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

HP Exam HPE6-A85 Topic 1 Question 34 Discussion

Actual exam question for HP's HPE6-A85 exam
Question #: 34
Topic #: 1
[All HPE6-A85 Questions]

The customer requires two Aruba CX 6200F 48G switches to be connected to each other with a distance of 80m/252ft between wiring closets. Switches need to have reservation for VSF expansion with ring

topology in each cabinet.

What is a valid configuration for a redundant link-aggregation port configuration?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

For an 80m distance between wiring closets, using SFP+ transceivers is appropriate as they can support longer distances than standard copper interfaces. Ports 1/1/51 and 1/1/52 are typically reserved for uplinks on Aruba CX 6200F 48G switches and can support SFP+ transceivers, making them suitable for a redundant link-aggregation port configuration.


by Theodora at Nov 16, 2024, 08:27 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium HPE6-A85 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Dudley
4 months ago
Option C, because who doesn't love starting from the bottom?
upvoted 0 times
Teri
3 months ago
Trevor: Sounds good, let's configure it that way.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brett
3 months ago
User 3: Agreed, let's go with Ports 1/1/1 and 1/1/2 for LAG.
upvoted 0 times
...
Trevor
3 months ago
User 2: Yeah, starting from the bottom makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Deja
3 months ago
User 1: I think option C is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Cordie
4 months ago
What, no option for using a carrier pigeon to connect the switches? I'm disappointed.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sina
4 months ago
I'm going to have to go with B. Ports 1/1/47 and 1/1/48 just make the most sense to me.
upvoted 0 times
Joye
3 months ago
User 2: Yeah, I think so too. Those ports should work well for the link-aggregation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tamekia
4 months ago
User 1: I agree, B seems like the best option for that setup.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lashanda
4 months ago
But wouldn't using SFP28 provide better performance for the link-aggregation port configuration?
upvoted 0 times
...
Jani
5 months ago
I'd go with D. Using the SFP+ ports for the LAG gives you the bandwidth you need for redundancy.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brynn
5 months ago
Option A seems like the logical choice. SFP28 ports are perfect for the 80m distance.
upvoted 0 times
Gwenn
4 months ago
User 4: SFP28 ports are the way to go for connecting the switches with that distance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavina
4 months ago
User 3: I think option A is the most suitable for the configuration needed.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thora
5 months ago
User 2: Definitely, SFP28 ports are ideal for that distance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ivette
5 months ago
User 1: I agree, option A with SFP28 ports is the best choice for the 80m distance.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Mica
5 months ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is D) Ports 1/1/51 and 1/1/52 with SFP+ for LAG.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashanda
5 months ago
I think the answer is A) Ports 1/1/49 and 1/1/50 with SFP28 for LAG.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel