exam questions

Exam 350-501 All Questions

View all questions & answers for the 350-501 exam

Exam 350-501 topic 1 question 140 discussion

Actual exam question from Cisco's 350-501
Question #: 140
Topic #: 1
[All 350-501 Questions]

Which two actions describe LSP delegation to PCE servers? (Choose two.)

  • A. removing TE re-optimization timer timeouts
  • B. changing the precedence of any of the PCE servers
  • C. entering the mpls traffic-eng reoptimize command
  • D. adding a new PCE server with lower precedence than the primary PCE
  • E. adding a new PCE server with higher precedence than the primary PCE
Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: CD 🗳️

Comments

Chosen Answer:
This is a voting comment (?). It is better to Upvote an existing comment if you don't have anything to add.
Switch to a voting comment New
rm868
Highly Voted 3 years, 6 months ago
i Think this is B and C The question does not specify which PCE server is to be the primary. so technically both D and E are correct depending on what you want to accomplish. if you want the Primary PCE to remain the primary then add a PCE with a higher precedence. If you want the Primary PCE to switch to the new PCE then set it at a lower precedence. For this reason is why i think the answer is B and C. Triggering PCE server precedence re-evaluation A change in a PCE server’s precedence is not considered a PCE server failure. So, the change in precedence does not trigger a redelegation timeout or a re-evaluation of LSP delegation to the PCE server at a PCC. Re-evaluation of LSP delegation to PCE servers after CLI reconfiguration is controlled by the TE reoptimisation timer. By default, the TE reoptimisation timer is set to 3600 seconds. You can accelerate the re-evaluation of LSP delegation from a PCC to PCE servers after you have changed the precedence of PCE servers or added new PCE servers. To do so, manually trigger TE reoptimisation.
upvoted 9 times
spyroskanel89
3 years, 1 month ago
Correct answer is B and C. rm868, I agree with your post. The meaning of question, it implies that PCE servers have already configured. Answer D and E are incorrect based on this assumption. Answer A is incorrect, it is unable to disable re-optimization timer (By default, the TE reoptimisation timer is set to 3600 seconds.).
upvoted 1 times
...
...
murmelika
Highly Voted 3 years, 11 months ago
sorry, i meant C and D
upvoted 7 times
...
rans3001
Most Recent 10 months ago
Selected Answer: BC
Triggering PCE server precedence re-evaluation A change in a PCE server’s precedence is not considered a PCE server failure. So, the change in precedence does not trigger a redelegation timeout or a re-evaluation of LSP delegation to the PCE server at a PCC. Re-evaluation of LSP delegation to PCE servers after CLI reconfiguration is controlled by the TE reoptimisation timer. By default, the TE reoptimisation timer is set to 3600 seconds. You can accelerate the re-evaluation of LSP delegation from a PCC to PCE servers after you have changed the precedence of PCE servers or added new PCE servers. To do so, manually trigger TE reoptimisation using the following command in privileged EXEC mode: mpls traffic-eng reoptimize
upvoted 1 times
...
Mephystopheles
1 year, 10 months ago
Selected Answer: CD
LSP Delegations as per link: -Enter "#mpls traffic-eng reoptimize", and add new PCE server (lower precedence)
upvoted 1 times
...
IcQ
1 year, 11 months ago
Selected Answer: CD
why not B? from the link in the question i quote: "A change in a PCE server’s precedence is not considered a PCE server failure. So, the change in precedence does not trigger a redelegation timeout or a re-evaluation of LSP delegation to the PCE server at a PCC." so basically changing the precedence do not trigger a delegation, but adding a new PCE server does
upvoted 1 times
...
1234512345
2 years, 1 month ago
C and D are better for me than C and B
upvoted 1 times
...
thejag
2 years, 2 months ago
B and C
upvoted 1 times
...
DUsoo
2 years, 2 months ago
Selected Answer: BC
Answers are B/C
upvoted 1 times
...
mohdema
2 years, 6 months ago
Selected Answer: CD
In the above code snippet, 100 is a lower precedence than 255, which is the default precedence. Therefore, the device with IP address 192.0.2.2 becomes the primary PCE and the device with 192.0.2.1 becomes the standby PCE. Triggering PCE server precedence re-evaluation A change in a PCE server’s precedence is not considered a PCE server failure. So, the change in precedence does not trigger a redelegation timeout or a re-evaluation of LSP delegation to the PCE server at a PCC. Re-evaluation of LSP delegation to PCE servers after CLI reconfiguration is controlled by the TE reoptimisation timer. By default, the TE reoptimisation timer is set to 3600 seconds. You can accelerate the re-evaluation of LSP delegation from a PCC to PCE servers after you have changed the precedence of PCE servers or added new PCE servers. To do so, manually trigger TE reoptimisation using the following command in privileged EXEC mode: mpls traffic-eng reoptimize
upvoted 1 times
...
elroy909
3 years, 5 months ago
The answer is in the question somewhat, as it talks about delegating the current primary, so C and D seem the best fit.
upvoted 2 times
ManuJi
7 months, 2 weeks ago
this! It's asking about "delegation", i.e., making a new primary. Thus the new server has to come in with lower-precedence.
upvoted 1 times
...
...
rokk_cm
3 years, 11 months ago
I think C and D are the right answers. Here is why from the same link: lower precedence => PCE is primary The IP addreseses are compared incase of equal priority. If the precedence for two PCEs is same, PCE with smaller IP address has a higher precedence. You can accelerate the re-evaluation of LSP delegation from a PCC to PCE servers after you have changed the precedence of PCE servers or added new PCE servers. To do so, manually trigger TE reoptimisation using the following command in privileged EXEC mode: mpls traffic-eng reoptimiz
upvoted 3 times
...
beenardino
3 years, 11 months ago
its definitely E If the precedence for two PCEs is same, PCE with smaller IP address has a higher precedence. and its C. You can accelerate the re-evaluation of LSP delegation from a PCC to PCE servers after you have changed the precedence of PCE servers or added new PCE servers. To do so, manually trigger TE reoptimisation using the following command in privileged EXEC mode: mpls traffic-eng reoptimize all found on the same URL provided.
upvoted 2 times
murmelika
3 years, 11 months ago
If a PCC is connected to multiple PCEs, the PCC selects a PCE with the lowest precedence value. If there is a tie, a PCE with the highest IP address is chosen for computing path. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/iosxr/ncs5500/segment-routing/72x/b-segment-routing-cg-ncs5500-72x.pdf But in the question does not mention anything about the IPs, only regarding the precedence, no? and lower precedence --> primary PCE
upvoted 3 times
beenardino
3 years, 11 months ago
you are right sir!
upvoted 2 times
...
...
rokk_cm
3 years, 11 months ago
Yes, but lower precedence means it has a better chance to be the primary, so definitely not E
upvoted 4 times
beenardino
3 years, 11 months ago
yes you are right! ( I also said this about Murmelika earlier)
upvoted 2 times
...
...
...
murmelika
3 years, 11 months ago
A and C?. According to the link provided in the answer, a lower precedence PCE becomes the primary PCE and then "You can accelerate the re-evaluation of LSP delegation from a PCC to PCE servers after you have changed the precedence of PCE servers or added new PCE servers. To do so, manually trigger TE reoptimisation using the following command in privileged EXEC mode:mpls traffic-eng reoptimize"
upvoted 1 times
...
Community vote distribution
A (35%)
C (25%)
B (20%)
Other
Most Voted
A voting comment increases the vote count for the chosen answer by one.

Upvoting a comment with a selected answer will also increase the vote count towards that answer by one. So if you see a comment that you already agree with, you can upvote it instead of posting a new comment.

SaveCancel
Loading ...
exam
Someone Bought Contributor Access for:
SY0-701
London, 1 minute ago