MENU
How does a single Aruba CX 6300M switch configuration use L3 connectivity to establish routing traffic between switch virtual interfaces 120 and 130?
Suggested Answer: A
Get Premium HPE6-A85 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
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.
40 comments · newest first
AN
Angelyn
11 months ago
Static routes are definitely a good option too!
KI
King
11 months ago
Wait, are you sure about that? Sounds a bit off.
BA
Barney
11 months ago
Totally agree, deleting 'no routing' is essential for SVI.
AD
Adaline
12 months ago
I think route leaking is a must for proper traffic flow.
AR
Arlette
12 months ago
Routing is enabled by default with Aruba 6300M.
IL
Ilene
12 months ago
Creating static routes seems like a possible solution, but I wonder if that's necessary if routing is already enabled by default.
DA
Dana
1 year 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.
VI
Vi
1 year ago
I think route leaking might be relevant here, especially if we're dealing with different VRFs. I practiced a similar question about that.
MA
Marva
1 year 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.
NO
Noah
1 year 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.
EL
Elbert
1 year 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.
BA
Barrett
1 year 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.
TH
Theola
1 year ago
This seems pretty straightforward. I think the answer is probably D - creating static routes between the SVIs would be the way to go.
VA
Vallie
2 years ago
Option A? More like 'Option Nah', am I right? Routing is never that easy.
EL
Elza
2 years ago
User 4: Yeah, creating static routes between SVI 120 and 130 might be the way to go.
MO
Monte
2 years ago
User 3: I think we need to configure route leaking in the default VRF.
LA
Laine
2 years ago
User 2: Laine is right, routing can be tricky.
VE
Venita
2 years ago
User 1: Option A? More like 'Option Nah', am I right? Routing is never that easy.
DO
Dominque
2 years ago
Hmm, Option B seems legit. Route leaking, the secret sauce of the networking world!
JA
Janey
2 years ago
Option D for the win! Simple static routes should do the trick. Gotta love the straightforward solutions.
LE
Lezlie
2 years ago
Option C is just silly. Deleting 'no routing' won't magically enable routing.
ER
Ernie
2 years ago
User 3: User Comment: Option C is just silly. Deleting 'no routing' won't magically enable routing.
ZO
Zona
2 years ago
User 2: B) Route leaking must be configured in default VRF.
ED
Edmond
2 years ago
User 1: A) Routing is enabled by default with Aruba 6300M.
DE
Desirae
2 years ago
Sure, route leaking allows routes learned from one VRF to be leaked into another VRF, enabling communication between SVI 120 and 130.
ME
Melissia
2 years ago
Option A is a trap! Routing is not enabled by default, you gotta configure it.
EL
Elvera
2 years ago
No, we don't need to configure route leaking. We just have to create static routes between SVI 120 and 130.
MO
Mona
2 years ago
So, do we need to configure route leaking in the default VRF for L3 connectivity between SVI 120 and 130?
PA
Paola
2 years ago
I agree, option A is definitely a trap. You have to configure routing on the Aruba 6300M.
AL
Allene
2 years ago
Hmm, that's interesting. Can you explain why you think that?
RA
Raelene
2 years ago
I'd go with Option D. Creating static routes is the way to go for this specific scenario.
JA
Jani
2 years ago
I agree, creating static routes is the most efficient way to establish connectivity in this case.
FR
Franklyn
2 years ago
Option D is the best choice for setting up routing between SVI 120 and 130.
DE
Desirae
2 years ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is B) Route leaking must be configured in default VRF.
AL
Allene
2 years ago
I think the answer is A) Routing is enabled by default with Aruba 6300M.
EL
Elvis
2 years ago
Option B sounds right. You need to configure route leaking to get traffic between those SVIs.
KA
Katy
2 years ago
Exactly, it's an important step in the configuration process.
KY
Kyoko
2 years ago
That makes sense, it's necessary to establish routing traffic between the SVIs.
VI
Viva
2 years ago
Yes, route leaking must be configured in default VRF.
RE
Remedios
2 years ago
I think option B is the correct choice.