Exam 300-420 topic 1 question 105 discussion

I disagree on EVN because it has a limitation of 32 VNs. The questions says can scale to hundreds of Virtual Network

I found the Cisco White Papers that talks about EVNs - You are correct when you say we can only use 32VNs, but this is only limited to one IP Infrastructure. Since each Branch will have it's own IP Infrastructure then we can do 32VNs at each branch, so if you have 10 branches x 32VNs that puts you well over hundreds of VNs that can be supported with this feature. - MPLS Core requires tons of Administrative Overhead. - VRF Lite supports up to 8 VNs. - Only Clear answer here is A, keep in mind they also mention Easy to configure, EVN is known for easy configuration.

MPLS Core (B): MPLS is designed to scale and can handle the segmentation of hundreds of virtual networks much more effectively than VRF-Lite. MPLS allows for easier management of large-scale environments, especially when multiple virtual networks need to be created and routed independently. MPLS provides both scalability and flexibility, making it a good fit for large deployments with multiple virtual networks. • VRF-Lite (D): While VRF-Lite can work in smaller networks, it doesn’t scale well for hundreds of virtual networks. It can cause administrative overhead and performance degradation as the number of VRFs increases. It is more suited for smaller to medium-sized environments rather than large-scale deployments.

A is correct answer

MPLS Core is overkill for a campus network, and it can't separate address structures and routing tables by itself. MPLS VPN must be deployed for this purpose. EVN supports 32 VNs per IP infrastructure/interface. I go for A due to ease of management, scalability, and operational efficiency.

EVN: Supports up to 32 VN not hundreds like our requirements XX VRF Lite: Is recommended for smaller amounts of VN requirements XX IPsec Tunneling: Would be great but it requires Tons of Administrative Overhead because we would have to sit there and configure all of the VNs. Multi Hop MPLS is the best answer, you can scale MPLS for hundreds if not thousands of Virtual Networks with very little overhead because your ISP does all the work. The requirements never stated we needed to save Money which we are kinda defaulted to in our IT Heads. Answer is C

VRF-lite support less than 8 vn EVN only support up to 32 vn MPLS Core support hundreds or thousand VN https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/solutions/Enterprise/Campus/Network_Virtualization/sccsolover.html#wp416666

D. hop-by-hop VRF-Lite To meet the requirement of creating multiple Layer 3 virtual networks, each with its own addressing structure and routing table for data forwarding, the recommended solution is hop-by-hop VRF-Lite. This solution provides logical separation of multiple routing domains over a single physical infrastructure, allowing for the creation of multiple virtual networks with unique routing tables and addressing structures. VRF-Lite is scalable, providing support for hundreds of virtual networks, and has simple configuration and management with minimal administrative overhead.

Table 1 Network Virtualization Technique Comparison Chart has the answer https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/solutions/Enterprise/Campus/Network_Virtualization/sccsolover.html

This question is super tricky. It cannot be A (EVN) because of the max 32 VN limit. That leaves us with MPLS, IPsec tunnels or VRF-Lite. MPLS is a maybe but not easy to configure. IPsec tunnels is a no. VRF-Lite is a maybe. Easier than MPLS but still plenty of admin overhead. So I think the best option is VRF-Lite: D

I disagree on EVN because it has a limitation of 32 VNs. The questions says can scale to hundreds of Virtual Network

They say EVN scales up to 32 VN's maximum... But I read also that EVN is more scalable than VRF-Lite, so I am prone to agree on EVN to be the answer, but still not sure as the question mentions hundreds. Source: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/evn/configuration/xe-3s/evn-xe-3s-book/evn-overview.html

I think A: Hop-by-hop easy virtual network (EVN) based: Hop-by-hop VRF-lite is manageable for networks with fewer numbers of virtual networks and fewer numbers of hops in a virtual network path. However, when the number of logical networks (virtual/tenants) increases, there will be a high degree of operational complexity to create and configure the interface or subinterface per VN. EVN provides the same benefits for guaranteeing traffic separation with more simplified operations. In other words, EVN builds on VRF-Lite concepts and capabilities and provides additional benefits, including the following: ■ EVN offers better end-to-end VN scalability compared to the classic hop-by-hop 802.1Q-based solution. ■ EVN offers simplified configuration and management. ■ EVN offers the capability to provision shared services among different logical groups.