F5 Networks 201 Exam - Topic 5 Question 109 Discussion

Actual exam question for F5 Networks's 201 exam

Question #: 109
Topic #: 5

An LTM device has a virtual server mapped to www.f5.com with a pool assigned. Users report that when browsing, they are periodically required to re-login to /resources/201.1.7.b.2_l.com. The objects are defined as follows:

Virtual server. Destination 192.168.245.100:443 netmask 255.255.255.0

Persistence: SSL session persistence

Profiles: HTTP/TCP

Which persistence method should the BIG-IP Administrator apply to resolve this issue?

ASource address affinity

Bhexadecimal

CSIP

DDestination address affinity

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

by Arlene at Mar 22, 2025, 11:14 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 201 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Glenn

9 months ago

SSL session persistence should handle this, right?

upvoted 0 times

...

Mozelle

9 months ago

Wait, why would they need to re-login? That’s odd!

upvoted 0 times

...

Vernice

9 months ago

I disagree, destination address affinity might be better here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Beckie

9 months ago

I think hexadecimal is a total miss for this scenario.

upvoted 0 times

...

An

10 months ago

Sounds like source address affinity is the way to go.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sanjuana

10 months ago

I recall that destination address affinity is usually less common, but it might help in this scenario. I need to think about how users are being routed.

upvoted 0 times

...

Terina

10 months ago

I’m a bit confused about the options. I thought hexadecimal persistence was more for specific use cases, not general login issues.

upvoted 0 times

...

Thomasena

10 months ago

This question feels similar to one we practiced where we had to choose between source and destination address affinity. I think source address affinity might be the right choice here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Erin

10 months ago

I remember studying SSL session persistence, but I'm not entirely sure if it directly relates to the re-login issue.

upvoted 0 times

...

Winfred

11 months ago

I'm not entirely sure about this one. The persistence options don't seem to match what's described in the question. I'll need to review the material on persistence methods again to make sure I choose the right one.

upvoted 0 times

...

Paulina

11 months ago

Okay, let's see. The users are having to re-login, which suggests the persistence settings aren't working as expected. Since the virtual server is using SSL, I think Source address affinity is the way to go to keep the users connected.

upvoted 0 times

...

Bobbye

11 months ago

Hmm, I'm a bit confused here. The question mentions SSL session persistence, but that's not one of the options. I'll need to think this through carefully to make sure I understand the right persistence method to apply.

upvoted 0 times

...

Scarlet

11 months ago

This one seems straightforward. The users are having to re-login, so it's likely an issue with the persistence settings. I'll go with Source address affinity to keep the same users connected to the same server.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lisha

1 year ago

SIP? Really? I don't think that has anything to do with this problem. Maybe the BIG-IP administrator should try turning it off and on again, that usually works!

upvoted 0 times

...

Golda

1 year ago

Destination address affinity? I don't know, that seems a bit too specific for this problem. Maybe I should just flip a coin and hope for the best!

upvoted 0 times

Aimee

1 year ago

Let's try Destination address affinity and see if it resolves the issue.

upvoted 0 times

...

Carey

1 year ago

I'm not sure, maybe we should consider Source address affinity instead.

upvoted 0 times

...

Talia

1 year ago

I think Destination address affinity might be the solution.

upvoted 0 times

...

German

1 year ago

D) Destination address affinity

upvoted 0 times

...

Maia

1 year ago

C) SIP

upvoted 0 times

...

Miss

1 year ago

B) hexadecimal

upvoted 0 times

...

Laine

1 year ago

A) Source address affinity

upvoted 0 times

...

Lai

1 year ago

Source address affinity? That sounds like it might work, but I'm not sure if that's the best solution for an SSL-based issue. Maybe I need to think this through a bit more.

upvoted 0 times

Aileen

1 year ago

I agree, Destination address affinity could also be a good choice.

upvoted 0 times

...

Corinne

1 year ago

D) Destination address affinity

upvoted 0 times

...

Cordelia

1 year ago

I think Source address affinity might be the best option here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Layla

1 year ago

A) Source address affinity

upvoted 0 times

...

Dana

1 year ago

Hmm, this looks like a tricky one. I'm guessing it has something to do with the SSL session persistence, but I'm not sure which option would be the right fix.

upvoted 0 times