Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Cisco Exam 300-510 Topic 4 Question 88 Discussion

Actual exam question for Cisco's 300-510 exam
Question #: 88
Topic #: 4
[All 300-510 Questions]

The ISP_A network is configured with PIMv2 with sparse mode. The engineering team at ISP_A must implement multicast support following RFC 5059 in the network. The RP priority will be 0, and the solution must require limited supervision from the operations team. Which action must the team take to meet the requirements?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

Contribute your Thoughts:

Dorothy
5 months ago
I'm going with option B. Simple and straightforward, just the way I like it. No need to overcomplicate things when a good old Static RP can do the job.
upvoted 0 times
Lenna
4 months ago
Yeah, no need to overcomplicate things. Static RP gets the job done.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dominga
5 months ago
I agree, option B is the way to go. Simple and reliable.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Shelia
6 months ago
Haha, I bet the operations team is hoping for the 'limited supervision' part. They're probably dreading having to deal with all this multicast stuff anyway.
upvoted 0 times
Dianne
5 months ago
C) Implement bootstrap router in the network core.
upvoted 0 times
...
Herschel
5 months ago
A) Implement Auto-RP on the candidate RP and the mapping agent only.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Arlette
6 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. Option D with Anycast-RP on the edge routers sounds like it could work too. It might be a bit more complex, but it could be a good fit for the limited supervision requirement.
upvoted 0 times
Haydee
5 months ago
True, but implementing Anycast-RP on edge routers could provide better scalability.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vallie
5 months ago
I think implementing Auto-RP on the candidate RP and the mapping agent only might be simpler.
upvoted 0 times
...
Justine
5 months ago
Option D with Anycast-RP on the edge routers could be a good fit.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lonny
6 months ago
I think option C is the way to go. Implementing a Bootstrap Router in the network core is the best solution to meet the requirements. It's reliable and easy to manage.
upvoted 0 times
Goldie
5 months ago
Bootstrap Router in the network core is the most efficient solution. It will ensure multicast support following RFC 5059 with minimal supervision needed.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gilbert
5 months ago
I agree, Option C is the way to go for sure. It meets all the requirements without requiring much supervision from the operations team.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pok
6 months ago
Option C is definitely the best choice. Implementing a Bootstrap Router in the network core is reliable and easy to manage.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Veronica
6 months ago
I'm not sure, but I think option C could also work.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lucina
6 months ago
I disagree, I believe option D is the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Derick
6 months ago
Definitely go with option B. Static RP is the way to go when you want limited supervision. Who needs all that Auto-RP or Bootstrap Router complexity, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
Arlette
5 months ago
Agreed, Auto-RP and Bootstrap Router can be too complex for this setup.
upvoted 0 times
...
Earlean
6 months ago
Static RP is definitely the way to go in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Winifred
6 months ago
Static RP is definitely the way to go in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shawn
6 months ago
Option B is the best choice for limited supervision.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tasia
6 months ago
Option B is the best choice for limited supervision.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lindsey
6 months ago
I agree, Auto-RP and Bootstrap Router can be too complex. Static RP is much simpler to manage.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rolland
6 months ago
Option B is definitely the best choice for limited supervision. Static RP all the way!
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Shenika
6 months ago
I think we should go with option A.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77