Biography

真実的-更新するJN0-664過去問試験-試験の準備方法JN0-664 PDF

P.S. Pass4TestがGoogle Driveで共有している無料かつ新しいJN0-664ダンプ：https://drive.google.com/open?id=17fzeHsXyZJxtArQK8hhLwZaRI-YypLEM

あらゆる人にとって、時間は非常に大切です。JN0-664試験に対して、いろいろな資料があります。そのような資料を勉強するには、長い時間がかかります。でも、JN0-664問題集を利用すれば、短い時間でJN0-664試験に合格できます。そして、JN0-664問題集は安くて、便利です。誰でも、JN0-664問題集を選択すれば、試験に合格する可能性が大きいです。もし、JN0-664問題集を勉強すれば、もし、将来にITエリートになります。

Juniper Networksは、ネットワーク機器とサービスの主要なプロバイダーであり、JN0-664認定は業界で高く評価されています。この認定を取得することで、キャリアアップの機会や高い給与を得ることができます。また、サービスプロバイダー業界で優れたスキルと知識を持つことができます。

Juniper JN0-664認定試験は、120分以内に完了する必要がある65の複数選択質問で構成されています。この試験は、英語、日本、中国語など、いくつかの言語で利用できます。試験の準備をするために、候補者は、ジュニパーネットワークのトレーニングコース、学習ガイド、練習テストなど、さまざまなリソースを活用できます。

>> JN0-664過去問 <<

JN0-664試験の準備方法｜最新のJN0-664過去問試験｜有難いService Provider, Professional (JNCIP-SP) PDF

IT領域で仕事しているあなたは、きっとIT認定試験を通して自分の能力を証明したいでしょう。それに、JN0-664認証資格を持っている同僚や知人などますます多くなっているでしょう。そのような状況で、もし一つの資格を持っていないなら他の人に追及できないですから。では、どんな試験を受けるのかは決めましたか。Juniperの試験はどうですか。JN0-664認定試験のようなものはどうでしょうか。これは非常に価値がある試験なのですから、きっとあなたが念願を達成するのを助けられます。

Juniper Service Provider, Professional (JNCIP-SP) 認定 JN0-664 試験問題 (Q73-Q78):

質問 # 73
Which statement is correct about IS-IS when it performs the Dijkstra algorithm?

• A. When a new neighbor ID in the tree database matches a router ID in the LSDthe neighbor ID is moved to the candidate database.
• B. Tuples with the lowest cost are moved from the tree database to the LSDB.
• C. The algorithm will stop processing once the tree database is empty.
• D. The local router moves its own local tuples into the candidate database.

正解：C

 

質問 # 74
Click the Exhibit button.

You enabled a new router (R3) in your network but all destinations using IS-IS routes are not properly load balancing over this new router.
Referring to the exhibit, what is the problem?

• A. R2 is missing internal routes for R1.
• B. R1 does not have wide-metrics enabled.
• C. R3 does not have wide-metrics enabled.
• D. R1 is missing internal routes for R2.

正解：C

解説：
Let's dive into this IS-IS routing problem with a Juniper Networks (JNCIP-SP) perspective, analyze the exhibit, and determine why load balancing isn't working as expected after adding the new router R3. I'll provide a verified answer and a detailed explanation step by step.
C: R3 does not have wide-metrics enabled.
Detailed Explanation
1. Understanding the Exhibit
The exhibit shows the output of IS-IS database commands on two routers, R1 and R2, at Level 2 (L2). IS-IS (Intermediate System to Intermediate System) is a link-state routing protocol commonly used in service provider networks. The output provides details about the IS-IS database, including IP prefixes, metrics, and whether the router supports "wide metrics."
* R1's IS-IS Database (Level 2):
* IP prefix: 10.100.34.0/24
* Internal, Metric: default 63, Up
* IP extended prefix: 10.100.34.0/24, metric 63, Up
* IP extended prefix: 10.100.13.0/24, metric 63, Up
* R2's IS-IS Database (Level 2):
* IP extended prefix: 10.100.12.0/24, metric 1000, Up
* IP extended prefix: 10.100.23.0/24, metric 1000, Up
Additionally, the exhibit mentions that R1 and R2 can "find TLVs" and "match prefix," indicating they are processing IS-IS Type-Length-Value (TLV) data correctly. However, R3 has been newly added, and load balancing across this router isn't working as expected.
2. Key Concepts in IS-IS
To understand the issue, let's break down some critical IS-IS concepts relevant to this scenario:
* IS-IS Levels: IS-IS operates at two levels: Level 1 (L1) for intra-area routing and Level 2 (L2) for inter- area routing. The exhibit shows Level 2, so we're dealing with backbone routing between areas.
* Metrics in IS-IS:
* Default Metrics (Narrow Metrics): By default, IS-IS uses narrow metrics, which are limited to a maximum value of 63 per link (and a maximum path metric of 1023). This is encoded in the original IS-IS TLVs (Type 2 for LSPs).
* Wide Metrics: Wide metrics (introduced in RFC 3784) allow for larger metric values (up to
16,777,215) and are encoded in extended TLVs (Type 22 for LSPs, Type 135 for IP reachability).
Wide metrics are necessary for modern networks where higher metric values are needed for better path selection or when integrating with other protocols like OSPF.
* Load Balancing in IS-IS: IS-IS supports equal-cost multi-path (ECMP) routing, meaning if multiple paths to a destination have the same total metric, traffic can be load-balanced across those paths. For load balancing to work, all routers in the path must agree on the metrics and the paths must be equal- cost.
* TLVs and Extended Prefixes: The exhibit shows "IP extended prefix" entries, which are carried in TLV 135 (for IPv4) when wide metrics are enabled. "IP prefix" (without "extended") refers to the older TLV 128, which uses narrow metrics.
3. Analyzing the Metrics in the Exhibit
* R1's Output:
* R1 advertises 10.100.34.0/24 and 10.100.13.0/24 with a metric of 63.
* The presence of both "IP prefix" and "IP extended prefix" for the same prefix (10.100.34.0/24) suggests R1 is in transition mode. Transition mode means R1 supports both narrow and wide metrics to maintain compatibility with routers that may not support wide metrics.
* R2's Output:
* R2 advertises 10.100.12.0/24 and 10.100.23.0/24 with a metric of 1000.
* These are listed as "IP extended prefix," meaning R2 is using wide metrics (since a metric of
1000 exceeds the narrow metric limit of 63 per link).
4. Identifying the Problem
The issue is that load balancing isn't working over the new router R3. Let's evaluate why:
* Metric Discrepancy: R1 is using a metric of 63 (which fits within narrow metrics), while R2 is using a metric of 1000 (which requires wide metrics). This suggests that R1 and R2 are operating with different metric styles:
* R1 is likely in transition mode (supporting both narrow and wide metrics).
* R2 is using wide metrics exclusively (since its metric of 1000 can only be advertised using wide metrics).
* R3's Role: Since R3 is newly added and load balancing isn't working, we need to consider R3's configuration. The exhibit doesn't show R3's IS-IS database, but the options suggest a problem with wide metrics on either R1 or R3.
* Wide Metrics Requirement: For load balancing to work, all routers in the IS-IS domain must consistently use the same metric style (either all narrow or all wide). If R3 doesn't have wide metrics enabled, it can only process narrow metrics (max 63 per link). This means:
* R3 would ignore R2's advertisements (metric 1000) because they use wide metrics, which R3 can't process.
* R3 would only process R1's narrow metric advertisements (metric 63), leading to incomplete routing information and preventing load balancing.
5. Evaluating the Options
Let's go through each option to confirm the correct answer:
* A. R2 is missing internal routes for R1:
* R2's database shows prefixes like 10.100.12.0/24 and 10.100.23.0/24, but it doesn't show R1's prefixes. However, this is expected because the exhibit only shows a subset of the database. The problem is about load balancing, not missing routes entirely. R2 likely has routes from R1 but may not be able to use them for load balancing if metric styles don't match. This option is incorrect.
* B. R1 is missing internal routes for R2:
* R1's database shows its own prefixes (10.100.34.0/24, 10.100.13.0/24) but not R2's prefixes.
Again, this is likely because the exhibit is limited. R1 should have R2's routes in its database (since they're both in Level 2), but the issue is load balancing, not missing routes. This option is incorrect.
* C. R3 does not have wide-metrics enabled:
* If R3 doesn't have wide metrics enabled, it can only process narrow metrics (max 63). R2's prefixes with a metric of 1000 (using wide metrics) would be ignored by R3. This would result in R3 having an incomplete view of the network, preventing load balancing across paths that involve R2's prefixes. This aligns with the problem described and is the most likely cause. This option is correct.
* D. R1 does not have wide-metrics enabled:
* R1's output shows "IP extended prefix" entries, which are only advertised if wide metrics are enabled. R1 is likely in transition mode (advertising both narrow and wide metrics), so it does support wide metrics. This option is incorrect.
6. Why Load Balancing Fails
For load balancing to work in IS-IS, the total path metrics to a destination must be equal across multiple paths. If R3 doesn't support wide metrics:
* R3 ignores R2's prefixes (metric 1000) because they use wide metrics.
* R3 only sees R1's prefixes (metric 63) and builds its routing table based on narrow metrics.
* As a result, R3 doesn't see equal-cost paths involving R2's prefixes, and load balancing fails.
If R3 had wide metrics enabled, it would process both R1's and R2's prefixes, calculate the total path metrics, and potentially find equal-cost paths for load balancing.
7. Solution
To fix the issue, R3 needs to have wide metrics enabled. In Junos, this can be done with the following configuration:
set protocols isis level 2 wide-metrics-only
This ensures R3 uses wide metrics exclusively, matching R2's configuration and allowing it to process R2's prefixes with metrics like 1000. R1 is already in transition mode, so it will remain compatible.

 

質問 # 75
Which two statements are correct about a sham link? (Choose two.)

• A. The PEs exchange Type 3 OSPF LSAs instead of Type 1 OSPF LSAs for the L3VPN routes.
• B. The PEs exchange Type 1 OSPF LSAs instead of Type 3 OSPF LSAs for the L3VPN routes
• C. It creates an OSPF multihop neighborship between two PE routers.
• D. It creates a BGP multihop neighborship between two PE routers.

正解：B、C

解説：
A sham link is a logical link between two PE routers that belong to the same OSPF area but are connected through an L3VPN. A sham link makes the PE routers appear as if they are directly connected, and prevents OSPF from preferring an intra-area back door link over the VPN backbone. A sham link creates an OSPF multihop neighborship between the PE routers using TCP port 646. The PEs exchange Type 1 OSPF LSAs instead of Type 3 OSPF LSAs for the L3VPN routes, which allows OSPF to use the correct metric for route selection1.

 

質問 # 76

Click the Exhibit hutton.
You are configuring an interprovider Option C Layer 3 VPN to connect two customer sites.
Referring to the exhibit, which three statements are correct? (Choose three.)

• A. P routers only maintain the internal routes from their own AS.
• B. P routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS and the loopback address from the other AS PEs.
• C. PE routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS, the loopback address from the other AS PEs, and the L3VPN routes.
• D. ASBR routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS, the loopback address from the other AS PEs, and the L3VPN routes.
• E. ASBR routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS and the loopback addresses from the other AS PEs.

正解：A、C、E

解説：
Interprovider Option C for Layer 3 VPNs involves the use of Autonomous System Boundary Routers (ASBRs) to exchange labeled VPN-IPv4 routes between different Autonomous Systems (AS). This option requires BGP sessions between ASBRs, and the VPN routes are carried end-to-end using MPLS labels. Here' s a detailed analysis of the roles of different routers in this scenario:
1. **ASBR Routers**:
- ASBRs are responsible for exchanging VPN-IPv4 routes between different ASes.
- **A. ASBR routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS and the loopback addresses from the other AS PEs.**
- Correct. ASBRs maintain routes to internal destinations within their own AS, and they also need to know the loopback addresses of PEs in the other AS to set up the BGP sessions and MPLS tunnels.
2. **PE Routers**:
- PE routers are responsible for maintaining VPN routes and label information to forward VPN traffic correctly.
- **B. PE routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS, the loopback address from the other AS PEs, and the L3VPN routes.**
- Correct. PE routers need to maintain:
- Internal routes within their AS for routing.
- Loopback addresses of other AS PEs for establishing MPLS LSPs.
- L3VPN routes to provide end-to-end VPN connectivity.
3. **P Routers**:
- P routers are the core routers that do not participate in BGP VPN routing but forward labeled packets based on MPLS labels.
- **C. P routers only maintain the internal routes from their own AS.**
- Correct. P routers maintain the internal routing information to forward packets within the AS and use MPLS labels for forwarding VPN packets. They do not maintain VPN routes or routes from other ASes.
4. **Incorrect Statements**:
- **D. P routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS and the loopback address from the other AS PEs.
**
- Incorrect. P routers do not need to maintain the loopback addresses of other AS PEs. They only maintain internal routing and MPLS label information.
- **E. ASBR routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS, the loopback address from the other AS PEs, and the L3VPN routes.**
- Incorrect. ASBR routers do not maintain L3VPN routes. They exchange labeled VPN-IPv4 routes with other ASBRs and forward them to PE routers.
**Conclusion**:
The correct answers are:
**A. ASBR routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS and the loopback addresses from the other AS PEs.**
**B. PE routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS, the loopback address from the other AS PEs, and the L3VPN routes.**
**C. P routers only maintain the internal routes from their own AS.**
**References**:
- Juniper Networks Documentation on Interprovider VPNs: [Interprovider VPN Configuration](https://www.
juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/topic-map/mpls-vpn-interprovider.html)
- MPLS and VPN Architectures, CCIP Edition by Ivan Pepelnjak and Jim Guichard

 

質問 # 77
Your organization manages a Layer 3 VPN for multiple customers To support advanced route than one BGP community on advertised VPN routes to remote PE routers.
Which routing-instance configuration parameter would support this requirement?

• A. vrf-target export
• B. vrf-export
• C. vrf-target import
• D. vrf-import

正解：A

解説：
The vrf-target export parameter is used to specify one or more BGP extended community attributes that are attached to VPN routes when they are exported from a VRF routing instance to remote PE routers. This parameter allows you to control which VPN routes are accepted by remote PE routers based on their import policies. You can specify more than one vrf-target export value for a VRF routing instance to support advanced route filtering or route leaking scenarios.

 

質問 # 78
......

優れたJN0-664試験問題を使用すると、JN0-664認定資格を取得して自分自身を向上させ、より良い未来とより良い未来を実現することができます。 JN0-664トレーニングガイドを使用すると、職業で認められます。 JN0-664試験のブレーンダンプは、より大きな会社に注目させる能力を証明できます。 その後、より良い仕事を取得し、適切な職場に行くための選択肢があります。 JN0-664試験問題を試してみてはいかがですか。JN0-664試験問題が最高の準備資料であることに驚かれることでしょう。

JN0-664 PDF: https://www.pass4test.jp/JN0-664.html

• JN0-664資格関連題 🔮 JN0-664日本語参考 👧 JN0-664試験 ➡ 今すぐ⏩ www.passtest.jp ⏪で《 JN0-664 》を検索し、無料でダウンロードしてくださいJN0-664模擬トレーリング
• 優秀なJN0-664過去問 - 資格試験におけるリーダーオファー - すぐにダウンロードJN0-664: Service Provider, Professional (JNCIP-SP) 😠 ⮆ www.goshiken.com ⮄で➽ JN0-664 🢪を検索し、無料でダウンロードしてくださいJN0-664問題数
• JN0-664最新な問題集 😥 JN0-664最新な問題集 🔒 JN0-664最新テスト 🥓 [ www.xhs1991.com ]サイトで➡ JN0-664 ️⬅️の最新問題が使えるJN0-664独学書籍
• Juniper JN0-664過去問: Service Provider, Professional (JNCIP-SP) - GoShiken PDFダウンロード無料 😲 “ JN0-664 ”を無料でダウンロード【 www.goshiken.com 】で検索するだけJN0-664サンプル問題集
• 最高のJN0-664過去問一回合格-ハイパスレートのJN0-664 PDF 🥧 最新▷ JN0-664 ◁問題集ファイルは《 www.it-passports.com 》にて検索JN0-664専門知識内容
• JN0-664最新受験攻略 🔻 JN0-664日本語復習赤本 😍 JN0-664試験時間 🔹 今すぐ《 www.goshiken.com 》を開き、⏩ JN0-664 ⏪を検索して無料でダウンロードしてくださいJN0-664受験体験
• 優秀なJN0-664過去問 - 資格試験におけるリーダーオファー - すぐにダウンロードJN0-664: Service Provider, Professional (JNCIP-SP) 👽 ✔ www.it-passports.com ️✔️を入力して⏩ JN0-664 ⏪を検索し、無料でダウンロードしてくださいJN0-664最新受験攻略
• JN0-664日本語対策問題集 🍰 JN0-664問題数 🌾 JN0-664日本語対策問題集 🕋 時間限定無料で使える➡ JN0-664 ️⬅️の試験問題は（ www.goshiken.com ）サイトで検索JN0-664最新テスト
• 最高のJN0-664過去問一回合格-ハイパスレートのJN0-664 PDF 🥦 ➽ www.pass4test.jp 🢪を開いて“ JN0-664 ”を検索し、試験資料を無料でダウンロードしてくださいJN0-664問題数
• JN0-664最新な問題集 🆓 JN0-664日本語復習赤本 🤞 JN0-664日本語復習赤本 🕊 ▷ JN0-664 ◁を無料でダウンロード⇛ www.goshiken.com ⇚で検索するだけJN0-664日本語復習赤本
• 実際的なJN0-664過去問 - 合格スムーズJN0-664 PDF | 大人気JN0-664日本語認定 🔷 ▶ www.pass4test.jp ◀に移動し、[ JN0-664 ]を検索して無料でダウンロードしてくださいJN0-664資格関連題
• karnitradingacademy.com, www.stes.tyc.edu.tw, pct.edu.pk, thephilatherapynetwork.com, www.stes.tyc.edu.tw, karlbro462.glifeblog.com, www.so0912.com, www.stes.tyc.edu.tw, financialtipsacademy.in, mastarity.com

ちなみに、Pass4Test JN0-664の一部をクラウドストレージからダウンロードできます：https://drive.google.com/open?id=17fzeHsXyZJxtArQK8hhLwZaRI-YypLEM