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

Nokia 4A0-108 Exam - Topic 6 Question 71 Discussion

Actual exam question for Nokia's 4A0-108 exam
Question #: 71
Topic #: 6
[All 4A0-108 Questions]

Refer to the exhibit.

According to the PIM configuration on SR-3, can the receiver in the diagram receive multicast traffic from the source for group FF70:340:2001::1000? Assume all the other configurations are correct.

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Goldie at Jul 07, 2023, 07:01 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 4A0-108 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Lisandra
5 months ago
Not sure, but I feel like A could be right too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Desmond
5 months ago
I agree with B, the scope is definitely wrong.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pearlene
5 months ago
Surprised that no one mentioned the embedded-rp issue!
upvoted 0 times
...
Bev
6 months ago
I think it's option C, missing the 'rpf6-table' command.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bong
6 months ago
Definitely option B, the group address is off.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marguerita
6 months ago
I thought the PIM configuration was straightforward, but now I'm questioning if the group address scope really matters. Could it be option B?
upvoted 0 times
...
Susana
6 months ago
I feel like the embedded-rp group-range could definitely cause issues, but I can't recall the specifics. Maybe option D is the answer?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ramonita
6 months ago
This question seems similar to one we practiced where the RPF check was crucial. I think option C might be the right choice here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Antonette
7 months ago
I remember studying PIM configurations, but I'm not entirely sure if the group address affects multicast traffic directly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tess
7 months ago
Okay, let's see. The question is asking what the team should consider before implementing Salesforce Shield. I'll focus on understanding the differences between the answer choices and how they relate to the implementation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Daniel
7 months ago
Wait, I'm a bit confused. Is there a difference between MBR and GPT that I'm missing? I'll need to review those partition formats to make sure I understand the right approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Natalie
7 months ago
Oof, I'm a bit stumped on this one. I know there are a few different metrics we can use to assess regression model fit, but I'm drawing a blank on which one is most appropriate in this case. Gonna have to think it through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melodie
11 months ago
This is a tough one, but I think I've got it. The answer is B. The group address is in the wrong scope, so the receiver won't be able to get the traffic. Simple as that!
upvoted 0 times
...
Sue
11 months ago
Haha, this question is a real head-scratcher! I bet the exam writers are enjoying watching us scratch our heads. But I'm going with D - the embedded-rp group-range is just not right.
upvoted 0 times
Ashley
9 months ago
I see where you're coming from, but I'm sticking with D as well. Let's hope we're right!
upvoted 0 times
...
Ciara
10 months ago
Hmm, interesting point. But I still think it's D. The group-range has to be the issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Huey
10 months ago
I'm not so sure about D. I think it might be C because of the missing 'rpf6-table' command.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashley
10 months ago
I think you might be onto something with D. That embedded-rp group-range does seem off.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Idella
12 months ago
I'm leaning towards option C. The 'rpf6-table' command is missing, which is crucial for PIM to function properly. Without that, the receiver won't be able to receive the multicast traffic.
upvoted 0 times
Mitsue
10 months ago
No, the embedded-rp group-range is not the problem. It's the missing 'rpf6-table' command.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alysa
11 months ago
But what about the embedded-rp group-range? Could that be the issue?
upvoted 0 times
...
Simona
11 months ago
I think option C is correct. The 'rpf6-table' command is indeed missing.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Carmela
12 months ago
I think the answer is B. The group address seems to be in a wrong scope. Even though the PIM configuration looks correct, the multicast group address should be within the proper IPv6 scope.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosio
1 year ago
But the PIM configuration looks correct to me. Maybe it's just a small mistake.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nathalie
1 year ago
I disagree. The scope of the group address used to send traffic is wrong.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosio
1 year ago
I think the receiver can get multicast traffic from the source.
upvoted 0 times
...
Margurite
1 year ago
But what about option C) No. As the 'rpf6-table' command is missing? Could that be the reason?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashlyn
1 year ago
I disagree. I believe the answer is B) No. The scope of the group address used to send traffic is wrong.
upvoted 0 times
...
Margurite
1 year ago
I think the answer is A) Yes. The configuration of PIM is correct.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel