New Year Sale 2026! 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

HPE6-A85 Exam - Topic 11 Question 35 Discussion

Actual exam question for HP's HPE6-A85 exam
Question #: 35
Topic #: 11
[All HPE6-A85 Questions]

How does a single Aruba CX 6300M switch configuration use L3 connectivity to establish routing traffic between switch virtual interfaces 120 and 130?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

On an Aruba CX 6300M switch, routing between Switch Virtual Interfaces (SVIs) is enabled by default. Therefore, traffic between SVIs, like 120 and 130, can be routed internally without the need for additional configuration such as route leaking or static routes, as long as there is no 'no routing' configuration present on the SVIs.


by Tori at Dec 09, 2024, 02:05 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

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

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Angelyn
3 months ago
Static routes are definitely a good option too!
upvoted 0 times
...
King
3 months ago
Wait, are you sure about that? Sounds a bit off.
upvoted 0 times
...
Barney
3 months ago
Totally agree, deleting 'no routing' is essential for SVI.
upvoted 0 times
...
Adaline
4 months ago
I think route leaking is a must for proper traffic flow.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arlette
4 months ago
Routing is enabled by default with Aruba 6300M.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ilene
4 months ago
Creating static routes seems like a possible solution, but I wonder if that's necessary if routing is already enabled by default.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dana
4 months ago
I feel like I read something about needing to remove 'no routing' from the SVI interfaces to allow traffic to flow, but I can't recall the exact steps.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vi
4 months ago
I think route leaking might be relevant here, especially if we're dealing with different VRFs. I practiced a similar question about that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marva
5 months ago
I remember that routing is typically enabled by default on these switches, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the case for the CX 6300M.
upvoted 0 times
...
Noah
5 months ago
I'm a bit confused by this question. Is there something specific I'm missing about how the Aruba 6300M handles layer 3 connectivity between SVIs? I want to make sure I understand the underlying technology before I commit to an answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elbert
5 months ago
Option B looks promising - route leaking in the default VRF could be the way to get traffic between those two SVIs. I'll need to double-check the Aruba documentation to be sure, but that's my initial thought.
upvoted 0 times
...
Barrett
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a little unsure about this one. I know the Aruba 6300M can do layer 3 switching, but I'm not sure if routing is enabled by default or if I need to configure something. I'll have to think this through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Theola
5 months ago
This seems pretty straightforward. I think the answer is probably D - creating static routes between the SVIs would be the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vallie
1 year ago
Option A? More like 'Option Nah', am I right? Routing is never that easy.
upvoted 0 times
Elza
1 year ago
User 4: Yeah, creating static routes between SVI 120 and 130 might be the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Monte
1 year ago
User 3: I think we need to configure route leaking in the default VRF.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laine
1 year ago
User 2: Laine is right, routing can be tricky.
upvoted 0 times
...
Venita
1 year ago
User 1: Option A? More like 'Option Nah', am I right? Routing is never that easy.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Dominque
1 year ago
Hmm, Option B seems legit. Route leaking, the secret sauce of the networking world!
upvoted 0 times
...
Janey
1 year ago
Option D for the win! Simple static routes should do the trick. Gotta love the straightforward solutions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lezlie
1 year ago
Option C is just silly. Deleting 'no routing' won't magically enable routing.
upvoted 0 times
Ernie
1 year ago
User 3: User Comment: Option C is just silly. Deleting 'no routing' won't magically enable routing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Zona
1 year ago
User 2: B) Route leaking must be configured in default VRF.
upvoted 0 times
...
Edmond
1 year ago
User 1: A) Routing is enabled by default with Aruba 6300M.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Desirae
1 year ago
Sure, route leaking allows routes learned from one VRF to be leaked into another VRF, enabling communication between SVI 120 and 130.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melissia
1 year ago
Option A is a trap! Routing is not enabled by default, you gotta configure it.
upvoted 0 times
Elvera
1 year ago
No, we don't need to configure route leaking. We just have to create static routes between SVI 120 and 130.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mona
1 year ago
So, do we need to configure route leaking in the default VRF for L3 connectivity between SVI 120 and 130?
upvoted 0 times
...
Paola
1 year ago
I agree, option A is definitely a trap. You have to configure routing on the Aruba 6300M.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Allene
1 year ago
Hmm, that's interesting. Can you explain why you think that?
upvoted 0 times
...
Raelene
1 year ago
I'd go with Option D. Creating static routes is the way to go for this specific scenario.
upvoted 0 times
Jani
1 year ago
I agree, creating static routes is the most efficient way to establish connectivity in this case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Franklyn
1 year ago
Option D is the best choice for setting up routing between SVI 120 and 130.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Desirae
1 year ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is B) Route leaking must be configured in default VRF.
upvoted 0 times
...
Allene
1 year ago
I think the answer is A) Routing is enabled by default with Aruba 6300M.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elvis
1 year ago
Option B sounds right. You need to configure route leaking to get traffic between those SVIs.
upvoted 0 times
Katy
1 year ago
Exactly, it's an important step in the configuration process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kyoko
1 year ago
That makes sense, it's necessary to establish routing traffic between the SVIs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Viva
1 year ago
Yes, route leaking must be configured in default VRF.
upvoted 0 times
...
Remedios
1 year ago
I think option B is the correct choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel