Practice Free JN0-364 Service Provider Routing and Switching - Specialist (JNCIS-SP) Exam Questions Answers With Explanation

In theIS-IS (Intermediate System to Intermediate System)protocol, the process of forming an adjacency between two neighbors follows a specific sequence of states. While OSPF uses states like "Init," "Two-Way," and "Full," IS-IS uses a slightly different nomenclature within its state machine.

According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, when a router first sends anIS-IS Hello (IIH) PDUand receives one back from a neighbor, but has not yet confirmed that the neighbor "sees" it back, the adjacency enters theInitializingstate. Specifically, on a point-to-point link, the state transitions fromDowntoInitializingas soon as the first PDU is received. On a broadcast network (like Ethernet), the Initializing state indicates that the local router has received a Hello PDU from the neighbor, but the local router's own System ID is not yet listed in the neighbor's list of "seen" neighbors (the neighbor's Hello PDU does not yet contain the local router's MAC address).

The adjacency only moves to theUpstate (Option C) once bi-directional communication is confirmed—meaning both routers have seen each other's System IDs in the incoming Hello PDUs.

Why other options are incorrect:

Loading (Option A):This is an OSPF state, not an IS-IS state. In IS-IS, database synchronization happens after the adjacency is Up.

Two-Way (Option D):While functionally similar to the state IS-IS is achieving, "Two-Way" is the specific terminology for OSPF. In IS-IS, the intermediate step between knowing a neighbor exists and having a fully functional adjacency is strictly calledInitializing.

Multiple Spanning Tree Protocol (MSTP), as defined in IEEE 802.1s and implemented in Juniper Networks Junos OS, allows for the grouping of VLANs into specific spanning tree instances. This provides significant scalability and load-balancing advantages over traditional STP or RSTP. To achieve this, switches must be grouped into logical "Regions."

According to Juniper documentation, for two or more switches to be considered part of the sameMSTP Region, they must possess an identicalMSTP Configuration Identifier. This identifier consists of three specific attributes that must match exactly across all participating switches:

MSTI Name (Region Name):A descriptive string (up to 32 characters) that identifies the region.

MSTI Revision Level:A numerical value (0–65535) used to track configuration changes.

VLAN-to-Instance Mapping:The specific table that defines which VLAN IDs are associated with which Multiple Spanning Tree Instances (MSTIs).

If even one of these parameters—such as theRegion name(Option A)—differs, the switches will treat each other as being in separate regions. When switches are in different regions, they interact using theCommon Spanning Tree (CST), effectively seeing the other region as a single "virtual bridge," which limits the granularity of traffic engineering.

TheExtended system ID(Option B) is a component of the Bridge ID used to carry VLAN information in PVST+ but is not a region-matching requirement.Root bridge priority(Option C) andRoot bridge ID(Option D) are variables used during the STP election process to determine the topology's root, but they do not define the boundaries of an MSTP region itself.

In a Juniper Networks environment,Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP)is a signaling protocol used to establish Label-Switched Paths (LSPs). While RSVP handles the actual signaling (requesting labels and reserving bandwidth along a path), it does not inherently know which path to take. This is whereConstrained Shortest Path First (CSPF)comes into play.

CSPFis an advanced version of the Dijkstra algorithm used specifically for traffic engineering. Unlike the standard SPF used by IGPs, which only considers the shortest metric, CSPF takes into account multiple constraints such as available bandwidth, link coloring (administrative groups), and explicit hop requirements. According to Juniper technical documentation, when an LSP is configured, the Ingress router uses CSPF to calculate a loop-free path that satisfies all these constraints before RSVP begins signaling. This is why statementBis the correct description of the operational flow.

StatementDis a common distractor. While CSPF uses theTraffic Engineering Database (TED)to perform its calculations, the path is not "calculated by the TED" itself; the TED is merely the repository of link-state information (provided by OSPF or IS-IS extensions). StatementCrefers to Segment Routing Global Block (SRGB), which is relevant to Segment Routing (SR-TE), not standard RSVP-signaled LSPs. Finally, statementAis incorrect because admin-groups (link coloring) are actually one of the primary constraints thatrequireCSPF to determine a valid path.

In the BGP Finite State Machine (FSM), theIdlestate is the first stage of any BGP connection. When a BGP session is "stuck" in Idle, it typically indicates that the router is unable to even begin the process of establishing a TCP connection with its neighbor. According to Juniper Networks documentation, before BGP can transition to theConnectorActivestates, it must have a valid route to the neighbor's IP address in the routing table and be able to initiate a three-way TCP handshake on port 179.

If thepeer IP address is incorrect(Option D), the router may not have a route to that destination, or it may be attempting to connect to a non-existent or unreachable host. In many Junos configurations, if the underlying IGP (OSPF/IS-IS) or static routing cannot provide reachability to the neighbor address defined in the BGP configuration, the BGP process will remain in the Idle state and periodically retry the connection.

Regarding the other options:

The local AS number is missing (Option C):In Junos, you cannot commit a BGP configuration if the local autonomous system is not defined at either the [edit routing-options] level or within the BGP group itself. The commit check would fail before the session could even attempt to start.

The BGP group type (Option B):Having a mismatch in group type (internal vs. external) usually results in the session reaching theOpenSentorOpenConfirmstate before failing due to an "unacceptable AS" error in the OPEN message.

BGP hold time (Option A):Issues with hold timers or keepalives generally cause a session that is already in theEstablishedstate to drop; they do not prevent the session from leaving the Idle state.

In the provided exhibit, the output of the command show spanning-tree interface for switch1 reveals critical details about the Spanning Tree Protocol (STP) operational state.

The first correct statement is thatthe switch1 device is the root bridge(Option B). This is determined by comparing the "Port ID" column with the "Designated port ID" column, as well as checking the "Designated bridge ID". In the exhibit, for every interface listed (from ge-0/0/6.0 to ge-0/0/13.0), the Port ID and the Designated port ID are identical. Furthermore, every port is in the "FWD" (Forwarding) state with the "DESG" (Designated) role. In a Spanning Tree topology, the root bridge is the only device where all active participating interfaces serve as designated ports, as it has no need for a "Root" port role (which points toward a root bridge).

The second correct statement is thatthe bridge priority for switch1 is 32k(Option D). Looking at the "Designated bridge ID" column, we see the value 32768.0019e2552481. In Junos and general networking standards, the Bridge ID is composed of a bridge priority and the device's MAC address. The default priority for most Spanning Tree variants (STP, RSTP, MSTP) is 32,768, which is commonly referred to in shorthand as "32k".

Regarding the incorrect options:

Option A:There is no evidence of VSTP (VLAN Spanning Tree Protocol); the output shows "instance 0," which is typical for IEEE standard RSTP or STP.

Option C:The Port IDs for ge-0/0/8, ge-0/0/9, and ge-0/0/11 all start with "32" (e.g., 32:521), whereas the default port priority is typically 128 (as seen in ge-0/0/6.0 with 128:519). This indicates that the interface priorities for these specific ports have been manually tuned to a non-default value.

In Juniper Networks Junos OS, theLabel Distribution Protocol (LDP)is specifically designed to automate the creation of Label Switched Paths (LSPs) based on the information provided by the underlying Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP), such as OSPF or IS-IS. When LDP is enabled on a set of interfaces within an OSPF area (as shown in the exhibit with Area 0.0.0.0), it automatically discovers neighbors and exchanges label mappings for all known unicast routes in the routing table.

The defining characteristic of LDP in this context is its "topology-driven" nature. Unlike RSVP (Resource Reservation Protocol), which typically requires the manual configuration of each LSP ingress point and destination, LDP follows the IGP's shortest path tree to automatically build afull meshof LSPs between all participating routers. This means that every Provider Edge (PE) and Provider (P) router in the exhibit—PE1, PE2, PE3, P1, P2, and P3—will establish label-switched connectivity to every other router without the administrator having to define individual tunnels.

LDP accomplishes this through a downstream-unsolicited label distribution mode by default in Junos. Each router assigns a local label for its loopback address and other prefixes and advertises these to its neighbors. Because every router is performing this action for every reachable prefix in the OSPF domain, a complete fabric of label-switched paths is formed. While RSVP is more robust for traffic engineering and bandwidth reservation, LDP is the preferred protocol for creating a simple, scalable full mesh of LSPs for applications like Layer 3 VPNs or internal BGP tunneling where complex path manipulation is not required. BFD is a failure detection protocol, and BGP is used for service signaling, making LDP the only correct choice for automatic mesh creation.

The prevention of routing loops within an Autonomous System (AS) is handled differently than loop prevention between ASes. While External BGP (EBGP) uses the AS_PATH attribute to detect loops,Internal BGP (IBGP)does not modify the AS_PATH. Therefore, a different mechanism is required to ensure that a route does not circulate infinitely inside the network.

This mechanism is known as theIBGP Split Horizon rule. According to Juniper Networks documentation and the BGP standard (RFC 4271), a BGP speakermust not advertise a route learned via an IBGP peer to any other IBGP peer. In simpler terms, "what is learned internally, stays local." This rule ensures that a route only travels one "hop" inside the AS—from the router that learned it from an external source to all other internal routers.

Because of this rule, IBGP routers do not naturally propagate routes through each other. This creates a requirement for afull meshof IBGP sessions, where every BGP-speaking router in the AS must have a direct peering session with every other BGP-speaking router. To mitigate the scaling issues of a full mesh in large service provider networks, architects useRoute ReflectorsorConfederations, which are authorized exceptions to the Split Horizon rule.

Option B is incorrect because EBGP peersdoadvertise EBGP routes to other EBGP peers (this is how the internet works). Option C is incorrect because EBGP-learned routesmustbe sent to IBGP peers so the internal network knows how to reach the outside world. Option D is incorrect because internal routesmustbe sent to external peers to advertise your network to the internet.

In Junos OS, the flow of routing information is managed by policies that sit between the protocol's database (the RIB-In/LSDB) and the main routing table (inet.0). Understanding the direction of these policies is critical for correct configuration.

Animport policy (Option B)is used to control the movement of routes from a routing protocol into the routing table. According to Juniper Service Provider documentation, even though IS-IS is a link-state protocol that requires all routers in an area to have an identical Link-State Database (LSDB), animport policycan be used to filter which of those validated routes are actually placed into inet.0 for forwarding. For external routes (routes leaked into IS-IS from other areas or protocols), an import policy allows an administrator to selectively accept or reject prefixes based on specific criteria like prefix-lists or community tags.

It is important to distinguish this from anexport policy (Option A). In Junos, an export policy is used to take routesalready inthe routing table and push themoutto a protocol to be advertised to neighbors. For example, you would use an export policy to redistribute static routes into IS-IS.Route preference (Option C)is a global value used to select between different protocols for the same prefix, and theinterface metric (Option D)is used by the SPF algorithm to calculate the shortest path within the IS-IS database itself. Therefore, to specifically control which learned external routes are "installed" into the forwarding table, theimport policyis the correct tool.

TheBorder Gateway Protocol (BGP)operates based on a strict set of advertisement rules designed to prevent routing loops while ensuring global reachability. These rules differ significantly depending on whether the relationship isExternal BGP (EBGP)orInternal BGP (IBGP).

1. EBGP Advertisement (Option A):In a standard EBGP scenario, a router acts as an exit/entry point for an Autonomous System. When an EBGP speaker receives a valid route from any peer (Internal or External), it will, by default, advertise that route to all of its other EBGP peers. This is the primary mechanism that allows prefixes to propagate across the global internet from one AS to another.

2. IBGP Split Horizon (Option D):

The most critical rule within an AS is theIBGP Split Horizonrule. To prevent loops within an AS, BGP dictates that a route learned from an IBGP peermust notbe advertised to any other IBGP peer. This is why BGP requires a "full mesh" of IBGP sessions or the use ofRoute Reflectorsto ensure all internal routers learn all routes. Without this rule, a route could circulate infinitely within the AS because IBGP does not update the AS_PATH attribute.

3. EBGP to IBGP Propagation (Option B):

When a router learns a route from an EBGP peer, it is permitted to advertise that route to all of its IBGP peers. This ensures that everyone inside the network knows how to reach external destinations. However, it is important to remember that in Junos OS, theBGP Next Hopis not modified by default when sending routes to IBGP peers, often requiring a "next-hop-self" policy to ensure internal reachability.

Options C and E are incorrect because they directly contradict these fundamental BGP loop-prevention and propagation mechanisms.

In the IS-IS protocol,TLVs (Type, Length, Value)are the fundamental building blocks used to carry information withinLink-State PDUs (LSPs). Unlike some other protocols that have a fixed, rigid packet format, IS-IS was designed from the ground up to be modular and extensible. This extensibility is achieved through the use of TLVs, which allow the protocol to carry different types of data without requiring changes to the core protocol state machine.

According to Juniper Networks technical documentation,TLVs allow flexible encoding of routing information (Option C). Each TLV specifies the "Type" of information it carries (such as neighbor information or IP reachability), the "Length" of that information, and the "Value" (the actual data). This architecture is what allowed IS-IS to easily support IPv6 by simply adding new TLVs (like TLV 236 for IPv6 reachability) without redesigning the protocol. It also supports Traffic Engineering (TE) extensions used in MPLS environments by adding TLVs that describe link bandwidth and administrative groups.

Furthermore, a singleLSP can contain multiple TLVs (Option D). When a Juniper router generates an LSP, it packs all the necessary information—such as the router's area addresses, its neighbors, and its local interface prefixes—into various TLVs and places them into a single PDU. If the amount of information exceeds the Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) of the interface, the router will generate additional LSPs (fragmented LSPs) to carry the remaining TLVs.

Options A and B are incorrect because restricting an LSP to a single TLV would make the protocol incredibly inefficient, and the very nature of IS-IS is its ability to support multiple network layer protocols (not just IPv4) through its agnostic TLV-based transport.

TheBGP path selection algorithmis a deterministic process used by Juniper routers to select the single "best" path from the BGP table to be placed into the routing table (inet.0). This algorithm follows a specific, hierarchical set of rules. According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, the router evaluates attributes in a fixed order, and once a tie is broken at a specific step, the remaining steps are ignored.

The order of the primary BGP attributes in Junos OS is as follows:

Highest Local Preference:This is the first attribute evaluated after the basic check for a reachable next hop. Local preference is used within an Autonomous System (AS) to prioritize one exit point over another.

Shortest AS_PATH:If the local preference is equal, the router then evaluates the length of the AS_PATH attribute.

Lowest Origin Code:(IGP < EGP < Incomplete).

Lowest Multi-Exit Discriminator (MED).

In this specific scenario, the router compares a path with ahigher local preferenceagainst a path with ashorter AS path. Because theLocal Preferencecheck occurs at Step 1 and theAS_PATHcheck occurs later at Step 2, the router will select the path with the higher local preference immediately. The length of the AS path becomes irrelevant in this comparison because the tie was already broken by the local preference value. This allows network administrators to override the default "shortest path" logic of BGP to prefer specific providers or links based on business requirements.

In Junos OS, understanding the distinction between theRouting Information Base (RIB)and theForwarding Information Base (FIB)is fundamental to analyzing traffic patterns and load-balancing behavior. The RIB (show route) contains all prefixes learned via various protocols, while the FIB (show route forwarding-table) contains only the active next-hops that are actually programmed into the Packet Forwarding Engine (PFE).

According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, the default behavior for Junos OS when encounteringEqual-Cost Multipath (ECMP)routes is to select only a single next-hop from the available candidates in the RIB and install that single path into the FIB. In a default state, even if the show route output displays multiple next-hops for a destination like 172.24.0.0/24, only one would have the active route symbol (>) and only that one would appear in the forwarding table.

In the provided exhibit, the show route output shows two next-hops for 172.24.0.0/24, but only the first one (172.20.0.2) is marked with the>symbol as the active selection. However, the subsequent show route forwarding-table output reveals thatboth next-hops(172.20.0.2 and 172.20.1.2) are currently present in the forwarding table for that same destination. This discrepancy indicates that thedefault load-balancing behavior has been modified (Option B). This modification is typically achieved by creating a routing policy with the action then load-balance per-packet (which actually results in flow-based load balancing) and applying it to the forwarding table via the export statement under [edit routing-options forwarding-table].

Because the forwarding table now contains both next-hops, the router is no longer restricted to a single path. Therefore, therouter will choose both next-hops in the routing table (Option D)for packet forwarding, distributing flows across the two available Gigabit Ethernet interfaces (ge-0/0/2.0 and ge-0/0/3.0). This ensures higher utilized bandwidth and provides redundancy at the data plane level.

On multi-access network segments, such asEthernet, OSPF could potentially face a scalability issue. If every router on a segment formed a full adjacency with every other router, the number of adjacencies would follow the formula $n(n-1)/2$. In a segment with 10 routers, this would result in 45 adjacencies, each generating redundant flooding of Link-State Advertisements (LSAs) and excessive Hello traffic.

To solve this, OSPF elects aDesignated Router (DR)and aBackup Designated Router (BDR). According to Juniper Networks documentation, the primary purpose of the DR is to act as a central point of contact for the segment, therebyreducing OSPF traffic (Option C).

Instead of every router syncing with every other router, they all form aFull adjacencyonly with the DR and BDR. When a router (a DR-Other) has an update, it sends it to the multicast address224.0.0.6(All DR Routers). The DR then acknowledges the update and floods it to all other routers on the segment using the multicast address224.0.0.5(All OSPF Routers). This "hub-and-spoke" signaling model within the local segment significantly minimizes the bandwidth consumed by protocol overhead and reduces the CPU load on the participating routers.

It is important to note that the DR's scope is limited to the local segment; it does not "assign IDs" (Option A) nor does it flood routes to the "entire domain" (Option D), as that is the responsibility of individual routers within their respective areas.

BGP is apath-vector protocol, and its primary mechanism for ensuring a loop-free topology across the global internet is theAS_PATHattribute. This attribute is a "well-known mandatory" attribute that records every Autonomous System (AS) a prefix has passed through.

According to Juniper Networks Service Provider documentation, the loop prevention rule forExternal BGP (EBGP)is straightforward: when a router receives a BGP Update from an EBGP peer, it examines the AS_PATH list. If the router's ownlocal AS numberis already present in the list, it indicates that the advertisement has already traversed the local AS and has returned. To prevent a routing loop, the routerwill not use the routeand will implicitly discard the update (Option D).

This behavior is a default, hard-coded function of the BGP protocol and does not require the administrator to write manualrouting policies(Options B and C) to achieve basic loop prevention. While there are advanced features like as-path-expand or allow-as-in that can modify this behavior for specific design requirements (such as in certain Hub-and-Spoke MPLS VPN topologies), the standard operational default is to reject any route where the local AS is detected in the path. This ensures that traffic does not circulate infinitely between Autonomous Systems.