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

Juniper JN0-352 Exam - Topic 9 Question 1 Discussion

Refer to Exhibit:R1 is not responding to ICMP requests sent to the VIP address.Referring to the exhibit, which command option would you configure on the virtual address to correct this problem?
B) accept-data
A) track
C) advertise-interval
D) no-preempt

Juniper JN0-352 Exam - Topic 9 Question 1 Discussion

Actual exam question for Juniper's JN0-352 exam
Question #: 1
Topic #: 9
[All JN0-352 Questions]

Refer to Exhibit:

R1 is not responding to ICMP requests sent to the VIP address.

Referring to the exhibit, which command option would you configure on the virtual address to correct this problem?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

In this configuration, R1's physical interface address (10.10.10.1) is different from the VRRP virtual IP address (10.100.100.1), meaning R1 is operating as a non-owner VRRP master --- it did not originate the virtual address as one of its own real interface addresses. By default, Junos VRRP masters that do not own the virtual address will forward transit traffic destined through that address but will not process or respond to traffic addressed directly to the VIP itself, such as ICMP echo requests, Telnet, or SSH sessions aimed at 10.100.100.1. This is deliberate default behavior intended to prevent ambiguity about which physical device is answering on behalf of a shared virtual identity. To allow the master to accept and respond to packets whose destination is the virtual address itself, the accept-data statement must be explicitly configured under the vrrp-group hierarchy. Once enabled, the elected master will process locally destined traffic sent to the VIP, resolving exactly the symptom described. The track option is used for interface or route-based priority adjustment to influence mastership, advertise-interval tunes the frequency of VRRP hello advertisements, and no-preempt prevents a higher-priority router from reclaiming mastership once a lower-priority router has taken over --- none of these affect whether the master processes traffic destined to the VIP. Reference topics: Junos Enterprise Routing -- High Availability, VRRP accept-data Behavior.


Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Nguyet
3 days ago
I agree with track, but I'm not convinced that's the only fix needed.
upvoted 0 times
...
Denna
8 days ago
Wait, are we sure it's not an issue with the VIP itself?
upvoted 0 times
...
Josephine
13 days ago
I think no-preempt might be the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Misty
18 days ago
Definitely need to check the track option!
upvoted 0 times
...
Mari
23 days ago
Looks like R1 is down for ICMP.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ahmed
29 days ago
I vaguely recall that "no-preempt" might be used to control failover behavior, but I'm not confident it's the solution for ICMP responses.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashlyn
1 month ago
I practiced a similar question where "advertise-interval" was mentioned, but I don't think that's the right choice here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brinda
1 month ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like "accept-data" could be related to how the VIP handles incoming requests.
upvoted 0 times
...
Franchesca
1 month ago
I think I remember something about using the "track" option to monitor the status of the VIP. That might help with the ICMP issue.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel