Free Practice Questions for HP HPE7-A06 Exam

The goal is to make the adjacent router prefer routes exported by AGG-SW2 over AGG-SW1 for iBGP and eBGP routes to AS65000. Both switches use a route-map BGP-EXPORT with an ip-prefix list local-export. BGP path selection uses attributes like local preference, AS path length, and metric to determine the preferred route.

Analysis of Options:

Option A:Setting local-preference 200 affects iBGP route selection within the same AS but has no impact on eBGP peers (external AS65000), as local preference is not advertised externally.

Option B:Prepending the AS path with 65345 65345 65345 65345 increases the AS path length for routes exported by AGG-SW1, making them less preferred by the adjacent router (both iBGP and eBGP peers) compared to AGG-SW2’s routes, which have a shorter AS path.

Option C:Setting metric 200 affects the MED (Multi-Exit Discriminator), which is used for eBGP route selection within the same AS but is less influential than AS path length and not applicable for iBGP.

Option D:Incorrect syntax (set as-path without prepend) and does not achieve the desired effect.

Why Option B is Correct:BGP route selection prioritizes the shortest AS path for both iBGP and eBGP. By prepending AS 65345 multiple times to AGG-SW1’s exported routes, AGG-SW1’s routes appear less attractive due to a longer AS path, causing the adjacent router to prefer AGG-SW2’s routes. This is a standard BGP traffic engineering technique.

Relevance to Certification Objectives:

Routing (16%):Involves designing and troubleshooting BGP routing topologies, including manipulating path attributes like AS path.

Troubleshooting (10%):Includes remediating BGP routing issues by adjusting route-maps.

The question involves troubleshooting an issue where the command output is initially unknown, but subsequent executions show diagnostic information for an interface (1/1/X). The task is to identify appropriate diagnostic commands to troubleshoot the issue.

Analysis of Options:

Option A (diag interface transceiver al):Incorrect syntax; “al” is not a valid parameter.

Option B (diag interface 1/VX transceiver all):Incorrect syntax; “1/VX” is not a valid interface format.

Option C (diag cable-diagnostic 1/1/X):Correct. This command runs a cable diagnostic test (TDR) on interface 1/1/X to check for cable faults, such as opens or shorts.

Option D (diag cable 1/1/X):Incorrect; “diag cable” is not a valid AOS-CX command.

Option E (diag 1/1/X transceiver all):Correct. This command displays detailed transceiver information, including status, errors, and signal quality, useful for diagnosing interface issues.

Why C and E are Correct:The diag cable-diagnostic 1/1/X command is used to perform TDR tests to identify cable faults, which could cause connectivity issues. The diag 1/1/X transceiver all command provides detailed transceiver diagnostics, such as power levels, errors, or hardware issues, helping pinpoint problems with the interface or connected device. These commands align with AOS-CX troubleshooting workflows for physical layer issues.

Relevance to Certification Objectives:

Troubleshooting (10%):Involves using diagnostic commands to troubleshoot campus network issues.

Connectivity (9%):Includes identifying problem areas in device deployment, such as cabling or transceiver issues.

The issue is that switches are taking a very long time to execute commands. The question points towards the AAA configuration as the context (though the specific configuration is missing).

AAA and Command Latency:When AAA servers (like TACACS+ or RADIUS) are used for authentication, authorization, or accounting, the switch must communicate with these servers.

Impact of Unreachable Servers:If the primary AAA server configured on the switch becomes unreachable (due to network issues, server downtime, or firewall rules), the switch will attempt to connect, wait for a configured timeout period (often several seconds), and only then potentially try a secondary server or fall back to local credentials (if configured). This connection attempt and timeout period occurring before command execution (if command authorization is enabled) or during login introduces significant delays.

Analysis of Options:

A: Too many administrators might strain resources, but AAA timeouts cause more predictable, long delays per action.

B: Authentication fail-through only comes into playafterthe primary server times out. The timeout itself causes the delay.

C: An unreachable primary TACACS+ (or RADIUS) server is a classic cause of slow logins and command execution delays due to connection timeouts.  

D: A DoS attack might cause general slowness but isn't specifically linked to the AAA configuration context provided.

Conclusion:The most likely cause, given the context of AAA configuration and the symptom of slow command execution, is that the primary configured AAA server (like TACACS+) is unreachable, causing the switch to wait for timeouts.  

The question involves troubleshooting BGP issues on an AOS-CX switch, and the task is to identify the appropriate CLI command to begin the troubleshooting process.

Analysis of Options:

Option A (show run | route destination):Incorrect syntax; the show running-config command with a filter is not specific to BGP troubleshooting.

Option B (show debug start):Incorrect; AOS-CX does not use show debug start for initiating debugging.

Option C (show buffer | debug):Incorrect; this is not a valid AOS-CX command for BGP troubleshooting.

Option D:Correct. The show debug destinations command displays the current debug settings, including whether BGP debugging is enabled, which is a critical first step in troubleshooting BGP issues.

Why Option D is Correct:To troubleshoot BGP issues, the first step is to verify if debugging is enabled for BGP events, as this provides detailed logs of session states, messages, and errors. The show debug destinations command on AOS-CX switches shows which debug types (e.g., BGP) are active and where logs are sent (e.g., console, syslog). If BGP debugging is not enabled, the administrator can enable it using debug bgp to capture relevant information, making this the ideal starting point for BGP troubleshooting.

Relevance to Certification Objectives:

Troubleshooting (10%):Involves performing advanced troubleshooting of routing protocols like BGP.

Routing (16%):Includes diagnosing BGP session and configuration issues.

The question involves a customer experiencing performance degradation due to periodic overutilization of ToR-1 uplinks to legacy Core-1 and Core-2 switches. The proposed solution is to migrate to CX 6400 series switches, and the task is to identify which aspects of the CX 6400 platform address the issue while adhering to HPE Aruba Networking best practices.

Analysis of Options:

Option A:Incorrect. The CX 6400 does not support “multi-region design” as a feature for active forwarding pathways.

Option B:Correct. Virtual Switching Framework (VSF) on the CX 6400 allows multiple active forwarding pathways by creating a single logical switch from multiple physical switches, eliminating the need for STP in the core and reducing uplink congestion.

Option C:Incorrect. Backplane stacking does not directly enable ESXi hosts to load balance using active LACP; this is unrelated to uplink utilization.

Option D:Correct. Multi-Chassis Link Aggregation (MC-LAG) allows Core-1 and Core-2 to form a single logical 802.3ad (LACP) device, enabling active-active uplinks from ToR-1 and load balancing traffic to prevent overutilization.

Why B and D are Correct:The performance degradation is caused by uplink overutilization, likely due to STP blocking redundant paths or inefficient load balancing. The CX 6400’s VSF capability combines multiple switches into a single logical device, allowing all uplinks from ToR-1 to be active without relying on STP, which often blocks redundant paths. MC-LAG further enhances this by presenting Core-1 and Core-2 as a single LACP system, enabling ToR-1 to use all uplinks actively via LACP load balancing. These features align with HPE Aruba Networking best practices for high-availability and performance in campus core deployments.

Relevance to Certification Objectives:

Network Resiliency and Virtualization (8%):Designing and troubleshooting VSF and MC-LAG for resiliency and redundancy.

Performance Optimization (6%):Analyzing and remediating uplink utilization issues.

Connectivity (9%):Applying advanced networking architectures like VSF and MC-LAG.

The requirement is to secure independent network users from each other in a conference venue using Edge-1. This scenario typically calls for Private VLANs,specifically using the 'isolated' type to prevent communication between hosts within the same secondary VLAN.  

Analysis of Options:

Private VLANs consist of a primary VLAN and one or more secondary VLANs (isolated or community). Isolated ports cannot communicate with other isolated ports in the same VLAN; they can only communicate with promiscuous ports (usually the router uplink). Community ports can communicate with each other and promiscuous ports.

Option A: Configures VLAN 152 as private-vlan community.  

Option B: Configures VLAN 151 as private-vlan community.  

Option C: Defines VLAN 152 as a primary-vlan associated with itself, which isn't standard syntax/logic.  

Option D: Defines VLAN 151 as a primary-vlan associated with itself.  

The goal isisolation. None of the options directly configure an isolated VLAN. Options A and B configure community VLANs, which allow communication between users within that VLAN, contradicting the requirement. Options C and D attempt to define primary VLANs in a potentially incorrect way.

Caveat:There seems to be an issue with the provided options. Standard configuration to make VLAN 151 isolated would involve defining a primary VLAN (e.g., vlan 152 private-vlan primary) and then defining VLAN 151 as isolated (vlan 151 private-vlan isolated). Since none of the options correctly configure anisolatedVLAN, and the requirement is isolation, the question or options are likely flawed. However, if forced to interpret intent, questions sometimes test understanding of thetypesof private VLANs. Changing a VLANtocommunity type (Option B for VLAN 151) is a distinct action, even if it doesn't meet the statedisolationgoal. Without correct options for 'isolated', selecting the 'best' flawed option is difficult. Assuming the question intends to configure VLAN 151 assome typeof private secondary VLAN, Option B modifies VLAN 151's private VLAN characteristic.

Conclusion:Based on the requirement for isolation, none of the provided options are correct. However, if assuming a potential error in the question or options and needing to select the closest modification related to private VLAN types for VLAN 151, Option B is chosen tentatively, despite configuring 'community' instead of the required 'isolated'.

The question involves a minor software upgrade on a VSF (Virtual Switching Framework) stack of CX 6300M switches in the aggregation role, with CX 8325 switches in a VSX cluster as the core. The task is to identify the method for a hitless upgrade on the aggregation switches.

Analysis of Options:

Option A:Correct. VSF upgrades start with the secondary switch, followed by the primary, to ensure continuous operation without traffic disruption.

Option B:Incorrect. In-Service Software Upgrade (ISSU) is used for VSX, not VSF, and follows a different process.

Option C:Incorrect. Upgrading the primary switch first in VSF risks disrupting control plane operations.

Option D:Incorrect. ISSU is not applicable to VSF upgrades.

Why Option A is Correct:In a VSF stack, the update-software command initiates a rolling upgrade, starting with the secondary (standby) switch to ensure the primary (commander) continues handling traffic. Once the secondary is upgraded and rejoins the stack, the primary is upgraded, maintaining hitless operation. This process leverages VSF’s ability to keep member switches active during upgrades, minimizing downtime. The CX 6300M’s VSF implementation supports this hitless upgrade mechanism, as per HPE Aruba Networking documentation.

Relevance to Certification Objectives:

Network Resiliency and Virtualization (8%):Designing and troubleshooting VSF for high availability and hitless upgrades.

Troubleshooting (10%):Ensuring minimal disruption during software upgrades in campus networks.

The problem describes uplink congestion affecting VoIP traffic (marked with DSCP EF, value 46) on AGG-1's LAG1 uplink. The existing configuration classifies this traffic into voip_class and applies voip_policy inbound, setting local-priority 6. To improve reliable forwarding during congestion, VoIP traffic needs strict priority queuing on the egress interface (LAG1).  

Analysis of Options:

Option A applies a QoS schedule profile globally but doesn't modify the policy's local-priority or apply the schedule profile specifically to the congested LAG.  

Option B modifies voip_policy to set local-priority 7 (mapping DSCP 46 traffic to queue 7) and applies the 8qDwrStrict schedule profile to the egress interface lag 1. In the 8qDwrStrict profile, queue 7 is configured for strict priority, ensuring voice traffic gets precedence over lower-priority traffic during congestion. This aligns with best practices for QoS for VoIP.  

Option C also sets local-priority 7 and applies the schedule profile to lag 1, but the profile itself configures queue 7 with DWRR (Deficit Weighted Round Robin) instead of strict priority, which is less suitable for delay-sensitive voice traffic.  

Option D applies a schedule profile globally and uses DWRR for queue 7.  

Conclusion:Option B is the correct solution because it maps the DSCP EF traffic to the highest local priority (7) and applies a QoS schedule profile to the specific congested uplink (lag 1) that treats queue 7 with strict priority. This ensures voice traffic is prioritized reliably.

This question asks about 802.1X functionality in an AOS-10 environment involving Gateway Clusters.

AOS-10 Gateway/802.1X Architecture:

Authenticator:The Access Point (AP) typically acts as the 802.1X authenticator, handling EAPoL frames with the client.

RADIUS Proxy:The Gateway Cluster (specifically the cluster leader or UDG anchor) often acts as a RADIUS proxy, forwarding RADIUS messages between the APs and the central RADIUS server (e.g., ClearPass). This simplifies RADIUS configuration as the server only needs to know about the gateway cluster.  

CoA:Change of Authorization messages from the RADIUS server are typically sent to the device acting as the RADIUS client, which is the Gateway Cluster when operating in proxy mode.  

Mobility (L2 vs L3):Roaming behavior and User Designated Gateway (UDG) assignment can differ based on whether clients maintain their IP address (L2 mobility) or potentially require new IP information (L3 mobility). L2-connected gateway deployments generally allow for more seamless UDG persistence compared to L3-connected deployments where the client might roam across subnet boundaries managed by different gateways.  

Re-authentication:Seamless roaming mechanisms aim to minimize full re-authentications during roaming events.  

Analysis of Options:

A: Full re-authentication after re-association on L3-connected gateways might occur in some scenarios but contradicts the goal of seamless roaming.  

B: States the UDG remains fixed on L2-connected but not on L3-connected gateways. This aligns with the architectural differences in handling mobility across L2 vs L3 boundaries within a cluster.  

C: Incorrect. CoA is generally sent to the RADIUS client/proxy (the Gateway Cluster), not always directly to the APs.  

D: Correct. Gateways commonly act as a RADIUS proxy, while the AP remains the authenticator handling EAPoL with the client.  

E: Incorrect. The RADIUS proxy function is not limited to only Tunnel and Bridged modes.  

Conclusion:Options B and D accurately describe common characteristics of 802.1X operation within an AOS-10 Gateway Cluster architecture.