Juniper JN0-664 Service Provider Professional (JNCIP-SP) Exam Practice Test

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.

BGP add-path is a feature that allows the advertisement of multiple paths through the same peering session for the same prefix without the new paths implicitly replacing any previous paths. This behavior promotes path diversity and reduces multi-exit discriminator (MED) oscillations. BGP add-path is implemented by adding a path identifier to each path in the NLRI. The path identifier can be considered as something similar to a route distinguisher in VPNs, except that a path ID can apply to any address family. Path IDs are unique to a peering session and are generated for each network3. In this question, we have a route reflector (RR) that receives two routes for the same prefix (192.168.0.0/16) from an EBGP neighbor. By default, the RR will only advertise its best path to its clients (R1 and R2). However, we want R1 and R2 to receive both routes from the RR. To achieve this, we need to configure BGP add-path on the RR and enable it to send multiple paths for the same prefix to its clients.

The hello interval is the time interval between two consecutive hello packets sent by an OSPF router on an interface. The dead interval is the time interval after which a neighbor is declared down if no hello packets are received from it. These parameters must match between two OSPF routers for them to form an adjacency. In the exhibit, router R1 has a hello interval of 10 seconds and a dead interval of 40 seconds, while router R2 has a hello interval of 30 seconds and a dead interval of 120 seconds. This causes a mismatch and prevents them from becoming neighbors23.

In the provided exhibit, PE-1 and PE-2 are configured with LDP-signaled pseudowires to provide Layer 2 connectivity between CE-1 and CE-2. The issue is that there is no connectivity between CE-1 and CE-2. Let’s analyze the potential causes for this fault.

1. **LDP-Signaled Pseudowire (L2 Circuit) Configuration**:

- Pseudowires in MPLS networks use LDP (Label Distribution Protocol) to signal the virtual circuit (VC) labels between PE routers.

- For successful connectivity, the VC ID (Virtual Circuit Identifier) and LSPs (Label Switched Paths) between the PE routers must be correctly configured and operational.

2. **Analysis of the Exhibit**:

- The output shows the status of the L2 circuit connection on PE-1.

- The status (St) for the interface is `rmt Dn`, which indicates that the remote site (PE-2) is down or unreachable.

3. **Potential Causes**:

- **A. The VC IDs are mismatched**:

- Correct. If the VC IDs configured on PE-1 and PE-2 do not match, the L2 circuit cannot be established. Mismatched VC IDs prevent the pseudowire from forming correctly.

- **B. There is no LSP configured from PE-1 to PE-2**:

- Correct. LSPs are required for MPLS forwarding. If there is no LSP from PE-1 to PE-2, the LDP session cannot establish a path for the pseudowire. This results in the pseudowire being down.

- **C. Interface ge-0/0/0 on PE-1 is down**:

- Incorrect. The interface status is shown as `Up`, meaning the physical interface is operational.

- **D. There is no LSP configured from PE-2 to PE-1**:

- While this might seem like a potential issue, the specific problem of the remote site being down (`rmt Dn`) typically relates more directly to the forward path from PE-1 to PE-2 (i.e., no LSP from PE-1 to PE-2). Hence, the more accurate immediate cause is covered in Option B.

**Conclusion**:

Given the analysis, the correct statements describing potential causes for the fault are:

**A. The VC IDs are mismatched.**

**B. There is no LSP configured from PE-1 to PE-2.**

**References**:

- Juniper Networks Documentation on L2 Circuits: [Configuring Layer 2 Circuits](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/task/configuration/layer-2-circuits-configuring.html)

- MPLS Configuration Guide: [Juniper MPLS Configuration](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/topic-map/mpls-overview.html)

In the exhibit, the output of the `show route protocol bgp` command is shown for the prefix `172.16.20.4/30`. Let's analyze the provided BGP routing table to determine which statements are correct.

1. **AS Path Analysis**:

- The AS path for the route `172.16.20.4/30` is shown as `2 I`.

- This indicates that the route was learned from AS 2 and it is an internal (iBGP) route within the same AS.

2. **Multiple Paths**:

- The route has two next-hop IP addresses: `10.0.18.2` via interface `ge-1/0/4.0` and `10.0.19.2` via interface `ge-1/0/5.0`.

- This indicates that BGP multipath is configured, which allows multiple equal-cost paths to be used for load balancing.

- BGP multipath must be explicitly configured to use multiple paths for the same prefix.

3. **Multihop vs. Multipath**:

- **Multihop Configuration**: This is typically used for establishing BGP sessions with peers that are not directly connected. It is not related to load balancing.

- **Multipath Configuration**: This is used to enable load balancing across multiple paths for the same prefix, which is the case here.

**Conclusion**:

Given the above analysis:

- **C. This route is learned from the same AS number**: Correct. The AS path `2 I` indicates the route was learned from the same AS number (AS 2).

- **D. The multipath configuration is used for load balancing**: Correct. The presence of multiple next-hops indicates that BGP multipath is configured for load balancing.

Thus, the correct answers are:

**C. This route is learned from the same AS number.**

**D. The multipath configuration is used for load balancing.**

**References**:

- Junos OS BGP Multipath Documentation: [Junos OS BGP Multipath](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/topic-map/bgp-multipath.html)

- Junos OS BGP Configuration Guide: [Junos OS BGP Configuration](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/concept/bgp-routing-overview.html)

Class of Service (CoS) in networking is used to manage traffic by classifying, scheduling, and sometimes modifying packets to ensure network performance and Quality of Service (QoS). Different CoS components are used to achieve these goals. Let's analyze each option to determine which CoS component allows you to alter class-of-service values on the outbound interface of an edge router.

1. **Output Policer**:

- Policing is used to control the rate of traffic sent to or from a network interface. It can drop or remark traffic that exceeds a certain rate.

- Policing is not typically used to alter CoS values but to enforce traffic limits.

2. **Scheduler**:

- A scheduler is responsible for managing the order in which packets are transmitted out of an interface based on their CoS markings. It can allocate bandwidth and prioritize traffic.

- The scheduler manages how packets are queued and sent but does not alter the CoS values of packets.

3. **Rewrite Rules**:

- Rewrite rules are used to modify the CoS values of packets, such as DSCP (Differentiated Services Code Point) or 802.1p bits, as they exit an interface.

- Rewrite rules can alter the class-of-service values in the packet headers to match the desired policies of the outbound interface.

- Therefore, rewrite rules are the correct component for altering CoS values on an outbound interface.

4. **Forwarding Classes**:

- Forwarding classes are used to categorize packets into different traffic classes within a router for QoS handling.

- They help in defining how packets should be treated by the scheduler but do not directly modify the CoS values.

**Conclusion**:

To alter class-of-service values in packets on the outbound interface of an edge router, the correct CoS component to use is:

**C. rewrite rules**

**References**:

- Juniper Networks Documentation on CoS: [Class of Service Overview](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/concept/class-of-service-overview.html)

- Junos OS CoS Configuration Guide: [Rewrite Rules](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/topic-map/class-of-service-rewrite-rules.html)

The problem in this scenario is that CE-1 is configured with an incorrect peer AS number for its BGP session with PE-1. The CLI output shows that CE-1 is using AS 65531 as its local AS number and AS 65530 as its peer AS number. However, PE-1 is using AS 65530 as its local AS number and AS 65531 as its peer AS number. This causes a mismatch in the BGP OPEN messages and prevents the BGP session from being established. To solve this problem, CE-1 should configure its peer AS number as 65530 under [edit protocols bgp group external] hierarchy level.

VPLS is a technology that provides Layer 2 VPN services over an MPLS network. VPLS uses BGP as its control protocol to exchange VPN membership information between PE routers. The route target is a BGP extended community attribute that identifies which VPN a route belongs to. The route target must match on PE routers that participate in the same VPLS instance, otherwise they will not accept or advertise routes for that VPLS.

The class-of-service (CoS) configuration in the exhibit shows how traffic is scheduled on the ge-0/0/0 interface. Let's analyze each statement to determine its correctness:

A. Incoming traffic will not be classified because no classifier exists in the configuration.

This statement is correct. The configuration shown does not include any classifier, so no explicit classification is defined. As a result, incoming traffic will not be classified according to any custom criteria.

B. The best-effort queue can transmit more than 40% of the total bandwidth on the ge-0/0/0 interface, if no other queue is using that bandwidth.

This statement is correct. The transmit-rate percent 40 means that 40% of the bandwidth is guaranteed for the best-effort queue, but it can use more bandwidth if other queues (like the priority scheduler) are not utilizing their allocated bandwidth.

C. Incoming traffic will be classified using the default classifier.

This statement is incorrect. Without an explicit classifier in the configuration, there is no mention of a default classifier being used. Therefore, the incoming traffic won't be classified based on the configuration shown.

D. The best-effort queue can never transmit more than 40% of the total bandwidth on the ge-0/0/0 interface, even if that bandwidth is available.

This statement is incorrect. The transmit-rate percent 40 sets a guaranteed minimum bandwidth but does not set a maximum limit. The best-effort queue can utilize more bandwidth if other queues are not using their allocated portions.

Layer 2 VPNs don’t support fragmentation in the provider network. It is critical that the provider network supports the largest frame that the CE devices can generate after the MPLS and virtual routing and forwarding (VRF) labels are added by the PE devices. This example leaves the CE devices at the default 1500-byte maximum transmission unit (MTU) while configuring the provider core to support a 4000 byte MTU. This configuration avoids discards by ensuring the CE devices cannot exceed the MTU in the provider’s network.

BGP route reflectors are BGP routers that are allowed to ignore the IBGP loop avoidance rule and advertise IBGP learned routes to other IBGP peers under specific conditions. BGP route reflectors can reduce the number of IBGP sessions and updates in a network by eliminating the need for a full mesh of IBGP peers. BGP route reflectors can have three types of peerings:

EBGP neighbor: A BGP router that belongs to a different autonomous system (AS) than the route reflector.

IBGP client neighbor: An IBGP router that receives reflected routes from the route reflector. A client does not need to peer with other clients or non-clients.

IBGP non-client neighbor: An IBGP router that does not receive reflected routes from the route reflector. A non-client needs to peer with other non-clients and the route reflector.

In the exhibit, we can see that RR1 and RR2 are route reflectors in the same AS with reachability redundancy. They have two types of peerings: EBGP neighbors (R1 and R4) and IBGP client neighbors (Client1, Client2, and Client3). RR1 and RR2 are also peered with each other as IBGP non-client neighbors.

The problem in this scenario is that R1 and R8 are not receiving each other’s routes because of private AS numbers in the AS path. Private AS numbers are not globally unique and are not advertised to external BGP peers. To solve this problem, you need to do the following:

Configure loops on routers in AS 65412 and advertise-peer-as on routers in AS 64498. This allows R5 and R6 to advertise their own AS number (65412) instead of their peer’s AS number (64498) when sending updates to R7 and R8. This prevents a loop detection issue that would cause R7 and R8 to reject the routes from R5 and R62.

Configure remove-private on advertisements from AS 64497 toward AS 64498 and from AS 64500 toward AS 64499. This removes any private AS numbers from the AS path before sending updates to external BGP peers. This allows R2 and R3 to receive the routes from R1 and R4, respectively3.

class-of-service (CoS) is a feature that allows you to prioritize and manage network traffic based on various criteria, such as application type, user group, or packet loss priority. CoS uses different components to classify, mark, queue, schedule, shape, and drop traffic according to the configured policies.

One of the components of CoS is drop profiles, which define how packets are dropped when a queue is congested. Drop profiles use random early detection (RED) algorithm to drop packets randomly before the queue is full, which helps to avoid global synchronization and improve network performance. Drop profiles can be discrete or interpolated. A discrete drop profile maps a specific fill level of a queue to a specific drop probability. An interpolated drop profile maps a range of fill levels of a queue to a range of drop probabilities and interpolates the values in between.

In the exhibit, we can see that the class-of-service configuration shows an interpolated drop profile with two fill levels (50 and 75) and two drop probabilities (20 and 60). Based on this configuration, we can infer the following statements:

The drop probability jumps immediately from 20% to 60% when the queue level reaches 75% full. This is not correct because the drop profile is interpolated, not discrete. This means that the drop probability gradually increases from 20% to 60% as the queue level increases from 50% full to 75% full. The drop probability for any fill level between 50% and 75% can be calculated by using linear interpolation formula.

The drop probability gradually increases from 20% to 60% as the queue level increases from 50% full to 75% full. This is correct because the drop profile is interpolated and uses linear interpolation formula to calculate the drop probability for any fill level between 50% and 75%. For example, if the fill level is 60%, the drop probability is 28%, which is calculated by using the formula: (60 - 50) / (75 - 50) * (60 - 20) + 20 = 28.

To use this drop profile, you reference it in a scheduler. This is correct because a scheduler is a component of CoS that determines how packets are dequeued from different queues and transmitted on an interface. A scheduler can reference a drop profile by using the random-detect statement under the [edit class-of-service schedulers] hierarchy level. For example: scheduler test { transmit-rate percent 10; buffer-size percent 10; random-detect test-profile; }

To use this drop profile, you apply it directly to an interface. This is not correct because a drop profile cannot be applied directly to an interface. A drop profile can only be referenced by a scheduler, which can be applied to an interface by using the scheduler-map statement under the [edit class-of-service interfaces] hierarchy level. For example: interfaces ge-0/0/0 { unit 0 { scheduler-map test-map; } }

Bootstrap messages are PIM messages that are used to distribute rendezvous point (RP) information dynamically during an RP election. Bootstrap messages are sent by bootstrap routers (BSRs), which are routers that are elected to perform the RP discovery function for a PIM sparse-mode domain. Bootstrap messages contain information about candidate RPs and their multicast groups, as well as BSR priority and hash mask length. Bootstrap messages are forwarded to all routers within a PIM sparse-mode domain using hop-by-hop flooding.

BGP route target filtering can be configured on PE devices or on route reflectors (RRs). Configuring BGP route target filtering on RRs is more efficient and scalable, as it reduces the number of BGP sessions and updates between PE devices. To configure BGP route target filtering on RRs, the following steps are required:

Configure the family route-target statement under the BGP group or neighbor configuration on the RRs. This enables the exchange of the route-target address family between the RRs and their clients (PE devices). Configure the resolution rib bgp.l3vpn.0 resolution-ribs inet.0 statement under the routing-options configuration on the RRs. This enables the RRs to resolve next hops for VPN routes using the inet.0 routing table.

Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS) is a link-state routing protocol designed to move information efficiently within a computer network, a group of physically connected computers or similar devices. It operates in two levels, Level 1 (L1) and Level 2 (L2), and supports hierarchical routing within a multi-area network.

Let's analyze each statement to determine its correctness in the context of IS-IS multi-area networks.

1. **Statement A: Internal L1 PDUs are flooded to the local area's L2 routers.**

- This statement is correct. L1 PDUs (Protocol Data Units) are flooded within the L1 area and also to the L2 routers that are present in the same area. These L2 routers act as the boundary routers that connect the local L1 area to other L1 areas via L2.

2. **Statement B: External L2 PDUs are flooded to all L2 routers in other areas.**

- This statement is correct. L2 PDUs are flooded throughout the entire L2 backbone, which includes all L2 routers in different areas. This ensures that inter-area routing information is shared across the network.

3. **Statement C: Internal L1 PDUs are flooded to all L1 routers in other areas.**

- This statement is incorrect. Internal L1 PDUs are only flooded within the local L1 area. They do not cross L1 area boundaries; inter-area communication is handled by L2 routers.

4. **Statement D: Internal L1 PDUs are only flooded to the local area's L1 routers.**

- This statement is correct. Internal L1 PDUs are indeed only flooded within their local L1 area, and do not go beyond it.

5. **Statement E: External L2 PDUs are only flooded to the local area's L2 routers.**

- This statement is incorrect. External L2 PDUs are flooded to all L2 routers throughout the IS-IS network, not just to those in the local area. This allows L2 routers to maintain a complete map of the network's topology.

**Conclusion**:

Given the analysis, the correct answers are:

**A. Internal L1 PDUs are flooded to the local area's L2 routers.**

**B. External L2 PDUs are flooded to all L2 routers in other areas.**

**D. Internal L1 PDUs are only flooded to the local area's L1 routers.**

**References**:

- Juniper Networks Documentation on IS-IS: [IS-IS Overview](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/concept/is-is-routing-overview.html)

- RFC 1195, Use of OSI IS-IS for Routing in TCP/IP and Dual Environments: [RFC 1195](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1195) which details the operation of IS-IS in multi-area networks.

Route reflection is a BGP feature that allows a router to reflect routes learned from one IBGP peer to another IBGP peer, without requiring a full-mesh IBGP topology. Route reflectors do not change any existing BGP attributes by default when advertising routes, unless explicitly configured to do so. A BGP peer does not require any configuration changes to become a route reflector client, only the route reflector needs to be configured with the client parameter under [edit protocols bgp group group-name neighbor neighbor-address] hierarchy level.

BGP uses several attributes to select the best path for a destination prefix. One of these attributes is origin, which indicates how BGP learned about a route. The origin attribute can have one of three values: IGP, EGP, or Incomplete. IGP means that the route was originated by a network or aggregate statement within BGP or by redistribution from an IGP into BGP. EGP means that the route was learned from an external BGP peer (this value is obsolete since BGP version 4). Incomplete means that the route was learned by some other means, such as redistribution from a static route into BGP. BGP prefers routes with lower origin values, so Incomplete is preferred over EGP, which is preferred over IGP.

In OSPF, routers form adjacencies by exchanging Hello packets. These packets contain several parameters that must match between OSPF neighbors to establish a successful adjacency. Key among these parameters are the Hello Interval and the Dead Interval.

Let's analyze the exhibit and the question to determine the correct course of action to ensure that R4 peers with both R1 and R2.

1. **OSPF Hello and Dead Intervals**:

- **Hello Interval**: The time in seconds between Hello packets sent out by a router. Default is usually 10 seconds for broadcast and point-to-point networks.

- **Dead Interval**: The time in seconds that a router will wait to receive a Hello packet from a neighbor before declaring the neighbor down. Default is usually four times the Hello Interval (40 seconds).

2. **Analysis of the Exhibit**:

- **R1's Interface**: Shows a Dead Interval of 40 seconds.

- **R2's Interface**: Shows a Dead Interval of 40 seconds.

- **R4's Interface**: Shows a Dead Interval of 20 seconds.

From the exhibit, we can see that R4 has a Dead Interval of 20 seconds, while R1 and R2 have Dead Intervals of 40 seconds. This discrepancy prevents R4 from establishing an OSPF peering with R1.

3. **Option Analysis**:

- **A. Adjust the Priority on R1 to be lower than the Priority on R4**:

- Incorrect. The OSPF Priority is used for DR/BDR election on multi-access networks and does not impact peering issues.

- **B. Change the MTU size on R1 and R2 to be 22 bytes higher than R4's MTU size**:

- Incorrect. While MTU mismatches can prevent OSPF adjacencies, the exhibit does not indicate an MTU mismatch issue.

- **C. Adjust the Dead Interval on R4 to match the Dead Interval on R1 and R2**:

- Correct. Matching the Dead Interval on R4 to 40 seconds will ensure that all routers have consistent Hello and Dead Intervals, allowing OSPF adjacencies to form.

- **D. Adjust the Hello Interval on R1 and R2 to match the Hello Interval on R4**:

- While this would be a valid approach if the Hello Intervals were mismatched, the exhibit shows that the Hello Intervals are consistent (10 seconds) across all routers. Therefore, this adjustment is not necessary.

**Conclusion**:

To correct the OSPF peering issue, the Dead Interval on R4 should be adjusted to match the Dead Intervals on R1 and R2. The correct answer is:

**C. Adjust the Dead Interval on R4 to match the Dead Interval on R1 and R2.**

**References**:

- Juniper Networks Documentation on OSPF: [OSPF Overview](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/concept/ospf-routing-overview.html)

- OSPF Configuration Guide: [Configuring OSPF](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/task/configuration/ospf-configuring.html)