Exam 300-710 topic 1 question 111 discussion

Other have stated, why are we assuming this is a NAT issue. Traffic could be dropped by a rule or a misconfiguration. Initial I thought A, but if it's an external client, sure D. So I'll go against the grain and say A.

so which one is the correct answer The correct answer to resolve the connectivity issue between a client and a server without initiating traffic from the client is: D. Use packet-tracer to validate that the packet passes through the firewall and is NATed to the correct IP address. The packet-tracer tool simulates the path of a packet through the firewall, providing insights into how the traffic is processed, including NAT and firewall rules. This helps identify any configuration issues that might be preventing the client's response from reaching the server. Packet capture (option C) is also useful for verifying actual traffic, but packet-tracer is more comprehensive for simulating and diagnosing potential problems in the configuration without needing live traffic.

I think A is correct answer. packet tracer not able to validate traffic pass trough..i can validate policy configure correctly or not.

A and B is a straight NO. D gives you all the steps the firewall would do with the packet in theory. C taken for ingress and egress traffic show wat happens in real life. We know the packet reaches the server so packet tracer should not provide much new information but packet capture can tell if the response from the server reaches the firewall or not, it can also tell if the packet was sent out on the right interface with the expected IP addresses etc.

If it is statefull firewall, then ACL can not block the response from server this exesting connection, only wrong NAT rule for this server could be the issue. My opinion the answer is D.

if the traffic was being blocked by an access list, then the traffic would not be reaching the server, so it discards A answer. correct Answer is D

i would go with D because packet-tracer checkes the ACP AND NAT, Routing and all the stuff. So D will include A

D-Packet-tracer/NAT "without generating traffic from the client", makes this a packet tracer answer. The only problem is that packet tracer doesnt track the return packet from the server, and therefor wont tell you if it is being dropped by an ACL in the return path. What I have seen in my real-life packet tracer use, is packet tracer dropping the initial packet because the return packet would hit an unexpected NAT rule, causing asymmetrical NAT and the connection failing anyways. As such, my answer is

FTD is a statefull firewall, so A is out of the table D is correct

A is the correct answer. If it wouldn't NAT-et (if there is a NAT) the traffic wouldn't reach the server, But the ACL still can block the traffic FROM the Server to the Client.

There is nothing says that NAT was configured in this scenario. A is a valid answer.

It seems that A and D are valid answers depend on architecture.