McAfee-Secured Website

Exam Bundle

Exam Code: HPE7-A01

Exam Name HPE Network Campus Access Professional

Certification Provider: HP

Corresponding Certification: HPE Aruba Networking Certified Professional - Campus Access

HP HPE7-A01 Bundle $19.99
HPE7-A01 Sample 1 HPE7-A01 Sample 2 HPE7-A01 Sample 3 HPE7-A01 Sample 4 HPE7-A01 Sample 5 HPE7-A01 Sample 6 HPE7-A01 Sample 7 HPE7-A01 Sample 8 HPE7-A01 Sample 9 HPE7-A01 Sample 10

100% HP HPE7-A01 Guaranteed Success With Testking Training Materials

Get Real HPE7-A01 Exam Questions & Expert Verified Answers as Experienced on the Real Exam!

  • Questions & Answers

    HPE7-A01 Questions & Answers

    161 Questions & Answers

    The ultimate exam preparation tool, Questions & Answers mirrors the actual HPE7-A01 exam while allowing you to hone and measure every aspect of your test-taking ability.

  • Study Guide

    HPE7-A01 Study Guide

    1264 PDF Pages

    Developed by industry experts, this 1264-page guide spells out in painstaking detail all of the information you need to ace HPE7-A01 exam.

HPE Network Campus Access Professional (HPE7-A01) Practice Tests

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Money Back Guarantee

Testking provides hassle-free money back guarantee with our products. That is because we have 100% trust in the abilities of our professional and experience product team, and our record is a proof of that.

99.6% PASS RATE
Total Cost: $154.98
Bundle Price: $134.99

Purchase Individually

  • Questions & Answers

    Questions & Answers

    161 Questions

    $124.99
  • Study Guide

    Study Guide

    1264 PDF Pages

    $29.99

HP HPE7-A01 Practice Test 55

Question 540

At a regional hospital campus in Richmond, engineers report that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces. The work affects clinical scheduling and bedside devices. What evidence should the engineer request after the repair?

  1. The intended destination resolves through the authorized next hop and no unwanted default-route black hole remains
  2. The expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table
  3. Each VRF resolves only its authorized prefixes, with controlled tests proving isolation and allowed shared services
  4. The BGP session establishes and only the intended network prefixes appear with accepted next hops

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This observation tests the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states requirement at a regional hospital campus in Richmond. The expected result is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table. The necessary correction is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes; a saved configuration alone would not prove it is working. In this case, the observed fault is that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces.

Incorrect Answers

A:

At a regional hospital campus in Richmond, the observation may be useful for a separate Static/default route and route preference test, but it does not establish that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces has been resolved. The relevant check is the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states outcome.

C:

At a regional hospital campus in Richmond, this would verify VRF segmentation and routing isolation, not the failure reported in this scenario. The requested closure criterion instead concerns OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states: the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

D:

At a regional hospital campus in Richmond, the observation may be useful for a separate BGP peer state and AS compatibility test, but it does not establish that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces has been resolved. The relevant check is the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states outcome.

Question 541

During a planned campus-network change at a hotel campus in Vancouver, operators discover that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces. The design must preserve guest access and property operations. Which change most directly addresses the stated failure?

  1. Use explicit route filters or redistribution policy so only authorized prefixes cross routing-domain boundaries
  2. Align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes
  3. Assign routed interfaces and routes to their intended VRFs and use only explicitly approved cross-VRF connectivity
  4. Install the correct destination prefix and reachable next hop, then validate route preference before expecting application reachability

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The crucial symptom at a hotel campus in Vancouver is that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces. The best response is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes. Confirm success by checking that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Incorrect Answers

A:

At a hotel campus in Vancouver, that change is aimed at Dynamic route filtering and redistribution, not at the actual fault: the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces. A successful repair here must show that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

C:

At a hotel campus in Vancouver, the option addresses VRF segmentation and routing isolation rather than the reported issue. For the stated symptom, the expected evidence is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

D:

At a hotel campus in Vancouver, that change is aimed at Static/default route and route preference, not at the actual fault: the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces. A successful repair here must show that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Question 542

During a planned campus-network change at a hotel campus in Vancouver, operators discover that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces. The design must preserve guest access and property operations. Which post-change observation is the strongest acceptance evidence?

  1. The intended destination resolves through the authorized next hop and no unwanted default-route black hole remains
  2. The expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table
  3. The selected OSPF path reflects approved cost policy and a controlled link failure converges to the intended backup
  4. Each VRF resolves only its authorized prefixes, with controlled tests proving isolation and allowed shared services

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This observation tests the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states requirement at a hotel campus in Vancouver. The expected result is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table. The necessary correction is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes; a saved configuration alone would not prove it is working. In this case, the observed fault is that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces.

Incorrect Answers

A:

At a hotel campus in Vancouver, the observation may be useful for a separate Static/default route and route preference test, but it does not establish that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces has been resolved. The relevant check is the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states outcome.

C:

At a hotel campus in Vancouver, this would verify OSPF path metric and convergence, not the failure reported in this scenario. The requested closure criterion instead concerns OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states: the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

D:

At a hotel campus in Vancouver, the observation may be useful for a separate VRF segmentation and routing isolation test, but it does not establish that the new routed VLAN is omitted from the switch's OSPF-enabled interfaces has been resolved. The relevant check is the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states outcome.

Question 543

At a manufacturing complex in Detroit, engineers report that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings. The work affects production and maintenance endpoints. Which implementation choice meets this requirement without broadening access?

  1. Verify OSPF costs and advertised prefix reachability on the intended paths, then tune metric or failover requirements
  2. Configure DHCP relay on the correct routed client VLAN interface toward the authorized server and verify return-path reachability
  3. Install the correct destination prefix and reachable next hop, then validate route preference before expecting application reachability
  4. Align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

The crucial symptom at a manufacturing complex in Detroit is that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings. The best response is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes. Confirm success by checking that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Although this is a valid design approach for OSPF path metric and convergence in an appropriate case, it leaves the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states dependency untested. The observed condition at a manufacturing complex in Detroit is that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings.

B:

At a manufacturing complex in Detroit, the option addresses DHCP relay and inter-subnet services rather than the reported issue. For the stated symptom, the expected evidence is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

C:

At a manufacturing complex in Detroit, that change is aimed at Static/default route and route preference, not at the actual fault: an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings. A successful repair here must show that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Question 544

At a manufacturing complex in Detroit, engineers report that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings. The work affects production and maintenance endpoints. Which test result most directly confirms the required behavior?

  1. The expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table
  2. Each VRF resolves only its authorized prefixes, with controlled tests proving isolation and allowed shared services
  3. Neighbor route tables contain approved routes and do not receive protected management or unrelated tenant prefixes
  4. The selected OSPF path reflects approved cost policy and a controlled link failure converges to the intended backup

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This observation tests the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states requirement at a manufacturing complex in Detroit. The expected result is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table. The necessary correction is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes; a saved configuration alone would not prove it is working. In this case, the observed fault is that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings.

Incorrect Answers

B:

At a manufacturing complex in Detroit, this would verify VRF segmentation and routing isolation, not the failure reported in this scenario. The requested closure criterion instead concerns OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states: the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

C:

At a manufacturing complex in Detroit, the observation may be useful for a separate Dynamic route filtering and redistribution test, but it does not establish that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings has been resolved. The relevant check is the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states outcome.

D:

At a manufacturing complex in Detroit, this measures a different network requirement, OSPF path metric and convergence. The case describes that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings, so accepting this result would leave the primary fault without direct verification.

Question 545

During a planned campus-network change at a public safety training center in Oslo, operators discover that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings. The design must preserve learning simulations and voice services. What configuration or diagnostic step is the best next move?

  1. Configure DHCP relay on the correct routed client VLAN interface toward the authorized server and verify return-path reachability
  2. Align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes
  3. Assign routed interfaces and routes to their intended VRFs and use only explicitly approved cross-VRF connectivity
  4. Verify OSPF costs and advertised prefix reachability on the intended paths, then tune metric or failover requirements

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The crucial symptom at a public safety training center in Oslo is that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings. The best response is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes. Confirm success by checking that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Incorrect Answers

A:

Although this is a valid design approach for DHCP relay and inter-subnet services in an appropriate case, it leaves the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states dependency untested. The observed condition at a public safety training center in Oslo is that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings.

C:

At a public safety training center in Oslo, that change is aimed at VRF segmentation and routing isolation, not at the actual fault: an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings. A successful repair here must show that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

D:

Although this is a valid design approach for OSPF path metric and convergence in an appropriate case, it leaves the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states dependency untested. The observed condition at a public safety training center in Oslo is that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings.

Question 546

During a planned campus-network change at a public safety training center in Oslo, operators discover that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings. The design must preserve learning simulations and voice services. What evidence should the engineer request after the repair?

  1. The expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table
  2. Each VRF resolves only its authorized prefixes, with controlled tests proving isolation and allowed shared services
  3. The intended destination resolves through the authorized next hop and no unwanted default-route black hole remains
  4. DHCP broadcasts reach the approved remote server through relay and clients receive valid leases with their intended options

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This observation tests the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states requirement at a public safety training center in Oslo. The expected result is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table. The necessary correction is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes; a saved configuration alone would not prove it is working. In this case, the observed fault is that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings.

Incorrect Answers

B:

At a public safety training center in Oslo, this would verify VRF segmentation and routing isolation, not the failure reported in this scenario. The requested closure criterion instead concerns OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states: the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

C:

At a public safety training center in Oslo, the observation may be useful for a separate Static/default route and route preference test, but it does not establish that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings has been resolved. The relevant check is the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states outcome.

D:

At a public safety training center in Oslo, this measures a different network requirement, DHCP relay and inter-subnet services. The case describes that an OSPF adjacency remains absent because the two sides use incompatible authentication settings, so accepting this result would leave the primary fault without direct verification.

Question 547

At a design studio in Berlin, engineers report that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers. The work affects wireless workstations and video conferences. Which change most directly addresses the stated failure?

  1. Configure DHCP relay on the correct routed client VLAN interface toward the authorized server and verify return-path reachability
  2. Assign routed interfaces and routes to their intended VRFs and use only explicitly approved cross-VRF connectivity
  3. Align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes
  4. Use explicit route filters or redistribution policy so only authorized prefixes cross routing-domain boundaries

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

The crucial symptom at a design studio in Berlin is that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers. The best response is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes. Confirm success by checking that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Incorrect Answers

A:

At a design studio in Berlin, the option addresses DHCP relay and inter-subnet services rather than the reported issue. For the stated symptom, the expected evidence is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

B:

At a design studio in Berlin, that change is aimed at VRF segmentation and routing isolation, not at the actual fault: the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers. A successful repair here must show that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

D:

At a design studio in Berlin, the option addresses Dynamic route filtering and redistribution rather than the reported issue. For the stated symptom, the expected evidence is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Question 548

At a design studio in Berlin, engineers report that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers. The work affects wireless workstations and video conferences. Which post-change observation is the strongest acceptance evidence?

  1. The BGP session establishes and only the intended network prefixes appear with accepted next hops
  2. DHCP broadcasts reach the approved remote server through relay and clients receive valid leases with their intended options
  3. The expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table
  4. The intended destination resolves through the authorized next hop and no unwanted default-route black hole remains

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

This observation tests the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states requirement at a design studio in Berlin. The expected result is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table. The necessary correction is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes; a saved configuration alone would not prove it is working. In this case, the observed fault is that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers.

Incorrect Answers

A:

At a design studio in Berlin, this would verify BGP peer state and AS compatibility, not the failure reported in this scenario. The requested closure criterion instead concerns OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states: the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

B:

At a design studio in Berlin, the observation may be useful for a separate DHCP relay and inter-subnet services test, but it does not establish that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers has been resolved. The relevant check is the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states outcome.

D:

At a design studio in Berlin, this would verify Static/default route and route preference, not the failure reported in this scenario. The requested closure criterion instead concerns OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states: the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Question 549

During a planned campus-network change at a university faculty building in Boston, operators discover that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers. The design must preserve teaching tools and shared printers. Which implementation choice meets this requirement without broadening access?

  1. Assign routed interfaces and routes to their intended VRFs and use only explicitly approved cross-VRF connectivity
  2. Align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes
  3. Use explicit route filters or redistribution policy so only authorized prefixes cross routing-domain boundaries
  4. Configure DHCP relay on the correct routed client VLAN interface toward the authorized server and verify return-path reachability

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

The crucial symptom at a university faculty building in Boston is that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers. The best response is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes. Confirm success by checking that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Incorrect Answers

A:

At a university faculty building in Boston, the option addresses VRF segmentation and routing isolation rather than the reported issue. For the stated symptom, the expected evidence is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

C:

Although this is a valid design approach for Dynamic route filtering and redistribution in an appropriate case, it leaves the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states dependency untested. The observed condition at a university faculty building in Boston is that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers.

D:

At a university faculty building in Boston, the option addresses DHCP relay and inter-subnet services rather than the reported issue. For the stated symptom, the expected evidence is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

Question 550

During a planned campus-network change at a university faculty building in Boston, operators discover that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers. The design must preserve teaching tools and shared printers. Which test result most directly confirms the required behavior?

  1. Each VRF resolves only its authorized prefixes, with controlled tests proving isolation and allowed shared services
  2. The expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table
  3. The selected OSPF path reflects approved cost policy and a controlled link failure converges to the intended backup
  4. Neighbor route tables contain approved routes and do not receive protected management or unrelated tenant prefixes

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This observation tests the OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states requirement at a university faculty building in Boston. The expected result is that the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table. The necessary correction is to align OSPF participation, area, reachability and neighbor authentication before troubleshooting downstream learned routes; a saved configuration alone would not prove it is working. In this case, the observed fault is that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers.

Incorrect Answers

A:

At a university faculty building in Boston, this would verify VRF segmentation and routing isolation, not the failure reported in this scenario. The requested closure criterion instead concerns OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states: the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.

C:

At a university faculty building in Boston, this measures a different network requirement, OSPF path metric and convergence. The case describes that the same physical link has peers configured for conflicting OSPF area identifiers, so accepting this result would leave the primary fault without direct verification.

D:

At a university faculty building in Boston, this would verify Dynamic route filtering and redistribution, not the failure reported in this scenario. The requested closure criterion instead concerns OSPF neighbor prerequisites and states: the expected neighbor reaches the required state and the authorized OSPF routes enter the routing table.