MENU
If a management VPLS is administratively disabled what will be the status of the associated user VPLS SAPs?
Suggested Answer: D
Get Premium 4A0-105 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
34 comments · newest first
LE
Lennie
11 months ago
C is a myth, you can disable a management VPLS if needed.
AV
Avery
11 months ago
B is definitely wrong, they won't all be disabled.
CL
Claudio
11 months ago
Wait, is it really possible to disable a management VPLS? Sounds off.
JE
Jettie
11 months ago
Totally agree, A makes the most sense here.
LY
Lynette
12 months ago
A is correct, the SAPs act like they're not part of the management VPLS.
PE
Pete
12 months ago
I don’t recall spanning tree being automatically enabled on user VPLS SAPs, so I think option D is probably incorrect.
LY
Lynna
1 year ago
I’m leaning towards option C because I thought we can't actually disable a management VPLS, but I need to double-check that.
GA
Gary
1 year ago
I remember a practice question that mentioned regular semantics applying when a management VPLS is disabled. Could that be option A?
MA
Makeda
1 year ago
I think if the management VPLS is disabled, the user VPLS SAPs might get disabled too, but I'm not entirely sure.
KA
Kayleigh
1 year ago
I don't think it's possible to disable a management VPLS. That's the core of the VPLS configuration, so it should always be active. The user VPLS SAPs would continue to function normally regardless of the management VPLS state. I'm pretty sure that's the correct approach here.
KA
Katlyn
1 year ago
Okay, I've got this. If the management VPLS is disabled, the user VPLS SAPs should still function normally, as if the management VPLS doesn't exist. The regular semantics should apply. I'm confident that's the right answer.
ME
Melodie
1 year ago
Hmm, I think the key here is understanding how the management VPLS and user VPLS are related. If the management VPLS is disabled, that might cause the user VPLS SAPs to be disabled as well. I'll need to review my notes on VPLS configurations.
MA
Markus
1 year ago
This is a tricky one. I'm not sure if the management VPLS being disabled would affect the user VPLS SAPs or not. I'll need to think this through carefully.
RE
Reena
1 year ago
Wait, I'm confused. If the management VPLS is disabled, wouldn't that mean the user VPLS SAPs would also be disabled or pruned? I'm not sure, but I think that might be the case. I'll have to double-check my understanding.
CL
Clement
1 year ago
Okay, I think the key here is to explore, draw out, and identify the information relevant to the change. That's going to be crucial.
MA
Malcolm
1 year ago
I'm a little unsure about this one. The options seem similar, and I want to make sure I understand the differences between BIA, RTO, MTTR, and SLA. Let me re-read the question and think it through step-by-step.
LA
Lashonda
1 year ago
This is a tricky one. I'll need to make sure I don't miss any of the loss relief rules and apply them correctly to the given figures. Time to put on my thinking cap!
IS
Isabelle
1 year ago
Haha, A? Really? As if the SAPs would just pretend the management VPLS doesn't exist. That's like saying, 'Oh, the manager is gone, so I don't have to do any work today!'
LU
Luther
1 year ago
I'm going with D. Enabling spanning tree on the user VPLS SAPs sounds like a reasonable way to handle the situation when the management VPLS is disabled.
JO
Johnna
1 year ago
I'm also leaning towards B. It seems like the most logical outcome.
NO
Nobuko
1 year ago
I agree with B. All user VPLS SAPs will be disabled/pruned.
JA
Janey
1 year ago
I think A makes more sense. It will be as if the SAP doesn't belong to a management VPLS.
LA
Lajuana
1 year ago
I'm not sure about C. It seems possible to administratively disable a management VPLS. But D could also work with enabling spanning tree on the user VPLS SAPs.
SA
Salome
1 year ago
I agree with B. All user VPLS SAPs will be disabled/pruned if the management VPLS is administratively disabled.
RE
Reiko
1 year ago
I think A makes more sense. It will be like the SAP doesn't belong to a management VPLS.
RO
Royal
1 year ago
Come on, how can C be the answer? Of course, you can administratively disable a management VPLS, that's just common sense!
JA
Jacqueline
2 years ago
I think the correct answer is B. If the management VPLS is disabled, it makes sense that the associated user VPLS SAPs would also be disabled or pruned.
AL
Alona
1 year ago
I see your point, it's important to consider all options before determining the correct answer.
AR
Armando
1 year ago
That could be a possibility, but I still think it's more likely that all user VPLS SAPs would be disabled or pruned.
TW
Twanna
1 year ago
But what if regular semantics apply and it's as if the SAP doesn't belong to a management VPLS?
WY
Wynell
1 year ago
I agree, it would make sense for all user VPLS SAPs to be disabled if the management VPLS is administratively disabled.
LE
Leonor
2 years ago
I'm not sure, but I think the answer might be D. Spanning tree will be automatically enabled on the user VPLS SAPs.
GL
Glory
2 years ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is A. Regular semantics will apply.
YU
Yuonne
2 years ago
I think the answer is B. All user VPLS SAPs will be disabled/pruned.