Free and Premium Juniper JN0-664 Dumps Questions Answers

Prefer the route with the lower origin code. Routes learned from an IGP have a lower origin code than those learned from an exterior gateway protocol (EGP), and both have lower origin codes than incomplete routes (routes whose origin is unknown).

In the exhibit, we see two VRF (Virtual Routing and Forwarding) instances, CE-1 and CE-2, configured on a Juniper router. Each VRF is associated with a route-distinguisher (RD) and a vrf-target value.

Understanding the Role of vrf-target

The vrf-target is used to define Route Targets (RT), which control the import and export of VPN routes in MPLS Layer 3 VPNs (L3VPNs).

If two VRFs share the same RT, they will import each other's routes, allowing communication between them.

In this case, both VRFs have the same vrf-target:

vrf-target target:65512:100;

Since both CE-1 and CE-2 have the same RT (65512:100), they will import and export each other’s routes, enabling route sharing between them.

Understanding route-distinguisher (RD)

The RD (Route Distinguisher) only ensures uniqueness of overlapping IP prefixes within the MPLS network.

It does not control route sharing between VRFs.

In the exhibit, both VRFs have the same RD (65512:1), but this does not influence whether they share routes.

Correct Answer Selection

A (Correct): The vrf-target configuration enables route sharing between CE-1 and CE-2 since they have the same RT (65512:100).

B (Incorrect): The vrf-target does the opposite—it allows sharing, not blocking.

C (Incorrect): The route-distinguisher only provides unique route identification, but does not affect route sharing.

D (Incorrect): Again, route-distinguisher has no impact on route sharing.

Reference from Juniper Official Documentation

✅ Juniper Documentation - Junos MPLS VPNs Configuration Guide:

"Route targets (vrf-target) are used to control the import and export of VPN routes between different VRFs. VRFs with the same route target can import and export routes to each other, enabling inter-VRF communication."

Thus, the correct answer is:

✅ A. The vrf-target configuration will allow routes to be shared between CE-1 and CE-2.

EVPN is a technology that connects L2 network segments separated by an L3 network using a virtual Layer 2 network overlay over the Layer 3 network. EVPN uses BGP as its control protocol to exchange different types of routes for different purposes. Type 2 routes are used to advertise MAC address and IP address pairs learned using ARP snooping from the local CE devices. Type 3 routes are used to join a multicast tree to flood traffic such as broadcast, unknown unicast, and multicast (BUM) traffic.

To create a summary route for IS-IS, you need to configure a policy statement that matches the prefixes to be summarized and sets the next-hop to discard. You also need to configure a summary-address statement under the IS-IS protocol hierarchy that references the policy statement. In this case, the policy statement leak-v6 is trying to match the prefix 2001:db9:a:fa00::/61 exactly, but this prefix is not advertised by any router in the network. Therefore, no summary route is created. To fix this, you need to delete the longer keyword from the route-filter term and change the prefix length to /61 exact. This will match any prefix that falls within the /61 range. You also need to delete the export statement under protocols isis, because this will export all routes that match the policy statement to other IS-IS routers, which is not desired for a summary route.

In the provided exhibit, the output of the `show pim join extensive 232.1.1.1` command is shown. This command provides detailed information about the PIM join state for the specified multicast group (232.1.1.1) on the router R1. To determine the correct statements regarding the multicast traffic, let's analyze the output and the terms involved:

1. **ASM vs. SSM**:

- **ASM (Any-Source Multicast)**: In ASM, receivers are interested in receiving multicast traffic from any source sending to a particular multicast group.

- **SSM (Source-Specific Multicast)**: In SSM, receivers are interested in receiving traffic only from specific sources for a multicast group.

- **Group Address Range**:

- ASM uses the range 224.0.0.0 to 239.255.255.255.

- SSM uses the range 232.0.0.0 to 232.255.255.255.

Since the group address 232.1.1.1 falls within the SSM range (232.0.0.0/8), there might be confusion. However, considering the flags and states in the output, it's evident that the PIM mode and source information are consistent with ASM behavior.

2. **Multicast Trees**:

- **RPT (Rendezvous Point Tree)**: Multicast traffic initially uses the RPT, where the Rendezvous Point (RP) acts as an intermediate point.

- **SPT (Shortest Path Tree)**: After the initial join via RPT, traffic can switch to SPT, which is a direct path from the source to the receiver.

3. **Output Analysis**:

- **Flags**:

- The flags `sparse, rp-tree, wildcard` indicate that the group 232.1.1.1 is currently using RPT. This is typical for ASM, where traffic initially goes through the RP.

- The flags `sparse, spt` indicate that for the source 172.16.1.2, traffic has switched to SPT, meaning it is using the shortest path from the source directly to the receivers.

**Conclusion**:

Based on the analysis:

- **A. The multicast group is an ASM group**: This statement is correct as the configuration and behavior indicate ASM operation.

- **B. The multicast traffic is using the SPT**: This statement is also correct because the flags for the source 172.16.1.2 indicate that the traffic is using the SPT.

Thus, the correct answers are:

**A. The multicast group is an ASM group.**

**B. The multicast traffic is using the SPT.**

**References**:

- Juniper Networks PIM Documentation: [PIM

- Junos OS Multicast Routing Configuration Guide: [Multicast Routing Configuration

The resolve-vpn parameter is a BGP option that allows a router to resolve labeled VPN-IPv4 routes using unlabeled IPv4 routes received from another BGP peer with family inet labeled-unicast configured. This option enables interprovider VPNs without requiring MPLS labels between ASBRs or using VRF tables on ASBRs. In this scenario, you need to configure the resolve-vpn parameter under [edit protocols bgp group external family inet labeled-unicast] hierarchy level on both ASBRs.

EVPN is a solution that provides Ethernet multipoint services over MPLS networks. EVPN uses BGP to distribute endpoint provisioning information and set up pseudowires between PE devices. EVPN uses different route types to convey different information in the control plane. The following are the main EVPN route types:

Type 1 - Ethernet Auto-Discovery Route: This route type is used for network-wide messaging and discovery of other PE devices that are part of the same EVPN instance. It also carries information about the redundancy mode and load balancing algorithm of the PE devices.

Type 2 - MAC/IP Advertisement Route: This route type is used for MAC and IP address learning and advertisement between PE devices. It also carries information about the Ethernet segment identifier (ESI) and the label for forwarding traffic to the MAC or IP address.

Type 3 - Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag Route: This route type is used for broadcast, unknown unicast, and multicast (BUM) traffic forwarding. It also carries information about the multicast group and the label for forwarding BUM traffic.

Type 4 - Ethernet Segment Route: This route type is used for multihoming scenarios, where a CE device is connected to more than one PE device. It also carries information about the ESI and the designated forwarder (DF) election process.

The auto-export parameter is a routing option that allows a routing instance to share routes with other routing instances or the master routing table. The auto-export parameter automatically exports routes from one routing instance to another based on the route target communities attached to the routes. In this scenario, the 10.101.1.0/24 route will be shared if the auto-export parameter is configured under [edit routing-options] hierarchy level.

The exhibit shows the configuration of a VRF (Virtual Routing and Forwarding) instance on a Juniper PE router. Let's break down the key components:

VRF Configuration (VPN-A)

The instance type is VRF, meaning this is an L3VPN (Layer 3 VPN).

The routing instance contains a static route (10.1.0.0/16 next-hop 10.1.0.1).

The interface ge-0/0/2.0 is assigned to the VRF.

Route Distinguisher (RD): 172.17.20.1:1

VRF-Export Policy: vpn-a-export

VRF-Target: target:65512:1 (This defines which routes will be imported into the VRF).

VRF Export Policy (vpn-a-export)

The vpn-a-export policy adds two BGP communities (route targets) to exported VPN routes:

community add vpn-a-target;

community add vpn-m-target;

accept;

The vpn-a-target community corresponds to target:65512:1.

The vpn-m-target community corresponds to target:65512:2.

Policy-Options (Community Definitions)

community vpn-a-target members target:65512:1;

community vpn-m-target members target:65512:2;

This confirms that routes exported from this VRF will have BOTH target:65512:1 and target:65512:2.

Evaluating the Answer Choices

✅ Option A: "VPN routes are exported with the target:65512:1 and target:65512:2 route targets."

The vpn-a-export policy explicitly adds both vpn-a-target (65512:1) and vpn-m-target (65512:2) to exported routes.

This is correct. ✅

❌ Option B: "You cannot use the vrf-target and vrf-export statements in the same VRF."

This is incorrect.

Juniper allows the use of both vrf-target and vrf-export in the same VRF:

vrf-target is used for importing routes.

vrf-export defines export policies (which can add additional route targets).

This is incorrect. ❌

❌ Option C: "VPN routes with the target:65512:1 and target:65512:2 route targets are imported."

The vrf-target target:65512:1; statement only controls importing routes.

The import policy does not include target:65512:2, so routes tagged with target:65512:2 alone would not be imported into this VRF.

This is incorrect. ❌

❌ Option D: "VPN routes are exported with only the target:65512:1 route target."

The export policy (vpn-a-export) clearly adds both 65512:1 and 65512:2.

This is incorrect. ❌

Final Answer:

✅ A. VPN routes are exported with the target:65512:1 and target:65512:2 route targets.

Verification from Juniper Documentation

Juniper MPLS L3VPN Configuration Guide confirms that vrf-target is used for importing, while vrf-export can be used for exporting multiple route targets.

Juniper Routing Policy Documentation states that export policies can add multiple BGP communities (route targets).

RFC 4364 (BGP/MPLS IP VPNs) defines the use of route targets for VPN route control.

TLVs are tuples of (Type, Length, Value) that can be advertised in IS-IS packets. TLVs can carry different kinds of information in the Link State Packets (LSPs). IS-IS supports both narrow and wide metrics for link costs. Narrow metrics use a single octet to encode the link cost, while wide metrics use three octets. Narrow metrics have a maximum value of 63, while wide metrics have a maximum value of 16777215. If there are both narrow and wide metric devices in the topology, IS-IS will advertise two TLVs for each link: one with the narrow metric and one with the wide metric. This allows backward compatibility with older devices that only support narrow metrics12.

AToM (Any Transport over MPLS) is a framework that supports various Layer 2 transport types over an MPLS network core. One of the transport types supported by AToM is LDP Layer 2 circuit, which is a point-to-point Layer 2 connection that uses LDP for signaling and MPLS for forwarding. LDP Layer 2 circuit can support Layer 2 connectivity without using BGP and can be scalable and efficient by using a single MPLS LSP for multiple VPN connections. The customer can maintain all routing for their private network by using their own CE switches.

Interprovider Option C for Layer 3 VPNs involves the use of Autonomous System Boundary Routers (ASBRs) to exchange labeled VPN-IPv4 routes between different Autonomous Systems (AS). This option requires BGP sessions between ASBRs, and the VPN routes are carried end-to-end using MPLS labels. Here’s a detailed analysis of the roles of different routers in this scenario:

1. **ASBR Routers**:

- ASBRs are responsible for exchanging VPN-IPv4 routes between different ASes.

- **A. ASBR routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS and the loopback addresses from the other AS PEs.**

- Correct. ASBRs maintain routes to internal destinations within their own AS, and they also need to know the loopback addresses of PEs in the other AS to set up the BGP sessions and MPLS tunnels.

2. **PE Routers**:

- PE routers are responsible for maintaining VPN routes and label information to forward VPN traffic correctly.

- **B. PE routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS, the loopback address from the other AS PEs, and the L3VPN routes.**

- Correct. PE routers need to maintain:

- Internal routes within their AS for routing.

- Loopback addresses of other AS PEs for establishing MPLS LSPs.

- L3VPN routes to provide end-to-end VPN connectivity.

3. **P Routers**:

- P routers are the core routers that do not participate in BGP VPN routing but forward labeled packets based on MPLS labels.

- **C. P routers only maintain the internal routes from their own AS.**

- Correct. P routers maintain the internal routing information to forward packets within the AS and use MPLS labels for forwarding VPN packets. They do not maintain VPN routes or routes from other ASes.

4. **Incorrect Statements**:

- **D. P routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS and the loopback address from the other AS PEs.**

- Incorrect. P routers do not need to maintain the loopback addresses of other AS PEs. They only maintain internal routing and MPLS label information.

- **E. ASBR routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS, the loopback address from the other AS PEs, and the L3VPN routes.**

- Incorrect. ASBR routers do not maintain L3VPN routes. They exchange labeled VPN-IPv4 routes with other ASBRs and forward them to PE routers.

**Conclusion**:

The correct answers are:

**A. ASBR routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS and the loopback addresses from the other AS PEs.**

**B. PE routers maintain the internal routes from its own AS, the loopback address from the other AS PEs, and the L3VPN routes.**

**C. P routers only maintain the internal routes from their own AS.**

**References**:

- Juniper Networks Documentation on Interprovider VPNs: [Interprovider VPN

- MPLS and VPN Architectures, CCIP Edition by Ivan Pepelnjak and Jim Guichard

Analyzing the Exhibit and Understanding the Issue

The exhibit shows BGP configurations on CE-1 and PE-1, which are connected via EBGP.

CE-1 (Customer Edge)

Uses AS 64511 and establishes an EBGP session with PE-1 (AS 65550).

Configured to export 10 static routes (192.168.1.0/24 - 192.168.10.0/24) using the static-to-bgp policy.

PE-1 (Provider Edge)

Uses AS 65550 and is peering with CE-1 (AS 64511).

Configured with a prefix-limit of 5 on received routes from CE-1.

Teardown enabled, meaning if more than 5 prefixes are received, the BGP session is shut down.

Identifying the Problem

CE-1 is correctly configured with peer AS 65550, so Option B ("CE-1 is configured with an incorrect peer AS") is incorrect ❌.

CE-1 is advertising exactly 10 static routes (as per policy).

PE-1 has a prefix-limit maximum 5 with teardown enabled.

This means that when CE-1 advertises more than 5 prefixes, PE-1 shuts down the BGP session.

BGP moves to the "Active" state, indicating that the session has been disrupted and PE-1 is trying to re-establish the connection.

CE-1 is reachable since the session was initially established before the limit was exceeded, so Option D ("CE-1 is unreachable") is incorrect ❌.

CE-1 is not advertising its entire routing table, only the static prefixes listed in the policy, so Option A ("CE-1 is advertising its entire routing table") is incorrect ❌.

Correct Answer

✅ C. The prefix limit has been reached on PE-1

Verification from Juniper Documentation

Juniper BGP Prefix Limit Documentation confirms that exceeding the prefix limit with teardown causes the BGP session to go into "Active" state.

Juniper Troubleshooting Guide for BGP Peering Issues states that when a BGP session reaches the prefix limit and has teardown enabled, the session is terminated.

The attached bit is a flag in an IS-IS LSP that indicates whether a router is connected to another area or level (L2) of the network. By default, L2 routers set this bit when they advertise their LSPs to L1 routers, and L1 routers use this bit to select a default route to reach other areas or levels through L2 routers. However, this may result in suboptimal routing if there are multiple L2 routers with different paths to other areas or levels. To ensure that L1 routers have only the most specific routes available from L2 routers, you can configure the ignore-attached-bit parameter on all L1 routers. This makes L1 routers ignore the attached bit and install all interarea routes learned from L2 routers in their routing tables.

A sham link is a logical link between two PE routers that belong to the same OSPF area but are connected through an L3VPN. A sham link makes the PE routers appear as if they are directly connected, and prevents OSPF from preferring an intra-area back door link over the VPN backbone. A sham link creates an OSPF multihop neighborship between the PE routers using TCP port 646. The PEs exchange Type 1 OSPF LSAs instead of Type 3 OSPF LSAs for the L3VPN routes, which allows OSPF to use the correct metric for route selection1.

In the provided exhibit, the configuration involves using a RIB (Routing Information Base) group to facilitate internet access for VPN-A Site 1 through PE-1. The goal is to provide VRF Internet access over a single connection.

1. **Understanding RIB Groups**:

- RIB groups allow for the import and export of routes between different routing tables.

- In this scenario, we have two RIBs: `inet.0` (the main routing table) and `VPN-A.inet.0` (the VRF-specific routing table).

2. **Statement Analysis**:

- **A. You must use the RIB group to move a default route, which is learned through BGP, from the inet.0 table to the VPN-A.inet.0 table.**

- Correct. To provide Internet access to VPN-A, the default route (0.0.0.0/0) learned via BGP in the `inet.0` table must be made available in the `VPN-A.inet.0` table. This is done using the RIB group to import the default route.

- **B. You do not need to use the RIB group to move interface routes from the inet.0 table to the VPN-A.inet.0 table.**

- Correct. Interface routes (connected routes) are typically directly added to both the global and the VRF routing tables without needing a RIB group. These routes are known to the VRF because the interfaces are part of the VRF configuration.

- **C. You do not need to use the RIB group default route, which is learned through BGP, from the inet.0 table to the VPN-A.inet.0 table.**

- Incorrect. As discussed, the default route needs to be imported into the VRF's routing table using a RIB group to enable Internet access for the VRF.

- **D. You must use the RIB group to move interface routes from the inet.0 table to the VPN-A.inet.0 table.**

- Incorrect. Interface routes are directly associated with the VRF interfaces and are automatically known to the VRF routing table. There is no need to use a RIB group for these routes.

**Conclusion**:

The correct answers are:

**A. You must use the RIB group to move a default route, which is learned through BGP, from the inet.0 table to the VPN-A.inet.0 table.**

**B. You do not need to use the RIB group to move interface routes from the inet.0 table to the VPN-A.inet.0 table.**

**References**:

- Juniper Networks Documentation on RIB Groups: [RIB Groups

- Junos OS VPNs Configuration Guide: [Junos VPNs

The provided configuration is for a routing instance named VPN-A on a Juniper PE (Provider Edge) router. Let’s break it down:

Instance Type: VRF

The instance-type vrf; statement indicates that this is a Layer 3 VPN (L3VPN) using MPLS VPNs (RFC 4364 – BGP/MPLS IP VPNs).

This confirms that Option D (A Layer 3 VPN is configured) is correct ✅.

VRF Target and Interface Association

The vrf-target target:64512:1234; defines the route target (RT) for importing and exporting VPN routes.

The interface ge-0/0/1.0; binds this interface to the VRF.

BGP Configuration for CE (Customer Edge) Peering

The group CE section configures external BGP (EBGP) (type external;).

The neighbor 10.0.0.1 is in AS 64512 (peer-as 64512;).

The as-override; statement is used.

Evaluating the Answer Choices

✅ Option B: "This VPN connects customer sites that use the same AS number."

The as-override; command allows multiple customer sites that use the same AS number (64512) to communicate over the service provider’s MPLS network.

Normally, BGP prevents routes with the same AS in the AS_PATH from being accepted. The as-override feature replaces the customer's AS number with the provider’s AS, ensuring proper route advertisement.

✅ This statement is correct.

❌ Option A: "This VPN connects customer sites that use different AS numbers."

If the customer sites had different AS numbers, there would be no need for as-override.

The as-override feature is specifically used when all customer sites share the same AS number, ensuring that BGP routes are accepted.

❌ This statement is incorrect.

❌ Option C: "A Layer 2 VPN is configured."

A Layer 2 VPN (L2VPN) configuration would typically use instance-type l2vpn; or EVPN/VPLS-related parameters (e.g., protocols l2vpn or protocols vpls).

Since this configuration uses instance-type vrf; and BGP with a VRF target, it is clearly a Layer 3 VPN (L3VPN).

❌ This statement is incorrect.

✅ Option D: "A Layer 3 VPN is configured."

The instance-type vrf; confirms this is an MPLS Layer 3 VPN (L3VPN).

VRFs, BGP, and route targets (vrf-target) are specific to Layer 3 VPNs.

✅ This statement is correct.

Final Answer:

✅ B. This VPN connects customer sites that use the same AS number.

✅ D. A Layer 3 VPN is configured.

Verification from Juniper Documentation:

Juniper BGP/MPLS Layer 3 VPNs Guide confirms that instance-type vrf is used for L3VPNs.

Juniper BGP Configuration Guide states that as-override is applied when customer sites use the same AS number.

RFC 4364 (BGP/MPLS IP VPNs) explains how route targets and VRFs are used in L3VPN deployments.

Option A (Correct):

In IS-IS, the Designated Intermediate System (DIS) is elected based on the highest configured priority (as defined in Junos OS).

If priorities are equal, the router with the highest MAC address becomes the DIS.

A priority value of 10 will always override a lower priority (e.g., 1).

VPLS is a technology that provides Layer 2 VPN services over an MPLS network. VPLS uses BGP as its control protocol to exchange VPN membership information between PE routers. The route target is a BGP extended community attribute that identifies which VPN a route belongs to. The route target must match on PE routers that participate in the same VPLS instance, otherwise they will not accept or advertise routes for that VPLS.

The customer interface in an LDP-signaled pseudowire is the interface on the PE router that connects to the CE device. An LDP-signaled pseudowire is a type of Layer 2 circuit that uses LDP to establish a point-to-point connection between two PE routers over an MPLS network. The customer interface can have different encapsulation types depending on the type of traffic that is carried over the pseudowire. The encapsulation types are ethernet-ccc, vlan-ccc, extended-vlan-ccc, atm-ccc, frame-relay-ccc, ppp-ccc, cisco-hdlc-ccc, and tcc-ccc. Depending on the encapsulation type, the customer interface can accept or reject tagged or untagged frames in the data plane, and include or exclude VLAN tags in the control plane LDP advertisement. The following table summarizes the behavior of different encapsulation types:

The vrf-target statement is used in routing-instances to define route-target communities for VPN route import and export policies.

vrf-target export → Controls which route targets (RTs) are added to advertised routes (used when sending routes to remote PEs).

vrf-target import → Controls which VPN routes are accepted into the VRF (used when receiving routes from remote PEs).

In PIM-SM (Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode), the Designated Router (DR) plays a crucial role in multicast forwarding. The DR is responsible for various tasks depending on whether it is connected to the source or the receiver. Let's analyze each statement regarding the PIM DR in a PIM-SM domain.

1. **Statement A: The source DR sends PIM register messages from the source network to the RP.**

- Correct. In PIM-SM, the DR on the source's local network is responsible for encapsulating multicast packets in PIM Register messages and sending them to the Rendezvous Point (RP). This process ensures that the RP is aware of active sources.

2. **Statement B: If the DR priorities match, the router with the lowest IP address is selected as the DR.**

- Incorrect. The correct rule is that if the DR priorities match, the router with the **highest** IP address is selected as the DR. The election process first compares priorities; if priorities are equal, the IP addresses are compared to select the DR.

3. **Statement C: The receiver DR sends PIM join and PIM prune messages from the receiver network toward the RP.**

- Correct. In PIM-SM, the DR on the receiver's local network sends PIM Join messages toward the RP to join the multicast distribution tree. Similarly, it sends PIM Prune messages to leave the tree when there are no interested receivers.

4. **Statement D: By default, PIM DR election is performed on point-to-point links.**

- Incorrect. By default, PIM DR election is performed on multi-access networks (e.g., Ethernet). On point-to-point links, there is no need for a DR election as there are only two routers involved.

**Conclusion**:

The correct statements regarding the PIM DR in a PIM-SM domain are:

**A. The source DR sends PIM register messages from the source network to the RP.**

**C. The receiver DR sends PIM join and PIM prune messages from the receiver network toward the RP.**

**References**:

- Juniper Networks Documentation on PIM-SM: [PIM-SM

- RFC 7761, Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): [RFC which details the PIM-SM protocol, including DR roles and election procedures.