Free Practice Questions for Cisco 400-007 Exam

EIGRP may be valid for initial deployment, but its scalability limitations — including proprietary nature, limited support over non-broadcast multipoint VPNs, and suboptimal convergence for large WAN overlays — make it most restrictive for future expansion.

BGP is typically the most scalable choice for large-scale VPN WAN deployments.

Why other options are incorrect:

B: IS-IS is not commonly deployed over Internet VPNs.

C: OSPF has better scalability than EIGRP for multi-area design but still limited over VPN overlays.

D: BGP is the preferred protocol for large-scale IPsec VPN WANs.

—

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

—

For EIGRP to maintain loop-free alternate paths, the feasibility condition must be met:

A. The Reported Distance (RD) must be lower than the router ' s Feasible Distance (FD).

E. A feasible successor must exist (i.e., an alternate next-hop satisfying the feasibility condition).

This design allows immediate failover without recomputation, ensuring fast convergence — a critical CCDE v3.1 protocol design principle.

Why other options are incorrect:

B, C, D: Misstate the feasibility condition or confuse RD and FD relationships.

—

UplinkFast is an STP optimization feature designed primarily for access layer switches to reduce convergence time when a direct link failure occurs. When a primary uplink fails, UplinkFast immediately activates a backup uplink port without waiting for traditional STP convergence.

It is most effective on access layer switches where redundant uplinks to distribution switches exist.

On distribution switches, it may also be useful if they have multiple uplinks toward the core.

UplinkFast is not recommended for core switches as these typically don’t have redundant uplinks toward lower-tier devices.

It is not designed to resolve interoperability issues between different STP versions or to adjust hello timers.

—

In infrastructure design, primary constraints are:

D (Component availability): If hardware or software components are not readily available, designs may need to adapt.

E (Total cost): Budget limitations always influence design decisions regarding redundancy, scalability, and technology selection.

Why other options are not primary constraints:

A: Monitoring is a design consideration, but not a core constraint.

B: Time frame impacts project delivery, not necessarily the design robustness.

C: Staff experience affects operations but is not a primary technical design constraint.

—

BFD (Bidirectional Forwarding Detection) provides sub-second failure detection at the control plane level, making it the fastest convergence mechanism for Layer 3 routing protocols.

Fiber Ethernet typically offers higher reliability and lower latency than copper.

When combined, Fiber with BFD provides the most robust and quickest convergence for unidirectional failures in a routed data center environment.

Why other options are incorrect:

A and B: Copper adds more physical susceptibility to errors.

B and D: UDLD is a Layer 2 unidirectional detection mechanism, not optimized for Layer 3 convergence.

—

Cisco FabricPath is a Layer 2 multipath technology that blends traditional Layer 2 Ethernet with routing technologies to enable loop-free forwarding and scalability. Two critical mechanisms used to mitigate loops:

C. RPF (Reverse Path Forwarding) Check: FabricPath applies a reverse path forwarding check, similar to multicast, to verify the source of a frame and discard duplicates arriving on unexpected paths.

D. TTL Header: FabricPath adds a Time-To-Live (TTL) field to Layer 2 frames, which is not present in traditional Ethernet. This prevents indefinite circulation of frames by limiting their lifetime in the network—much like in IP.

These elements allow FabricPath to prevent broadcast storms and loops in multipath Layer 2 topologies, addressing legacy STP limitations with efficient loop-avoidance methods.

==========

B (OSPF Type 1 external):Type 1 external routes include both the external cost (from redistribution) and the internal OSPF cost to the ASBR. This ensures accurate end-to-end metric calculation across domains.

Other options explained:

A: Type 2 external ignores internal OSPF cost, potentially creating suboptimal routing.

C/D: EIGRP doesn’t use OSPF metric types; redistribution into EIGRP uses EIGRP metrics.