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 9

Question 80

An enterprise network designer recommends: Use Junos OSPFv3 operational neighbor and interface inspection rather than only pinging IPv6 addresses. Which situation most clearly calls for this action?

  1. An IPv6 subnet has intermittent OSPFv3 forwarding and operations needs evidence of the actual neighbor FSM.
  2. An external IPv6 static prefix is present in a Junos routing table but must be deliberately advertised into the OSPFv3 domain.
  3. An enterprise has IPv6 interface addresses but only OSPFv2 has been enabled for the existing IPv4 routing domain.
  4. An OSPFv3 peering troubleshooter assumes neighbors must use their global IPv6 addresses for all Hello exchanges.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This case requires the OSPFv3 neighbor visibility action. The engineer can see adjacency state and whether OSPFv3 runs on the expected interface.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This other case would be better matched to Apply an appropriate export policy to the OSPFv3 instance for the selected IPv6 route. Selected external IPv6 reachability can be advertised into OSPFv3 rather than leaking all static routes.

C:

This other case would be better matched to Configure the applicable Junos OSPFv3 process and IPv6 interfaces in the correct area. OSPFv3 can exchange supported IPv6 routing information across the configured links.

D:

This other case would be better matched to Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring. Link-local addressing supports OSPFv3 adjacency on the same link.

Question 81

An OSPFv3 area border router exports many contiguous IPv6 networks into the backbone and the design requires fewer interarea entries. Which Junos networking action or protocol decision best addresses this requirement?

  1. Align the intended OSPFv3 interface area numbers on the adjacent routers.
  2. Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring.
  3. Configure the applicable Junos OSPFv3 process and IPv6 interfaces in the correct area.
  4. Configure a supported interarea IPv6 route summary for the appropriate OSPFv3 area.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This action addresses IPv6 route summarization. Downstream routers can learn an aggregate IPv6 prefix rather than every component network.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That action targets OSPFv3 area mismatch: The area-identifier mismatch no longer prevents the OSPFv3 adjacency. It does not directly resolve the stated IPv6 route summarization requirement.

B:

That action targets OSPFv3 link-local adjacency: Link-local addressing supports OSPFv3 adjacency on the same link. It does not directly resolve the stated IPv6 route summarization requirement.

C:

That action targets OSPFv3 IPv6 routing: OSPFv3 can exchange supported IPv6 routing information across the configured links. It does not directly resolve the stated IPv6 route summarization requirement.

Question 82

A Junos network engineer takes this step: Configure a supported interarea IPv6 route summary for the appropriate OSPFv3 area. Which outcome most directly follows?

  1. Downstream routers can learn an aggregate IPv6 prefix rather than every component network.
  2. The area-identifier mismatch no longer prevents the OSPFv3 adjacency.
  3. Link-local addressing supports OSPFv3 adjacency on the same link.
  4. OSPFv3 can exchange supported IPv6 routing information across the configured links.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This is the direct result of the IPv6 route summarization decision: Downstream routers can learn an aggregate IPv6 prefix rather than every component network.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This outcome is associated with OSPFv3 area mismatch (Align the intended OSPFv3 interface area numbers on the adjacent routers.), not the specified action.

C:

This outcome is associated with OSPFv3 link-local adjacency (Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring.), not the specified action.

D:

This outcome is associated with OSPFv3 IPv6 routing (Configure the applicable Junos OSPFv3 process and IPv6 interfaces in the correct area.), not the specified action.

Question 83

An OSPFv3 area border router exports many contiguous IPv6 networks into the backbone and the design requires fewer interarea entries. A colleague instead suggests: Configure the applicable Junos OSPFv3 process and IPv6 interfaces in the correct area. Which corrective approach most directly addresses the original issue?

  1. Configure the applicable Junos OSPFv3 process and IPv6 interfaces in the correct area.
  2. Configure a supported interarea IPv6 route summary for the appropriate OSPFv3 area.
  3. Align the intended OSPFv3 interface area numbers on the adjacent routers.
  4. Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This corrective choice addresses IPv6 route summarization. Downstream routers can learn an aggregate IPv6 prefix rather than every component network.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That alternative applies to OSPFv3 IPv6 routing instead. OSPFv3 can exchange supported IPv6 routing information across the configured links.

C:

That alternative applies to OSPFv3 area mismatch instead. The area-identifier mismatch no longer prevents the OSPFv3 adjacency.

D:

That alternative applies to OSPFv3 link-local adjacency instead. Link-local addressing supports OSPFv3 adjacency on the same link.

Question 84

An enterprise network designer recommends: Configure a supported interarea IPv6 route summary for the appropriate OSPFv3 area. Which situation most clearly calls for this action?

  1. An enterprise has IPv6 interface addresses but only OSPFv2 has been enabled for the existing IPv4 routing domain.
  2. An OSPFv3 peering troubleshooter assumes neighbors must use their global IPv6 addresses for all Hello exchanges.
  3. An OSPFv3 area border router exports many contiguous IPv6 networks into the backbone and the design requires fewer interarea entries.
  4. Two IPv6 routers exchange OSPFv3 Hellos but one interface belongs to area 0.0.0.2 and the other to area 0.0.0.0.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

This case requires the IPv6 route summarization action. Downstream routers can learn an aggregate IPv6 prefix rather than every component network.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This other case would be better matched to Configure the applicable Junos OSPFv3 process and IPv6 interfaces in the correct area. OSPFv3 can exchange supported IPv6 routing information across the configured links.

B:

This other case would be better matched to Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring. Link-local addressing supports OSPFv3 adjacency on the same link.

D:

This other case would be better matched to Align the intended OSPFv3 interface area numbers on the adjacent routers. The area-identifier mismatch no longer prevents the OSPFv3 adjacency.

Question 85

An external IPv6 static prefix is present in a Junos routing table but must be deliberately advertised into the OSPFv3 domain. Which Junos networking action or protocol decision best addresses this requirement?

  1. Apply an appropriate export policy to the OSPFv3 instance for the selected IPv6 route.
  2. Align the intended OSPFv3 interface area numbers on the adjacent routers.
  3. Use Junos OSPFv3 operational neighbor and interface inspection rather than only pinging IPv6 addresses.
  4. Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This action addresses OSPFv3 IPv6 external. Selected external IPv6 reachability can be advertised into OSPFv3 rather than leaking all static routes.

Incorrect Answers

B:

That action targets OSPFv3 area mismatch: The area-identifier mismatch no longer prevents the OSPFv3 adjacency. It does not directly resolve the stated OSPFv3 IPv6 external requirement.

C:

That action targets OSPFv3 neighbor visibility: The engineer can see adjacency state and whether OSPFv3 runs on the expected interface. It does not directly resolve the stated OSPFv3 IPv6 external requirement.

D:

That action targets OSPFv3 link-local adjacency: Link-local addressing supports OSPFv3 adjacency on the same link. It does not directly resolve the stated OSPFv3 IPv6 external requirement.

Question 86

A Junos network engineer takes this step: Apply an appropriate export policy to the OSPFv3 instance for the selected IPv6 route. Which outcome most directly follows?

  1. The area-identifier mismatch no longer prevents the OSPFv3 adjacency.
  2. Selected external IPv6 reachability can be advertised into OSPFv3 rather than leaking all static routes.
  3. Link-local addressing supports OSPFv3 adjacency on the same link.
  4. The engineer can see adjacency state and whether OSPFv3 runs on the expected interface.

Explanation

Correct Answer

B:

This is the direct result of the OSPFv3 IPv6 external decision: Selected external IPv6 reachability can be advertised into OSPFv3 rather than leaking all static routes.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This outcome is associated with OSPFv3 area mismatch (Align the intended OSPFv3 interface area numbers on the adjacent routers.), not the specified action.

C:

This outcome is associated with OSPFv3 link-local adjacency (Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring.), not the specified action.

D:

This outcome is associated with OSPFv3 neighbor visibility (Use Junos OSPFv3 operational neighbor and interface inspection rather than only pinging IPv6 addresses.), not the specified action.

Question 87

An external IPv6 static prefix is present in a Junos routing table but must be deliberately advertised into the OSPFv3 domain. A colleague instead suggests: Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring. Which corrective approach most directly addresses the original issue?

  1. Align the intended OSPFv3 interface area numbers on the adjacent routers.
  2. Use Junos OSPFv3 operational neighbor and interface inspection rather than only pinging IPv6 addresses.
  3. Apply an appropriate export policy to the OSPFv3 instance for the selected IPv6 route.
  4. Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring.

Explanation

Correct Answer

C:

This corrective choice addresses OSPFv3 IPv6 external. Selected external IPv6 reachability can be advertised into OSPFv3 rather than leaking all static routes.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That alternative applies to OSPFv3 area mismatch instead. The area-identifier mismatch no longer prevents the OSPFv3 adjacency.

B:

That alternative applies to OSPFv3 neighbor visibility instead. The engineer can see adjacency state and whether OSPFv3 runs on the expected interface.

D:

That alternative applies to OSPFv3 link-local adjacency instead. Link-local addressing supports OSPFv3 adjacency on the same link.

Question 88

An enterprise network designer recommends: Apply an appropriate export policy to the OSPFv3 instance for the selected IPv6 route. Which situation most clearly calls for this action?

  1. An OSPFv3 peering troubleshooter assumes neighbors must use their global IPv6 addresses for all Hello exchanges.
  2. Two IPv6 routers exchange OSPFv3 Hellos but one interface belongs to area 0.0.0.2 and the other to area 0.0.0.0.
  3. An IPv6 subnet has intermittent OSPFv3 forwarding and operations needs evidence of the actual neighbor FSM.
  4. An external IPv6 static prefix is present in a Junos routing table but must be deliberately advertised into the OSPFv3 domain.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This case requires the OSPFv3 IPv6 external action. Selected external IPv6 reachability can be advertised into OSPFv3 rather than leaking all static routes.

Incorrect Answers

A:

This other case would be better matched to Check the interface link-local IPv6 communication used by OSPFv3 neighboring. Link-local addressing supports OSPFv3 adjacency on the same link.

B:

This other case would be better matched to Align the intended OSPFv3 interface area numbers on the adjacent routers. The area-identifier mismatch no longer prevents the OSPFv3 adjacency.

C:

This other case would be better matched to Use Junos OSPFv3 operational neighbor and interface inspection rather than only pinging IPv6 addresses. The engineer can see adjacency state and whether OSPFv3 runs on the expected interface.

Question 89

A Junos edge router has a static route that must appear in OSPF but is not redistributed by default. Which Junos networking action or protocol decision best addresses this requirement?

  1. Move the specific reject policy term before the broad accept term.
  2. Reference the policy from the intended OSPF export or import hierarchy according to its purpose.
  3. Use precise route-filter terms with accept and an explicit default reject in the OSPF export policy.
  4. Create a Junos policy matching the selected static route and apply it as OSPF export.

Explanation

Correct Answer

D:

This action addresses Static OSPF export. Only accepted static route candidates are eligible for external OSPF advertisement.

Incorrect Answers

A:

That action targets Policy term evaluation: The rejected prefix can be stopped before policy evaluation reaches the general acceptance rule. It does not directly resolve the stated Static OSPF export requirement.

B:

That action targets OSPF policy attachment: The policy begins controlling the applicable OSPF route exchange direction. It does not directly resolve the stated Static OSPF export requirement.

C:

That action targets OSPF selective redistribution: Advertising external reachability can be limited to the enumerated prefixes. It does not directly resolve the stated Static OSPF export requirement.

Question 90

A Junos network engineer takes this step: Create a Junos policy matching the selected static route and apply it as OSPF export. Which outcome most directly follows?

  1. Only accepted static route candidates are eligible for external OSPF advertisement.
  2. The policy begins controlling the applicable OSPF route exchange direction.
  3. Advertising external reachability can be limited to the enumerated prefixes.
  4. The rejected prefix can be stopped before policy evaluation reaches the general acceptance rule.

Explanation

Correct Answer

A:

This is the direct result of the Static OSPF export decision: Only accepted static route candidates are eligible for external OSPF advertisement.

Incorrect Answers

B:

This outcome is associated with OSPF policy attachment (Reference the policy from the intended OSPF export or import hierarchy according to its purpose.), not the specified action.

C:

This outcome is associated with OSPF selective redistribution (Use precise route-filter terms with accept and an explicit default reject in the OSPF export policy.), not the specified action.

D:

This outcome is associated with Policy term evaluation (Move the specific reject policy term before the broad accept term.), not the specified action.

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