Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Cisco 200-301 Exam - Topic 1 Question 119 Discussion

Why would VRRP be implemented when configuring a new subnet in a multivendor environment?
A) when a gateway protocol is required that support more than two Cisco devices for redundancy
B) to enable normal operations to continue after a member failure without requiring a change In a host ARP cache
C) to ensure that the spanning-tree forwarding path to the gateway is loop-free
D) to interoperate normally with all vendors and provide additional security features for Cisco devices

Cisco 200-301 Exam - Topic 1 Question 119 Discussion

Actual exam question for Cisco's 200-301 exam
Question #: 119
Topic #: 1
[All 200-301 Questions]

Why would VRRP be implemented when configuring a new subnet in a multivendor environment?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Vesta at Mar 06, 2026, 12:58 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 200-301 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Kerry
3 days ago
D is interesting, but I feel it’s not the main reason for VRRP.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nadine
8 days ago
A sounds good too, but it’s more about Cisco devices.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pete
13 days ago
I agree, B makes sense. No need to update ARP cache.
upvoted 0 times
...
Barney
19 days ago
I think B is the best choice. It keeps things running smoothly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Winifred
24 days ago
D is interesting, but I prefer B for its simplicity.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vicky
29 days ago
A sounds good too, but B is more practical for failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vanda
1 month ago
Agreed, B makes sense. No need to change ARP cache.
upvoted 0 times
...
Michell
1 month ago
I think B is the best choice. It keeps things running smoothly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marcos
1 month ago
D is interesting, but I feel it’s less relevant in a multivendor setup.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alline
2 months ago
A sounds good too, but it’s more about redundancy with Cisco.
upvoted 0 times
...
Darrel
2 months ago
I agree, B makes sense. No need to change ARP cache.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sina
2 months ago
I think B is the best choice. It keeps things running smoothly after a failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Silvana
2 months ago
C is important too, loop-free paths are a must!
upvoted 0 times
...
Cristal
2 months ago
B is key! It helps avoid ARP cache issues after a failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rebecka
4 months ago
Wait, does it really work with all vendors? Sounds too good to be true.
upvoted 0 times
...
Noemi
4 months ago
Totally agree, it keeps things running smoothly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Coletta
4 months ago
VRRP is great for redundancy across different vendors!
upvoted 0 times
...
Elliott
4 months ago
I thought spanning-tree handled loops already?
upvoted 0 times
...
Anabel
5 months ago
It's crucial for keeping the ARP cache stable after a failure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lili
5 months ago
Wait, does it really work with non-Cisco devices?
upvoted 0 times
...
Glenna
5 months ago
Totally agree, it's essential for failover!
upvoted 0 times
...
Kenia
5 months ago
VRRP helps with redundancy across different vendors.
upvoted 0 times
...
Julio
5 months ago
I thought VRRP was implemented to ensure failover without changing ARP caches, so I might lean towards option B, but I need to double-check that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristine
5 months ago
I feel like option D makes sense because VRRP needs to work with different vendors, but I’m not confident if it really adds security features for Cisco devices.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marci
6 months ago
I remember practicing a question about gateway protocols, and I think VRRP is good for multivendor setups, but I can't recall if it directly relates to spanning-tree paths.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bulah
6 months ago
I think VRRP is mainly about redundancy, but I'm not sure if it specifically helps with ARP cache issues like option B suggests.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel