Exam 400-007 All Questions

View all questions & answers for the 400-007 exam

Exam 400-007 topic 1 question 215 discussion

Actual exam question from Cisco's 400-007

Question #: 215
Topic #: 1

In a redundant hub and spoke "wheel" design, all spokes are connected to the hub, and spokes are connected to other spokes as well. During failure on one spoke link, the traffic from that site can be sent to a neighboring site for it to be forwarded to the hub site. But during peak hours, a link is overloaded and traffic is re-routed to a neighbor, which subsequently becomes overloaded. This overload results in network traffic oscillation as the load varies at each spoke site. This design provides more redundancy but not more resiliency because the routing protocol must process many alternate paths to determine the lowest cost path. Which two design changes help to improve resilience in this case? (Choose two.)

A. Increase the number of redundant paths considered during the routing convergence calculation.
B. Eliminate links between every spoke.
C. Increase routing protocol convergence timers.
D. Increase unequal-cost parallel paths.
E. Use two links to each remote site instead of one.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: BE 🗳️

by blezzzo at Oct. 12, 2023, 12:53 p.m.

Comments

Submit Cancel

Sheeda

Highly Voted 1 year, 8 months ago

Selected Answer: BE

B and E together looks good i.e. remove the wheel links completely and use two links to each spoke.

upvoted 7 times

...

blezzzo

Highly Voted 1 year, 8 months ago

Selected Answer: DE

A. Increasing redundant paths defeats the purpose since it causes routing protocol to process many more alternate paths to determine the lowest cost path. B. Eliminating links between every spoke kill redundancy. Site is unreachable if there is a failure on spoke link. C. Increasing convergence timers does not solve the problem of processing many alternate paths. D & E: Adding more links to the remote sites gives us added redundancy together with Increasing unequal-cost parallel paths helps both links share traffic in case one link is overloaded. Let me know what y'all think

upvoted 5 times

bdp123

1 year, 2 months ago

If you add another link from each Spoke to the Hub (answer 'E'), then you have redundancy from each Spoke and do not need the Spoke-to-Spoke physical connection (answer 'B').

upvoted 2 times

...

kalulosu

Most Recent 4 months, 4 weeks ago

Selected Answer: BE

I think ans are B and E. Eliminating links between spokes prevents excessive traffic oscillations and reduces the load on routing protocols. Providing multiple links to each remote site also ensures redundancy and allows traffic to be rerouted to another path in the event of link failure. This increases network resiliency and improves traffic stability.

upvoted 1 times

...

JCGO

8 months, 3 weeks ago

Selected Answer: BE

BE. Read more carefully. they have routing protocol issues related to a lot links between spokes. Why are you voting for adding more such inks...

upvoted 1 times

...

noxkrugger

9 months, 2 weeks ago

Selected Answer: DE

DE is the answer

upvoted 1 times

...

crypto700

10 months, 3 weeks ago

The answer is D&E

upvoted 1 times

...

Sheeda

1 year, 8 months ago

In any case, i dont think D is correct since that is what we want to avoid i.e. avoiding the routing protocol to process many alternate paths.

upvoted 1 times

...

Sheeda

1 year, 8 months ago

This link discusses this issue, E is correct. The other best option is to remove the wheel link between every other spoke. So B is not correct. I hope it is not a typo. https://www.nojitter.com/network-redundancy-or-resilience

upvoted 2 times

...