPF is useful when many networks or dynamic route changes are expected, but it is more complex than needed. MPLS VPN with BGP would require provider service and does not meet the simple encrypted Internet connection requirement. Reference topics: site-to-site IPsec, policy-based VPN, static routing, point-to-point secure connectivity, WAN simplicity.

PIM Source-Specific Multicast is the correct multicast protocol when receivers can subscribe to traffic from known sources and the design must avoid rendezvous points. SSM uses the (S,G) model, where receivers explicitly join a multicast group from a specific source. Because the source is known at join time, the network does not need a shared tree or RP discovery process. This makes SSM attractive for broadcast-style streaming applications, such as video channels, where each stream source is known and receivers subscribe to specific channels. PIM Sparse Mode and Any-Source Multicast use an RP to allow receivers to discover active sources, so they do not meet the requirement of no rendezvous point. BIDIR-PIM also relies on an RP-rooted shared tree and is optimized for many-to-many applications rather than source-specific broadcast channels. For a large cable TV provider streaming multiple video channels from defined sources, SSM simplifies the multicast control plane, eliminates RP dependency, and scales efficiently by creating only the source-specific state required by active receivers.