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

- Free Preparation Discussions

Juniper Exam JN0-664 Topic 2 Question 30 Discussion

Actual exam question for Juniper's JN0-664 exam

Question #: 30
Topic #: 2

[All JN0-664 Questions]

Exhibit

CE-1 and CE-2 are part of a VPLS called Customer1 No connectivity exists between CE-1 and CE-2. In the process of troubleshooting, you notice PE-1 is not learning any routes for this VPLS from PE-2, and PE-2 is not learning any routes for this VPLS from PE-1.

AThe route target must match on PE-1 and PE-2.

BThe route distinguisher must match on PE-1 and PE-2.

CThe instance type should be changed to I2vpn.

DThe no-tunnel-services statement should be deleted on both PEs.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: A

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.

by Merilyn at Jul 18, 2024, 12:05 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium JN0-664 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Alease

4 months ago

Haha, changing the instance type to I2vpn? Really? That's like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Not gonna work, buddy!

upvoted 0 times

...

Devorah

4 months ago

Hmm, I'm not sure about that. What if the route distinguisher is the problem? That could be causing the connectivity issues between PE-1 and PE-2.

upvoted 0 times

...

Bong

4 months ago

I agree with Carin. The route target is the key to VPLS connectivity, so that's the first thing I'd check.

upvoted 0 times

Remedios

2 months ago

D) The no-tunnel-services statement should be deleted on both PEs.

upvoted 0 times

...

Carlene

3 months ago

C) The instance type should be changed to l2vpn.

upvoted 0 times

...

Carissa

3 months ago

B) The route distinguisher must match on PE-1 and PE-2.

upvoted 0 times

...

Eveline

3 months ago

A) The route target must match on PE-1 and PE-2.

upvoted 0 times

...

Roxanne

3 months ago

B) I think the route distinguisher must match on PE-1 and PE-2.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lakeesha

4 months ago

A) The route target must match on PE-1 and PE-2.

upvoted 0 times

...

...

Annamae

4 months ago

I think we should check both the route target and route distinguisher to be sure.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tasia

4 months ago

It's possible, but I think the route target is more likely the culprit.

upvoted 0 times

...

Mona

4 months ago

But what about the route distinguisher? Could that also be causing the problem?

upvoted 0 times

...

Carin

4 months ago

The route target must match on PE-1 and PE-2. That's the obvious issue here.

upvoted 0 times

German

3 months ago

D) The no-tunnel-services statement should be deleted on both PEs.

upvoted 0 times

...

Trinidad

3 months ago

C) The instance type should be changed to I2vpn.

upvoted 0 times

...

Myra

3 months ago

B) The route distinguisher must match on PE-1 and PE-2.

upvoted 0 times

...

Matt

4 months ago

A) The route target must match on PE-1 and PE-2.

upvoted 0 times

...

...

Annamae

4 months ago

I agree, if the route target doesn't match, the PEs won't learn the routes.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tasia

5 months ago

I think the issue might be with the route target.

upvoted 0 times

...

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