300-420 Exam Dumps : Designing Cisco Enterprise Networks

DiffServ is the correct scalable QoS architecture for classifying traffic according to business requirements and using DSCP values as the priority descriptor. Cisco QoS design distinguishes DiffServ from IntServ. IntServ uses per-flow signaling with RSVP and can reserve resources, but that model is not operationally scalable across large enterprise networks. DiffServ is class-based. Traffic is classified and marked at the network edge, then each device applies per-hop behavior to those classes using local QoS policy. DSCP provides a six-bit field in the IP header, which supports more than ten classification values and allows standardized treatment classes such as EF, AF, class selector, and default. Best effort provides no differentiated treatment, and RSVP is a signaling mechanism associated with IntServ rather than the requested scalable class-based architecture. “Interserv” is not the correct Cisco QoS model term. Therefore, the engineer should design around DiffServ, with a clear trust boundary, marking policy, queuing model, and consistent treatment across WAN and campus boundaries. Reference topics: DiffServ, DSCP, per-hop behavior, class-based QoS, scalable QoS architecture.

BFD is not required for the specific failure described: a physical fiber break on point-to-point routed links. In a Layer 3 campus or routed-access design, a direct physical link failure is detected by the interface state change, so the routing protocol can react immediately without waiting for hello/dead timers. Cisco campus design guidance favors point-to-point routed links partly because they give rapid convergence and avoid STP delays. BFD is valuable when a forwarding-path failure is not reliably detected by Layer 1 or Layer 2, or when a protocol adjacency must detect loss faster than its native timers. It does not automatically create convergence by itself; it detects failure and notifies the routing protocol. For a clean fiber cut on a routed point-to-point link, link-down detection is already fast enough for sub-second failover in the design. OSPF timer tuning is also not the preferred design answer for this physical-failure case. Reference topics: routed access design, point-to-point links, link-failure detection, BFD, OSPF convergence.

The correct solution is a management VRF with SSH keys for device access. A management VRF creates a separate routing and forwarding table for management traffic, keeping administrative reachability isolated from production and overlay routes. That directly satisfies the requirement that the overlay network must not cause routing issues and makes troubleshooting easier for operations teams because management reachability can be validated independently. Cisco VRF design uses separate routing tables to isolate traffic and can support overlapping addresses or independent routing policy. For secure device access, SSH with key-based authentication provides encrypted administrative sessions and stronger authentication than clear-text or password-only methods. Private VLANs and ordinary VLANs provide Layer 2 separation but do not create independent routing tables. TACACS+ and RADIUS are AAA systems; they are useful but do not define the management transport architecture. Separate physical interfaces can be useful out-of-band, but the best match for overlay isolation and operational simplicity is management VRF plus SSH keys. Reference topics: management VRF, secure device access, SSH public-key authentication, routing-table isolation, enterprise management design.