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 3

Question 20

An enterprise network designer recommends: Configure compatible Hello and dead intervals on both connected OSPF interfaces. Which situation most clearly calls for this action?

  1. A packet capture shows OSPF Hellos on a connected link but a neighbor adjacency never forms because Hello and dead timer settings differ.
  2. Two directly connected Junos routers never become OSPF neighbors because one interface is assigned to area 0 and the other to area 1.
  3. An Ethernet segment must be advertised as connected infrastructure but no routing adjacency should form toward attached workstations.
  4. The Junos interface has IPv4 reachability but never sends OSPF Hellos because it was omitted from the intended OSPF area.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This case requires the OSPF timer mismatch action. OSPF neighbor compatibility checks can pass the timer parameters.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This other case would be better matched to Place both peering interfaces in the same intended OSPF area. The peers can proceed toward an adjacency when their area identifiers match.

C:

This other case would be better matched to Make the LAN-facing OSPF interface passive while preserving its prefix advertisement. The prefix can be included in OSPF without sending Hello packets to end hosts on that segment.

D:

This other case would be better matched to Add the correct routed interface under the appropriate Junos OSPF area configuration. OSPF processing can start on the specified link and discover eligible neighbors.

Question 21

Separate Junos routers in the same OSPF domain accidentally use an identical router ID and display unstable LSDB topology. Which Junos networking action or protocol decision best addresses this requirement?

  1. Inspect OSPF neighbor status and interface details with operational show commands.
  2. Correct the interface MTU mismatch on the two ends before attempting full database synchronization.
  3. Assign a unique stable router ID to each OSPF speaker.
  4. Align the supported OSPF authentication method and credentials across the link.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

This action addresses Duplicate router IDs. Every router is identified unambiguously in the link-state topology database.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That action targets OSPF adjacency diagnostics: The operator can distinguish Down, Init, ExStart, Exchange, and Full adjacency states. It does not directly resolve the stated Duplicate router IDs requirement.

B:

That action targets OSPF MTU disagreement: Compatible MTUs remove a common cause of OSPF database-description exchange failures. It does not directly resolve the stated Duplicate router IDs requirement.

D:

That action targets OSPF authentication mismatch: Matching authentication lets correctly authenticated protocol packets participate in adjacency establishment. It does not directly resolve the stated Duplicate router IDs requirement.

Question 22

A Junos network engineer takes this step: Assign a unique stable router ID to each OSPF speaker. Which outcome most directly follows?

  1. Compatible MTUs remove a common cause of OSPF database-description exchange failures.
  2. Matching authentication lets correctly authenticated protocol packets participate in adjacency establishment.
  3. The operator can distinguish Down, Init, ExStart, Exchange, and Full adjacency states.
  4. Every router is identified unambiguously in the link-state topology database.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This is the direct result of the Duplicate router IDs decision: Every router is identified unambiguously in the link-state topology database.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This outcome is associated with OSPF MTU disagreement (Correct the interface MTU mismatch on the two ends before attempting full database synchronization.), not the specified action.

B:

This outcome is associated with OSPF authentication mismatch (Align the supported OSPF authentication method and credentials across the link.), not the specified action.

C:

This outcome is associated with OSPF adjacency diagnostics (Inspect OSPF neighbor status and interface details with operational show commands.), not the specified action.

Question 23

Separate Junos routers in the same OSPF domain accidentally use an identical router ID and display unstable LSDB topology. A colleague instead suggests: Inspect OSPF neighbor status and interface details with operational show commands. Which corrective approach most directly addresses the original issue?

  1. Assign a unique stable router ID to each OSPF speaker.
  2. Correct the interface MTU mismatch on the two ends before attempting full database synchronization.
  3. Inspect OSPF neighbor status and interface details with operational show commands.
  4. Align the supported OSPF authentication method and credentials across the link.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This corrective choice addresses Duplicate router IDs. Every router is identified unambiguously in the link-state topology database.

Incorrect Answers

B:

That alternative applies to OSPF MTU disagreement instead. Compatible MTUs remove a common cause of OSPF database-description exchange failures.

C:

That alternative applies to OSPF adjacency diagnostics instead. The operator can distinguish Down, Init, ExStart, Exchange, and Full adjacency states.

D:

That alternative applies to OSPF authentication mismatch instead. Matching authentication lets correctly authenticated protocol packets participate in adjacency establishment.

Question 24

An enterprise network designer recommends: Assign a unique stable router ID to each OSPF speaker. Which situation most clearly calls for this action?

  1. OSPF Hello packets arrive but neighboring interfaces use different authentication settings and no adjacency forms.
  2. Separate Junos routers in the same OSPF domain accidentally use an identical router ID and display unstable LSDB topology.
  3. A newly connected router reports no OSPF neighbors despite good interface and IP status, and the operator needs protocol-level evidence.
  4. Two OSPF routers reach ExStart and fail to finish database description negotiation over a link with unequal MTUs.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This case requires the Duplicate router IDs action. Every router is identified unambiguously in the link-state topology database.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This other case would be better matched to Align the supported OSPF authentication method and credentials across the link. Matching authentication lets correctly authenticated protocol packets participate in adjacency establishment.

C:

This other case would be better matched to Inspect OSPF neighbor status and interface details with operational show commands. The operator can distinguish Down, Init, ExStart, Exchange, and Full adjacency states.

D:

This other case would be better matched to Correct the interface MTU mismatch on the two ends before attempting full database synchronization. Compatible MTUs remove a common cause of OSPF database-description exchange failures.

Question 25

The Junos interface has IPv4 reachability but never sends OSPF Hellos because it was omitted from the intended OSPF area. Which Junos networking action or protocol decision best addresses this requirement?

  1. Configure compatible Hello and dead intervals on both connected OSPF interfaces.
  2. Place both peering interfaces in the same intended OSPF area.
  3. Make the LAN-facing OSPF interface passive while preserving its prefix advertisement.
  4. Add the correct routed interface under the appropriate Junos OSPF area configuration.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This action addresses Missing OSPF interface. OSPF processing can start on the specified link and discover eligible neighbors.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That action targets OSPF timer mismatch: OSPF neighbor compatibility checks can pass the timer parameters. It does not directly resolve the stated Missing OSPF interface requirement.

B:

That action targets OSPF area mismatch: The peers can proceed toward an adjacency when their area identifiers match. It does not directly resolve the stated Missing OSPF interface requirement.

C:

That action targets Passive OSPF interface: The prefix can be included in OSPF without sending Hello packets to end hosts on that segment. It does not directly resolve the stated Missing OSPF interface requirement.

Question 26

A Junos network engineer takes this step: Add the correct routed interface under the appropriate Junos OSPF area configuration. Which outcome most directly follows?

  1. OSPF processing can start on the specified link and discover eligible neighbors.
  2. The peers can proceed toward an adjacency when their area identifiers match.
  3. OSPF neighbor compatibility checks can pass the timer parameters.
  4. The prefix can be included in OSPF without sending Hello packets to end hosts on that segment.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This is the direct result of the Missing OSPF interface decision: OSPF processing can start on the specified link and discover eligible neighbors.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This outcome is associated with OSPF area mismatch (Place both peering interfaces in the same intended OSPF area.), not the specified action.

C:

This outcome is associated with OSPF timer mismatch (Configure compatible Hello and dead intervals on both connected OSPF interfaces.), not the specified action.

D:

This outcome is associated with Passive OSPF interface (Make the LAN-facing OSPF interface passive while preserving its prefix advertisement.), not the specified action.

Question 27

The Junos interface has IPv4 reachability but never sends OSPF Hellos because it was omitted from the intended OSPF area. A colleague instead suggests: Place both peering interfaces in the same intended OSPF area. Which corrective approach most directly addresses the original issue?

  1. Make the LAN-facing OSPF interface passive while preserving its prefix advertisement.
  2. Add the correct routed interface under the appropriate Junos OSPF area configuration.
  3. Place both peering interfaces in the same intended OSPF area.
  4. Configure compatible Hello and dead intervals on both connected OSPF interfaces.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This corrective choice addresses Missing OSPF interface. OSPF processing can start on the specified link and discover eligible neighbors.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That alternative applies to Passive OSPF interface instead. The prefix can be included in OSPF without sending Hello packets to end hosts on that segment.

C:

That alternative applies to OSPF area mismatch instead. The peers can proceed toward an adjacency when their area identifiers match.

D:

That alternative applies to OSPF timer mismatch instead. OSPF neighbor compatibility checks can pass the timer parameters.

Question 28

An enterprise network designer recommends: Add the correct routed interface under the appropriate Junos OSPF area configuration. Which situation most clearly calls for this action?

  1. Two directly connected Junos routers never become OSPF neighbors because one interface is assigned to area 0 and the other to area 1.
  2. An Ethernet segment must be advertised as connected infrastructure but no routing adjacency should form toward attached workstations.
  3. The Junos interface has IPv4 reachability but never sends OSPF Hellos because it was omitted from the intended OSPF area.
  4. A packet capture shows OSPF Hellos on a connected link but a neighbor adjacency never forms because Hello and dead timer settings differ.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

This case requires the Missing OSPF interface action. OSPF processing can start on the specified link and discover eligible neighbors.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This other case would be better matched to Place both peering interfaces in the same intended OSPF area. The peers can proceed toward an adjacency when their area identifiers match.

B:

This other case would be better matched to Make the LAN-facing OSPF interface passive while preserving its prefix advertisement. The prefix can be included in OSPF without sending Hello packets to end hosts on that segment.

D:

This other case would be better matched to Configure compatible Hello and dead intervals on both connected OSPF interfaces. OSPF neighbor compatibility checks can pass the timer parameters.

Question 29

A newly connected router reports no OSPF neighbors despite good interface and IP status, and the operator needs protocol-level evidence. Which Junos networking action or protocol decision best addresses this requirement?

  1. Inspect OSPF neighbor status and interface details with operational show commands.
  2. Assign a unique stable router ID to each OSPF speaker.
  3. Correct the interface MTU mismatch on the two ends before attempting full database synchronization.
  4. Align the supported OSPF authentication method and credentials across the link.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This action addresses OSPF adjacency diagnostics. The operator can distinguish Down, Init, ExStart, Exchange, and Full adjacency states.

Incorrect Answers

B:

That action targets Duplicate router IDs: Every router is identified unambiguously in the link-state topology database. It does not directly resolve the stated OSPF adjacency diagnostics requirement.

C:

That action targets OSPF MTU disagreement: Compatible MTUs remove a common cause of OSPF database-description exchange failures. It does not directly resolve the stated OSPF adjacency diagnostics requirement.

D:

That action targets OSPF authentication mismatch: Matching authentication lets correctly authenticated protocol packets participate in adjacency establishment. It does not directly resolve the stated OSPF adjacency diagnostics requirement.

Question 30

A Junos network engineer takes this step: Inspect OSPF neighbor status and interface details with operational show commands. Which outcome most directly follows?

  1. Matching authentication lets correctly authenticated protocol packets participate in adjacency establishment.
  2. The operator can distinguish Down, Init, ExStart, Exchange, and Full adjacency states.
  3. Every router is identified unambiguously in the link-state topology database.
  4. Compatible MTUs remove a common cause of OSPF database-description exchange failures.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This is the direct result of the OSPF adjacency diagnostics decision: The operator can distinguish Down, Init, ExStart, Exchange, and Full adjacency states.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This outcome is associated with OSPF authentication mismatch (Align the supported OSPF authentication method and credentials across the link.), not the specified action.

C:

This outcome is associated with Duplicate router IDs (Assign a unique stable router ID to each OSPF speaker.), not the specified action.

D:

This outcome is associated with OSPF MTU disagreement (Correct the interface MTU mismatch on the two ends before attempting full database synchronization.), not the specified action.

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