McAfee-Secured Website

Exam Code: JN0-650

Exam Name: Enterprise Routing and Switching, Professional (JNCIP-ENT)

Certification Provider: Juniper

Corresponding Certification: JNCIP-ENT

Questions & Answers

100% Juniper JN0-650 Guaranteed Success With Testking Training Materials

Get Real JN0-650 Exam Questions & Expert Verified Answers as Experienced on the Real Exam!

Questions & Answers

107 Questions & Answers with Testing Engine

"Enterprise Routing and Switching, Professional (JNCIP-ENT) Exam", also known as JN0-650 exam, is a Juniper certification exam.

Pass your tests with the always up-to-date JN0-650 Exam Engine. Your JN0-650 training materials keep you at the head of the pack!

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
Was: $137.49
Now: $124.99

Juniper JN0-650 Practice Test 15

Question 140

An enterprise network designer recommends: Inspect BGP summary, neighbor details, and session error information. Which situation most clearly calls for this action?

  1. A BGP speaker expects its neighbor to be in AS 64502 but the remote peer is actually configured in AS 64512.
  2. A BGP peer remains Idle even though the routing interface is physically up, and operators need the protocol's own view.
  3. Two EBGP speakers use loopback addresses and are separated by more than one routed hop.
  4. An Established BGP session repeatedly resets after hold time expires and peer keepalives are absent.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This case requires the BGP Idle state debugging action. The engineer can identify a configuration or transport reason for the non-Established state.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This other case would be better matched to Correct the external BGP peer AS configuration to match the real neighbor autonomous system. The AS identity check need not prevent a BGP session from becoming Established.

C:

This other case would be better matched to Enable a suitable EBGP multihop design and ensure route reachability to the remote peering address. An EBGP session is no longer limited to directly adjacent peer reachability.

D:

This other case would be better matched to Investigate transport loss and negotiate compatible keepalive and hold timers on the BGP peers. Reliable keepalive exchange can prevent unintended hold-timer expiration.

Question 141

A BGP peer advertises an IPv4 prefix with a next-hop address absent from the local routing table. Which Junos networking action or protocol decision best addresses this requirement?

  1. Permit the required bidirectional TCP session to the BGP peer addresses through the approved filter.
  2. Configure the supported BGP local-address to use the intended loopback source.
  3. Configure and negotiate the required BGP inet6 unicast family on both peers.
  4. Restore recursive reachability to the advertised next-hop before relying on the BGP route.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This action addresses BGP source next-hop reachability. The received BGP path can become eligible for installation when its next hop resolves.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That action targets BGP TCP reachability: The BGP transport connection can establish when other session parameters are correct. It does not directly resolve the stated BGP source next-hop reachability requirement.

B:

That action targets BGP source-address selection: The session's source address can match the remote router's configured neighbor. It does not directly resolve the stated BGP source next-hop reachability requirement.

C:

That action targets BGP IPv6 family negotiation: Supported IPv6 unicast NLRI can be exchanged through the BGP session. It does not directly resolve the stated BGP source next-hop reachability requirement.

Question 142

A Junos network engineer takes this step: Restore recursive reachability to the advertised next-hop before relying on the BGP route. Which outcome most directly follows?

  1. The received BGP path can become eligible for installation when its next hop resolves.
  2. The session's source address can match the remote router's configured neighbor.
  3. The BGP transport connection can establish when other session parameters are correct.
  4. Supported IPv6 unicast NLRI can be exchanged through the BGP session.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This is the direct result of the BGP source next-hop reachability decision: The received BGP path can become eligible for installation when its next hop resolves.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This outcome is associated with BGP source-address selection (Configure the supported BGP local-address to use the intended loopback source.), not the specified action.

C:

This outcome is associated with BGP TCP reachability (Permit the required bidirectional TCP session to the BGP peer addresses through the approved filter.), not the specified action.

D:

This outcome is associated with BGP IPv6 family negotiation (Configure and negotiate the required BGP inet6 unicast family on both peers.), not the specified action.

Question 143

A BGP peer advertises an IPv4 prefix with a next-hop address absent from the local routing table. A colleague instead suggests: Permit the required bidirectional TCP session to the BGP peer addresses through the approved filter. Which corrective approach most directly addresses the original issue?

  1. Configure and negotiate the required BGP inet6 unicast family on both peers.
  2. Restore recursive reachability to the advertised next-hop before relying on the BGP route.
  3. Permit the required bidirectional TCP session to the BGP peer addresses through the approved filter.
  4. Configure the supported BGP local-address to use the intended loopback source.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This corrective choice addresses BGP source next-hop reachability. The received BGP path can become eligible for installation when its next hop resolves.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That alternative applies to BGP IPv6 family negotiation instead. Supported IPv6 unicast NLRI can be exchanged through the BGP session.

C:

That alternative applies to BGP TCP reachability instead. The BGP transport connection can establish when other session parameters are correct.

D:

That alternative applies to BGP source-address selection instead. The session's source address can match the remote router's configured neighbor.

Question 144

An enterprise network designer recommends: Restore recursive reachability to the advertised next-hop before relying on the BGP route. Which situation most clearly calls for this action?

  1. Two established BGP routers need to advertise IPv6 unicast prefixes, but only IPv4 unicast family has been enabled.
  2. BGP neighbors have matching AS numbers yet TCP port 179 cannot be reached through the intervening security filter.
  3. A BGP peer advertises an IPv4 prefix with a next-hop address absent from the local routing table.
  4. An iBGP session is meant to use stable loopbacks but packets originate from a transit interface address the remote peer does not expect.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

This case requires the BGP source next-hop reachability action. The received BGP path can become eligible for installation when its next hop resolves.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This other case would be better matched to Configure and negotiate the required BGP inet6 unicast family on both peers. Supported IPv6 unicast NLRI can be exchanged through the BGP session.

B:

This other case would be better matched to Permit the required bidirectional TCP session to the BGP peer addresses through the approved filter. The BGP transport connection can establish when other session parameters are correct.

D:

This other case would be better matched to Configure the supported BGP local-address to use the intended loopback source. The session's source address can match the remote router's configured neighbor.

Question 145

Two otherwise comparable iBGP routes reach one destination, but the operator wants all AS-internal routers to prefer exit A. Which Junos networking action or protocol decision best addresses this requirement?

  1. Use policy to assign a higher BGP local-preference value to the route via exit A.
  2. Evaluate the lower MED where the BGP comparison rules permit MED comparison.
  3. Compare Junos route preference values across protocols before changing BGP policy.
  4. Apply the normal BGP preference for an EBGP path over an otherwise comparable IBGP path.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This action addresses Higher local preference. Local-preference ranking can steer outbound traffic toward the preferred egress.

Incorrect Answers

B:

That action targets MED comparison: The MED attribute can influence choice among comparable ingress options from that AS. It does not directly resolve the stated Higher local preference requirement.

C:

That action targets BGP route preference: The operator can identify why a non-BGP route wins active-route selection. It does not directly resolve the stated Higher local preference requirement.

D:

That action targets EBGP over IBGP selection: The externally learned path can become preferred after higher priority criteria tie. It does not directly resolve the stated Higher local preference requirement.

Question 146

A Junos network engineer takes this step: Use policy to assign a higher BGP local-preference value to the route via exit A. Which outcome most directly follows?

  1. The MED attribute can influence choice among comparable ingress options from that AS.
  2. Local-preference ranking can steer outbound traffic toward the preferred egress.
  3. The operator can identify why a non-BGP route wins active-route selection.
  4. The externally learned path can become preferred after higher priority criteria tie.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This is the direct result of the Higher local preference decision: Local-preference ranking can steer outbound traffic toward the preferred egress.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This outcome is associated with MED comparison (Evaluate the lower MED where the BGP comparison rules permit MED comparison.), not the specified action.

C:

This outcome is associated with BGP route preference (Compare Junos route preference values across protocols before changing BGP policy.), not the specified action.

D:

This outcome is associated with EBGP over IBGP selection (Apply the normal BGP preference for an EBGP path over an otherwise comparable IBGP path.), not the specified action.

Question 147

Two otherwise comparable iBGP routes reach one destination, but the operator wants all AS-internal routers to prefer exit A. A colleague instead suggests: Evaluate the lower MED where the BGP comparison rules permit MED comparison. Which corrective approach most directly addresses the original issue?

  1. Evaluate the lower MED where the BGP comparison rules permit MED comparison.
  2. Apply the normal BGP preference for an EBGP path over an otherwise comparable IBGP path.
  3. Use policy to assign a higher BGP local-preference value to the route via exit A.
  4. Compare Junos route preference values across protocols before changing BGP policy.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

This corrective choice addresses Higher local preference. Local-preference ranking can steer outbound traffic toward the preferred egress.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That alternative applies to MED comparison instead. The MED attribute can influence choice among comparable ingress options from that AS.

B:

That alternative applies to EBGP over IBGP selection instead. The externally learned path can become preferred after higher priority criteria tie.

D:

That alternative applies to BGP route preference instead. The operator can identify why a non-BGP route wins active-route selection.

Question 148

An enterprise network designer recommends: Use policy to assign a higher BGP local-preference value to the route via exit A. Which situation most clearly calls for this action?

  1. A prefix is received by BGP, yet a static route is selected as the active route in the Junos RIB.
  2. A neighboring AS advertises comparable paths with different multi-exit discriminator values.
  3. Two paths tie on earlier policy and path criteria, but one is learned from EBGP and one from IBGP.
  4. Two otherwise comparable iBGP routes reach one destination, but the operator wants all AS-internal routers to prefer exit A.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This case requires the Higher local preference action. Local-preference ranking can steer outbound traffic toward the preferred egress.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This other case would be better matched to Compare Junos route preference values across protocols before changing BGP policy. The operator can identify why a non-BGP route wins active-route selection.

B:

This other case would be better matched to Evaluate the lower MED where the BGP comparison rules permit MED comparison. The MED attribute can influence choice among comparable ingress options from that AS.

C:

This other case would be better matched to Apply the normal BGP preference for an EBGP path over an otherwise comparable IBGP path. The externally learned path can become preferred after higher priority criteria tie.

Question 149

Two BGP routes have equal local preference but different numbers of AS entries in their AS paths. Which Junos networking action or protocol decision best addresses this requirement?

  1. Inspect detailed BGP routes, attributes, next hops, and the active-path indication.
  2. Restore IP routing reachability to the route's recursive BGP next hop.
  3. Prefer the route with the shorter AS-path length under the normal selection sequence.
  4. Use the BGP origin-attribute comparison in the supported path selection sequence.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

This action addresses Shorter AS path. The fewer-AS route can win when earlier selection criteria are equal.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That action targets BGP selection evidence: The ranking evidence can identify the selection criterion behind the chosen path. It does not directly resolve the stated Shorter AS path requirement.

B:

That action targets BGP next-hop validity: The path can participate in valid best-path selection after next-hop resolution. It does not directly resolve the stated Shorter AS path requirement.

D:

That action targets Origin type tie break: A route with IGP origin can be preferred over an incomplete-origin path in this tie. It does not directly resolve the stated Shorter AS path requirement.

Question 150

A Junos network engineer takes this step: Prefer the route with the shorter AS-path length under the normal selection sequence. Which outcome most directly follows?

  1. The ranking evidence can identify the selection criterion behind the chosen path.
  2. The path can participate in valid best-path selection after next-hop resolution.
  3. A route with IGP origin can be preferred over an incomplete-origin path in this tie.
  4. The fewer-AS route can win when earlier selection criteria are equal.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This is the direct result of the Shorter AS path decision: The fewer-AS route can win when earlier selection criteria are equal.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This outcome is associated with BGP selection evidence (Inspect detailed BGP routes, attributes, next hops, and the active-path indication.), not the specified action.

B:

This outcome is associated with BGP next-hop validity (Restore IP routing reachability to the route's recursive BGP next hop.), not the specified action.

C:

This outcome is associated with Origin type tie break (Use the BGP origin-attribute comparison in the supported path selection sequence.), not the specified action.

Enterprise Routing and Switching, Professional (JNCIP-ENT) (JN0-650) Practice Tests