Juniper JN0-664 Service Provider Professional (JNCIP-SP) Exam Practice Test

Analyzing the Exhibit and Understanding the Issue

The exhibit shows BGP configurations on CE-1 and PE-1, which are connected via EBGP.

CE-1 (Customer Edge)

Uses AS 64511 and establishes an EBGP session with PE-1 (AS 65550).

Configured to export 10 static routes (192.168.1.0/24 - 192.168.10.0/24) using the static-to-bgp policy.

PE-1 (Provider Edge)

Uses AS 65550 and is peering with CE-1 (AS 64511).

Configured with a prefix-limit of 5 on received routes from CE-1.

Teardown enabled, meaning if more than 5 prefixes are received, the BGP session is shut down.

Identifying the Problem

CE-1 is correctly configured with peer AS 65550, so Option B ("CE-1 is configured with an incorrect peer AS") is incorrect ❌.

CE-1 is advertising exactly 10 static routes (as per policy).

PE-1 has a prefix-limit maximum 5 with teardown enabled.

This means that when CE-1 advertises more than 5 prefixes, PE-1 shuts down the BGP session.

BGP moves to the "Active" state, indicating that the session has been disrupted and PE-1 is trying to re-establish the connection.

CE-1 is reachable since the session was initially established before the limit was exceeded, so Option D ("CE-1 is unreachable") is incorrect ❌.

CE-1 is not advertising its entire routing table, only the static prefixes listed in the policy, so Option A ("CE-1 is advertising its entire routing table") is incorrect ❌.

Correct Answer

✅ C. The prefix limit has been reached on PE-1

Verification from Juniper Documentation

Juniper BGP Prefix Limit Documentation confirms that exceeding the prefix limit with teardown causes the BGP session to go into "Active" state.

Juniper Troubleshooting Guide for BGP Peering Issues states that when a BGP session reaches the prefix limit and has teardown enabled, the session is terminated.

Layer 2 VPNs don’t support fragmentation in the provider network. It is critical that the provider network supports the largest frame that the CE devices can generate after the MPLS and virtual routing and forwarding (VRF) labels are added by the PE devices. This example leaves the CE devices at the default 1500-byte maximum transmission unit (MTU) while configuring the provider core to support a 4000 byte MTU. This configuration avoids discards by ensuring the CE devices cannot exceed the MTU in the provider’s network.

The resolve-vpn parameter is a BGP option that allows a router to resolve labeled VPN-IPv4 routes using unlabeled IPv4 routes received from another BGP peer with family inet labeled-unicast configured. This option enables interprovider VPNs without requiring MPLS labels between ASBRs or using VRF tables on ASBRs. In this scenario, you need to configure the resolve-vpn parameter under [edit protocols bgp group external family inet labeled-unicast] hierarchy level on both ASBRs.

Analyzing the Exhibit

The diagram represents BGP peering between:

AS 65512 (Enterprise Network)

AS 65511 (ISP-A)

R3 and R4 are peering with ISP-A using EBGP.

R1, R2, R3, and R4 are peering within AS 65512 using IBGP.

Understanding BGP Route Behavior

Option A: "By default, the next-hop value for these routes is not changed by ISP-A before being sent to R3." ❌

Incorrect!

EBGP behavior: When a BGP route is advertised via EBGP, the next-hop IP is changed to the router's own IP by default.

Since ISP-A is advertising routes via EBGP to R3, the next-hop is changed to ISP-A’s IP.

Thus, this statement is incorrect.

Option B: "The BGP local-preference value that is used by ISP-A is not advertised to R3." ✅

Correct!

BGP Local Preference (LOCAL_PREF) is an IBGP-only attribute.

Local Preference is NOT shared over EBGP because it is used within an AS to influence route selection.

ISP-A will not send LOCAL_PREF to R3, as R3 is in a different AS.

Thus, this statement is correct.

Option C: "All BGP attribute values must be removed before receiving the routes." ❌

Incorrect!

BGP does not remove all attributes when advertising routes. Some attributes are modified (e.g., next-hop, AS-PATH), but others (like MED, community) may be preserved.

Thus, this statement is incorrect.

Option D: "The next-hop value for these routes is changed by ISP-A before being sent to R3." ✅

Correct!

As per default EBGP behavior, the next-hop is changed when a route is advertised to an EBGP peer.

This means ISP-A changes the next-hop to its own IP before sending it to R3.

Thus, this statement is correct.

Final Answer:

✅ B. The BGP local-preference value that is used by ISP-A is not advertised to R3.

✅ D. The next-hop value for these routes is changed by ISP-A before being sent to R3.

Verification from Juniper Documentation:

Juniper BGP Configuration Guide confirms that LOCAL_PREF is not advertised over EBGP.

RFC 4271 (BGP-4) specifies that next-hop is changed by default when advertising routes via EBGP.

The issue arises because R3’s group-range (224.1.1.0/28) is more specific than R2’s group-range (224.1.1.0/24). In PIM bootstrap (BSR), the RP with the longest prefix (most specific group-range) is preferred, regardless of priority. Even though R3 has a higher bootstrap priority (210 vs. R2’s 200), its more specific /28 group-range takes precedence for groups within 224.1.1.0/28.

Why Option D is Correct:

To force R4 to use R2 for all joins, R2’s group-range must be more specific than R3’s. For example:

If R2’s group-range is changed to 224.1.1.0/28 (same as R3) but with a higher priority, R2 would win (priority is compared only when group-ranges are equal).

If R2’s group-range is changed to 224.1.1.0/29 (more specific than /28), it will override R3’s /28 for groups in the /29 range.

The key is prefix specificity, which overrides priority in BSR elections.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

A. Change bootstrap priority on R2 to be higher than R3:

Priority is evaluated only when group-ranges are identical. Since R3’s group-range (/28) is more specific than R2’s (/24), R3 will still win for groups in 224.1.1.0/28, even if R2’s priority is higher.

B. Change the default route in inet.2 on R4:

RPF routes (inet.2) determine how traffic reaches the RP, but they do not influence RP election logic (BSR priority/group-range).

C. Change R2’s local address to be higher than R3’s:

The RP address is a tiebreaker only if priorities and group-ranges are equal. Since R3’s group-range is more specific, this change has no impact.

Key Takeaways:

BSR RP Election Order:

Longest group prefix (most specific).

Highest priority (if prefixes are equal).

Highest RP address (if prefixes and priorities are equal).

To override R3, R2 must advertise a more specific group-range (e.g., /28 or smaller) to ensure it is selected for the desired multicast groups.

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/cli-reference/topics/ref/command/show-route-advertising-protocol.html

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/bgp/topics/topic-map/load-balancing-bgp-session.html

The provided configuration is for a routing instance named VPN-A on a Juniper PE (Provider Edge) router. Let’s break it down:

Instance Type: VRF

The instance-type vrf; statement indicates that this is a Layer 3 VPN (L3VPN) using MPLS VPNs (RFC 4364 – BGP/MPLS IP VPNs).

This confirms that Option D (A Layer 3 VPN is configured) is correct ✅.

VRF Target and Interface Association

The vrf-target target:64512:1234; defines the route target (RT) for importing and exporting VPN routes.

The interface ge-0/0/1.0; binds this interface to the VRF.

BGP Configuration for CE (Customer Edge) Peering

The group CE section configures external BGP (EBGP) (type external;).

The neighbor 10.0.0.1 is in AS 64512 (peer-as 64512;).

The as-override; statement is used.

Evaluating the Answer Choices

✅ Option B: "This VPN connects customer sites that use the same AS number."

The as-override; command allows multiple customer sites that use the same AS number (64512) to communicate over the service provider’s MPLS network.

Normally, BGP prevents routes with the same AS in the AS_PATH from being accepted. The as-override feature replaces the customer's AS number with the provider’s AS, ensuring proper route advertisement.

✅ This statement is correct.

❌ Option A: "This VPN connects customer sites that use different AS numbers."

If the customer sites had different AS numbers, there would be no need for as-override.

The as-override feature is specifically used when all customer sites share the same AS number, ensuring that BGP routes are accepted.

❌ This statement is incorrect.

❌ Option C: "A Layer 2 VPN is configured."

A Layer 2 VPN (L2VPN) configuration would typically use instance-type l2vpn; or EVPN/VPLS-related parameters (e.g., protocols l2vpn or protocols vpls).

Since this configuration uses instance-type vrf; and BGP with a VRF target, it is clearly a Layer 3 VPN (L3VPN).

❌ This statement is incorrect.

✅ Option D: "A Layer 3 VPN is configured."

The instance-type vrf; confirms this is an MPLS Layer 3 VPN (L3VPN).

VRFs, BGP, and route targets (vrf-target) are specific to Layer 3 VPNs.

✅ This statement is correct.

Final Answer:

✅ B. This VPN connects customer sites that use the same AS number.

✅ D. A Layer 3 VPN is configured.

Verification from Juniper Documentation:

Juniper BGP/MPLS Layer 3 VPNs Guide confirms that instance-type vrf is used for L3VPNs.

Juniper BGP Configuration Guide states that as-override is applied when customer sites use the same AS number.

RFC 4364 (BGP/MPLS IP VPNs) explains how route targets and VRFs are used in L3VPN deployments.

OSPF is an interior gateway protocol that uses link-state routing to exchange routing information among routers within a single autonomous system. OSPF prevents routing loops in multi-area networks by using two methods: area hierarchy and SPF algorithm. Area hierarchy is the concept of dividing a large OSPF network into smaller areas that are connected to a backbone area (area 0). This reduces the amount of routing information that each router has to store and process, and also limits the scope of link-state updates within each area. All areas are required to connect to area 0 either directly or through virtual links2. SPF algorithm is the method that OSPF uses to calculate the shortest path to each destination in the network based on link-state information. The SPF algorithm runs on each router and builds a shortest-path tree that represents the topology of the network from the router’s perspective. The SPF algorithm prunes looped paths within an area by choosing only one best path for each destination3.

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/traffic-mgmt-qfx/topics/concept/cos-qfx-series-default-scheduling-classification-understanding.html

BGP route reflectors are BGP routers that are allowed to ignore the IBGP loop avoidance rule and advertise IBGP learned routes to other IBGP peers under specific conditions. BGP route reflectors can reduce the number of IBGP sessions and updates in a network by eliminating the need for a full mesh of IBGP peers. BGP route reflectors can have three types of peerings:

EBGP neighbor: A BGP router that belongs to a different autonomous system (AS) than the route reflector.

IBGP client neighbor: An IBGP router that receives reflected routes from the route reflector. A client does not need to peer with other clients or non-clients.

IBGP non-client neighbor: An IBGP router that does not receive reflected routes from the route reflector. A non-client needs to peer with other non-clients and the route reflector.

In the exhibit, we can see that RR1 and RR2 are route reflectors in the same AS with reachability redundancy. They have two types of peerings: EBGP neighbors (R1 and R4) and IBGP client neighbors (Client1, Client2, and Client3). RR1 and RR2 are also peered with each other as IBGP non-client neighbors.

The Dijkstra algorithm in IS-IS operates as follows:

Tree Database Initialization: The local router (root) is added to the tree database with a cost of 0.

Candidate Database Population: Neighbors of the root (from the LSDB) are placed into the candidate database with their associated costs.

Processing Nodes: The node with the lowest cost in the candidate database is moved to the tree database.

Neighbor Evaluation: For each neighbor of the newly added node (from the LSDB), if the neighbor is not already in the tree or candidate database, it is added to the candidate database. If it exists in the candidate with a higher cost, it is updated with the lower cost.

Termination: The algorithm stops when the candidate database is empty, ensuring all shortest paths are computed.

Analysis of Options:

A. Incorrect. The local router is placed directly into the tree database, not the candidate database.

B. Correct (with context). When a node is added to the tree database, its neighbors (existing in the LSDB) are evaluated. If these neighbors are not already in the tree or candidate database, they are added (not "moved") to the candidate database. The wording "moved" is technically inaccurate, but this option aligns closest with the process of populating the candidate database using LSDB entries during tree database processing.

C. Incorrect. Tuples (nodes) with the lowest cost are moved from the candidate database to the tree database, not from the tree to the LSDB. The LSDB remains static during SPF computation.

D. Incorrect. The algorithm stops when the candidate database is empty, not the tree database. The tree database grows as nodes are processed.

EVPN is a technology that connects L2 network segments separated by an L3 network using a virtual Layer 2 network overlay over the Layer 3 network. EVPN uses BGP as its control protocol to exchange different types of routes for different purposes. Type 2 routes are used to advertise MAC address and IP address pairs learned using ARP snooping from the local CE devices. Type 3 routes are used to join a multicast tree to flood traffic such as broadcast, unknown unicast, and multicast (BUM) traffic.

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/nce/feature-guide-virtual-private-lan-service/topics/task/vpls-ldp-signaling-solutions.html

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/vpn-l2/topics/concept/vpns-configuring-vpls-routing-instances.html#id-11510150__id-11568648

The hello interval is the time interval between two consecutive hello packets sent by an OSPF router on an interface. The dead interval is the time interval after which a neighbor is declared down if no hello packets are received from it. These parameters must match between two OSPF routers for them to form an adjacency. In the exhibit, router R1 has a hello interval of 10 seconds and a dead interval of 40 seconds, while router R2 has a hello interval of 30 seconds and a dead interval of 120 seconds. This causes a mismatch and prevents them from becoming neighbors23.

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.

Type 1: When Type value is 1, the Administrator field is 4-bytes and Assigned Number field is 2-bytes. The Administrator field should be set to the IP address (public IP addresses should be used). The Assigned Number field contains a number from a numbering space that is administered by the enterprise to which the IP address has been assigned by the appropriate authority.

For a Layer 3 VPN to function correctly, an MPLS Label Switched Path (LSP) must be established between the Provider Edge (PE) routers. The MPLS LSP is necessary for the transport of VPN traffic across the service provider's backbone network. If the MPLS LSP is not established, the PE routers cannot forward the VPN traffic properly, causing the routes to be hidden in the BGP routing table.

Here’s a breakdown of why the other options are less likely:

A. The routes use overlapping IP addresses.

Overlapping IP addresses might cause issues with route advertisement and selection, but they would not typically cause routes to be hidden in the bgp.l3vpn.0 table.

C. There is a routing loop in the service provider backbone.

While routing loops are problematic, they would not specifically cause the routes to be hidden in the bgp.l3vpn.0 table. Routing loops would more likely result in dropped packets or increased latency.

D. Route targets are not configured.

Incorrect or missing route target configuration would prevent routes from being imported into the correct VRF, but it would not usually result in the routes being hidden. Instead, they would simply not appear in the relevant VRF.

Thus, the absence of an established MPLS LSP is the most plausible cause for the routes being hidden.

Route reflection is a BGP feature that allows a router to reflect routes learned from one IBGP peer to another IBGP peer, without requiring a full-mesh IBGP topology. Route reflectors do not change any existing BGP attributes by default when advertising routes, unless explicitly configured to do so. A BGP peer does not require any configuration changes to become a route reflector client, only the route reflector needs to be configured with the client parameter under [edit protocols bgp group group-name neighbor neighbor-address] hierarchy level.

Class of Service (CoS) in networking is used to manage traffic by classifying, scheduling, and sometimes modifying packets to ensure network performance and Quality of Service (QoS). Different CoS components are used to achieve these goals. Let's analyze each option to determine which CoS component allows you to alter class-of-service values on the outbound interface of an edge router.

1. **Output Policer**:

- Policing is used to control the rate of traffic sent to or from a network interface. It can drop or remark traffic that exceeds a certain rate.

- Policing is not typically used to alter CoS values but to enforce traffic limits.

2. **Scheduler**:

- A scheduler is responsible for managing the order in which packets are transmitted out of an interface based on their CoS markings. It can allocate bandwidth and prioritize traffic.

- The scheduler manages how packets are queued and sent but does not alter the CoS values of packets.

3. **Rewrite Rules**:

- Rewrite rules are used to modify the CoS values of packets, such as DSCP (Differentiated Services Code Point) or 802.1p bits, as they exit an interface.

- Rewrite rules can alter the class-of-service values in the packet headers to match the desired policies of the outbound interface.

- Therefore, rewrite rules are the correct component for altering CoS values on an outbound interface.

4. **Forwarding Classes**:

- Forwarding classes are used to categorize packets into different traffic classes within a router for QoS handling.

- They help in defining how packets should be treated by the scheduler but do not directly modify the CoS values.

**Conclusion**:

To alter class-of-service values in packets on the outbound interface of an edge router, the correct CoS component to use is:

**C. rewrite rules**

**References**:

- Juniper Networks Documentation on CoS: [Class of Service Overview](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/concept/class-of-service-overview.html)

- Junos OS CoS Configuration Guide: [Rewrite Rules](https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/topic-map/class-of-service-rewrite-rules.html)