300-420 Exam Dumps : Designing Cisco Enterprise Networks (ENSLD) v1.1

Route summarization and EIGRP stub routing are the two correct design techniques for a stable and scalable EIGRP deployment. Summarization reduces the number of prefixes advertised upstream, conserves bandwidth and memory, hides route flaps behind the summary boundary, and reduces the size of the EIGRP topology table. Stub routing prevents branch or access devices from being used as transit routers and limits the scope of EIGRP queries. This is critical because uncontrolled EIGRP query propagation can increase convergence time and processing load, especially in larger hierarchical networks. Prefix lists and distribute lists can filter routes, but filtering alone does not provide the same query-boundary and topology-hiding benefits as summarization and stubs. Static redistribution increases complexity and can create loop or policy risks if not controlled with tags and metrics. The question specifically asks to conserve bandwidth, memory, and CPU, prevent suboptimal routing, and avoid unnecessary queries; summarization and stub routing are the direct Cisco design answers. The architect should summarize at hierarchy boundaries and configure access or branch routers as EIGRP stubs where they should not provide transit. Reference topics: EIGRP summarization, EIGRP stub routing, query scope, hierarchical routing.

The requirement for end-to-end path verification identifies the Integrated Services model with RSVP. IntServ uses per-flow resource reservation, and RSVP signals the path between sender and receiver so devices along that path can admit or reject the requested service based on available resources. This makes IntServ appropriate when the design requires explicit end-to-end path validation and reservation for application flows. DiffServ works differently. In a DiffServ design, traffic is marked, normally with DSCP or CoS at the edge, and each hop applies a configured per-hop behavior. DiffServ is scalable and common in enterprise WAN and campus QoS designs, but it does not perform per-flow signaling or verify that every device in the path can reserve the requested resources. Marking traffic at the access layer is an important QoS design practice, but marking alone is not path verification. Therefore, when the customer explicitly requires end-to-end path verification for business-critical traffic, Cisco QoS architecture points to IntServ with RSVP rather than a pure DiffServ marking model.

When Cisco SD-WAN edge router redundancy is designed, VRRP is the supported first-hop redundancy protocol in the SD-WAN edge context. VRRP provides a virtual default gateway for LAN-side devices, allowing one WAN Edge router to act as the active gateway while another can take over if the active router or tracked condition fails. Cisco SD-WAN designs use VRRP with tracking and policy alignment so branch LAN traffic can fail over to the appropriate edge router while the SD-WAN overlay handles transport and tunnel selection. HSRP and GLBP are traditional campus first-hop redundancy protocols, but they are not the supported FHRP answer for vEdge router redundancy in this design context. OMP is the SD-WAN control-plane routing protocol used between WAN Edge routers and vSmart controllers; it is not a first-hop redundancy protocol for LAN hosts. Therefore, the correct FHRP for vEdge router redundancy is VRRP. The design should also ensure that VRRP priorities, tracking, and SD-WAN routing preferences align so traffic exits the intended edge during normal and failure conditions.