Authentic Juniper Certification Exam JN0-683 Questions Answers

Understanding the Configuration:

The exhibit shows configurations for two VRFs (Customer_A and Customer_B) with specific VLANs and VNIs assigned. Each VRF has interfaces (IRBs) associated with particular VLANs.

Communication Between VLANs and Routing Instances:

Option B:VLAN 400 (irb.400) is part of Customer_B, and there is no direct connection or routing between Customer_A and Customer_B in the configuration provided. Therefore, devices in irb.400 cannot communicate directly with devices in the Customer_A routing instance.

Option D:Since irb.400 (VLAN 400) and irb.800 (VLAN 800) are part of the same routing instance (Customer_B), they can communicate over the fabric using VXLAN encapsulation.

Conclusion:

Option B:Correct—There is no direct communication between devices in irb.400 (Customer_B) and routing instance Customer_A.

Option D:Correct—Devices in VLAN 400 and VLAN 800 can communicate within the Customer_B routing instance over the fabric.

Understanding EBGP in an IP Fabric:

EBGP (External Border Gateway Protocol) is commonly used in IP fabrics to establish peering between routers, such as leaf and spine nodes, without relying on an Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) like OSPF or IS-IS.

IGP Requirement for EBGP:

Option B:EBGP peering does not require an IGP for adjacency establishment. This is because EBGP peers are typically directly connected, and BGP establishes its own sessions without needing an underlying IGP.

Leaf-to-Spine Peering:

Option C:In a typical IP fabric, each leaf node establishes an EBGP session with every spine node. This ensures full connectivity between leaves and spines, facilitating efficient routing and forwarding within the fabric.

Conclusion:

Option B:Correct—EBGP does not require an IGP for establishing peering sessions.

Option C:Correct—Each leaf node peers with every spine node, which is a standard practice in IP fabrics to ensure connectivity and redundancy.

Symmetric vs. Asymmetric Routing in EVPN-VXLAN:

Symmetric Routing:Traffic enters and exits the VXLAN network through the same VTEP, regardless of the source or destination. This approach simplifies routing decisions, especially in large networks, and is generally more scalable.

Asymmetric Routing:The routing occurs on the egress VTEP. This method can be simpler to deploy in smaller environments but becomes complex as the network scales, particularly with larger numbers of VNIs and VLANs.

Correct Statements:

C. Symmetric routing supports higher scaling numbers:Symmetric routing is preferred in larger EVPN-VXLAN deployments because it centralizes routing decisions, which can be more easily managed and scaled.

D. Asymmetric routing routes traffic on the egress switch:This is accurate, as asymmetric routing means the routing decision is made at the final hop, i.e., the egress VTEP before the traffic reaches its destination.

Incorrect Statements:

A. Symmetric routing needs an extra VLAN with an IRB interface for each L3 VRF instance:This is not accurate. Symmetric routing does not require an extra VLAN per VRF; rather, it uses the same VLAN/VNI across the network, simplifying routing and VLAN management.

B. Asymmetric routing is easier to monitor because of the transit VNI:Asymmetric routing is not necessarily easier to monitor; in fact, it can add complexity due to the split routing logic between ingress and egress points.

Data Center References:

The choice between symmetric and asymmetric routing in an EVPN-VXLAN environment depends on network size, complexity, and specific operational requirements. Symmetric routing is generally more scalable and easier to manage in large-scale deployments.