300-540 Dumps with Practice Exam Questions Answers

For asite-to-site IPsec VPN, each peer must point to thereachable IP address of the remote VPN endpoint—that is, the IP address on the WAN/Internet-facing interface of the remote router.

From the diagram:

R1 outside (toward Internet):192.168.10.1

R2 outside (toward Internet):192.168.20.2

Inside LANs:

Site 1:10.1.0.0/24

Site 2:10.2.0.0/24

The crypto map on R1 uses:

crypto map mymap 10 ipsec-isakmp

set transform-set myset

match address 101

set peer

The must be the IP address where R1 can actually reach the IPsec peer, which is R2’s Internet-facing interface192.168.20.2.

If the peer were configured with a LAN IP such as 10.2.0.1 (site 2’s internal gateway), IKE packets would never reach the remote router because that address is not routable over the Internet.

Therefore, the correct command to bring up the VPN is:

set peer 192.168.20.2

Option A (10.1.0.1)– local LAN IP (R1’s side), not the remote endpoint.

Option C (192.168.10.1)– R1’s own WAN IP, not the remote peer.

Option D (10.2.0.1)– remote LAN IP, not reachable directly over the Internet.

In Cisco data center and cloud-scale designs, adouble-sided vPC(also called vPC-to-vPC) is used when both ends of a Layer 2 port channel are formed by a pair of switches that operate as vPC peers. In this model:

On the aggregation or leaf side, two switches (in this case,LEAF1 and LEAF2) form a vPC domain with a vPC peer-link and keepalive.

On the access or ToR side, two switches (in this case,TOR1 and TOR2) must also form their ownvPC domainwith a peer-link and vPC keepalive.

The port-channel that interconnects the two vPC domains is then configured as a vPC on both sides, creating a vPC-to-vPC topology.

The problem statement specifies thatLEAF1 and LEAF2 are already configured as vPC peers. For a double-sided vPC to work, the other side (TOR1 and TOR2) must also behave as a single logical entity for the downstream Cisco UCS server and for the upstream vPC connection towards LEAF1 and LEAF2. This is only achieved when TOR1 and TOR2 are configured as vPC peers with:

A vPC domain ID

A vPC peer-link between TOR1 and TOR2

vPC member port-channels towards LEAF1 and LEAF2 and towards the Cisco UCS server

Therefore, the next required step is to configure avPC between TOR1 and TOR2.

Evaluation of the options:

Option A, “Add all the switches to the fabric,” is generic and not specific to vPC configuration. It does not address the technical requirement to form a vPC domain on the ToR side.

Option B, “Configure peering between LEAF1 and LEAF2 and TOR1 and TOR2,” is incorrect because vPC peering is only configured between the two switches that form each vPC domain (LEAF1–LEAF2 and TOR1–TOR2), not across all four switches together.

Option C, “Configure MSTP between TOR1 and TOR2,” is not required for establishing a double-sided vPC. vPC designs rely on the vPC control plane and the peer-link, not on spanning-tree between the vPC peers for normal operation.

Option D, “Configure a vPC between TOR1 and TOR2,” correctly describes configuring TOR1 and TOR2 as a vPC pair (vPC domain with peer-link), which is the mandatory step to create a double-sided vPC topology with LEAF1 and LEAF2.

For a site-to-site IPsec VPN, each peer must configure apre-shared keytied to thepublic IP address of the remote VPN peer:

crypto isakmp key address

From the diagram:

R1 outside IP:192.168.10.1/24

R2 outside IP:192.168.20.2/24← remote peer for R1

In the current R1 configuration, the ISAKMP key is incorrectly bound to192.168.10.2, which is a local next-hop/ISP address on R1’s own subnet, not the R2 public IP. Because the pre-shared-key address does not match the source IP of R2’s IKE packets, phase 1 negotiation fails and the tunnel never comes up.

The correct configuration on R1 must therefore be:

crypto isakmp key vpnuser address 192.168.20.2

Options A and C incorrectly change the default route (next hop must be the local ISP router, not R2’s public IP or a LAN address). Option D uses an internal address (10.1.1.2), which is not the IP used for IKE on the Internet.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation Based on Designing and Implementing Cisco Service Provider Cloud Network Infrastructure Knowledge

When connectingcarrier-neutral facilities (CNFs)ordata centerswithin the same metropolitan area, service providers typically usehigh-bandwidth, low-latency optical transport methods. The most appropriate and commonly deployed interconnection technology is:

DWDM (Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing) ring, which provides:

High capacity (10G, 40G, 100G, 400G)

Low latency

Redundancy through ring or mesh topologies

Multi-wavelength multiplexing for cost efficiency

Carrier-grade reliability for metro interconnect services

This aligns with cloud interconnect and metro transport design used in service provider environments.

Evaluation of the Options

A. OSPF backbone area adjacency

This is a routing protocol adjacency, not a physical connection method. It requires a transport link underneath but does not represent the physical interconnect itself.

B. Private wireless connection

Not suitable for CNF or metro DC interconnect because it lacks the bandwidth, reliability, and deterministic performance required for large-scale carrier-grade interconnects.

C. DWDM ring

This is the correct method. DWDM-based metro fiber rings are the standard for connecting carrier-neutral facilities in the same metro region.

D. CAT6e connection

This is limited to short-distance copper Ethernet (tens of meters). It is not used for metro-scale interconnects or between CNFs.

NETCONF rules state:

A user cannot terminatetheir own active session.

Attempting to kill the same session returnsinvalid-valueerror.

The session continues running normally.

Thus:

No logout

No termination

No configuration impact

Therefore,Ais correct.