You save $69.98
Two Cisco switch uplinks both use `switchport mode dynamic auto` and remain access links even though VLANs 100 and 200 must traverse an 802.1Q trunk. Which change directly establishes the required trunk?
Two dynamic-auto peers do not actively negotiate trunking. A deliberate trunk configuration or compatible active DTP mode is required, followed by verification of VLANs.
Gateway IPs affect routed connectivity and cannot initiate DTP or make an Ethernet switchport a trunk.
PortFast changes STP edge behavior, not trunk encapsulation or DTP mode negotiation.
A Layer 2 access port belongs to one data VLAN and cannot simultaneously bridge two independent VLANs without trunking.
At a logistics provider, the site engineer needs to identify a neighboring Cisco switch model and port ID when both devices support Cisco proprietary discovery. Which choice best addresses the stated requirement?
CDP advertises Cisco-specific neighboring device identity and interface data on directly connected links.
CAM data gives MAC/VLAN/ingress observations, not the peer model and advertised remote port ID that CDP or LLDP supplies.
An ICMP echo cannot prove a particular physical neighbor model and port.
The routing table describes reachable IP prefixes, not exact Layer 2 neighbor port IDs.
At a research campus, an implementation partner must exchange immediate-neighbor identity between a Cisco access switch and a third-party Ethernet phone. Which choice best addresses the stated requirement?
IEEE LLDP is vendor-neutral Layer 2 discovery across interoperable devices.
ACL matching does not decode LLDP chassis and port IDs.
CDP is proprietary and may not be supported on the third-party phone.
CDP may not interoperate with a non-Cisco phone; LLDP provides standardized directly connected neighbor identity.
At a research campus, a network operations engineer sees a missing expected CDP neighbor on an access port even though the Ethernet link is up. Which choice best addresses the stated requirement?
CDP advertisements may be disabled on one side even with physical connectivity.
CDP does not require client DHCP assignment.
VLAN changes do not directly enable proprietary discovery.
A link can be up with CDP disabled or unsupported.
At an e-commerce platform, the security and networking lead must stop sending neighbor identity on an untrusted public-facing interface while preserving internal discovery. Which choice best addresses the stated requirement?
Discovery frames can reveal infrastructure metadata; limiting them on untrusted edges reduces disclosure.
Duplicate MACs create switching instability and do not prevent discovery leakage.
Suppressing Layer 3 routing adjacency does not stop Layer 2 CDP neighbor disclosures on the public-facing switchport.
Stopping OSPF everywhere is unnecessary and disrupts legitimate routing.
At a field-service firm, an implementation partner needs to interpret a local LLDP neighbor record listing a remote chassis ID, port ID and system name. Which choice best addresses the stated requirement?
LLDP receives advertisements from immediate Layer 2 peers on the interface.
LLDP is link-local and does not enumerate all routed hops.
Link discovery does not contain application packet payloads.
STP and LLDP provide separate functions.
At a satellite office, the on-call technician must choose a standard way to distinguish local access switch port wiring when different vendor devices share the rack. Which choice best addresses the stated requirement?
LLDP provides a common standard for local neighbor chassis/port discovery.
Non-Cisco devices may not implement CDP.
ARP maps network addresses to local MACs and does not report the remote switch port ID or advertised system description.
Root priority changes spanning-tree topology and does not supply link IDs.
At a bank branch, a network administrator needs to identify a neighboring Cisco switch model and port ID when both devices support Cisco proprietary discovery. During review, someone proposes: "Run show ip route as proof of the physical neighboring switchport." Which technical explanation most directly shows why this proposal does not solve the requirement?
The routing table describes reachable IP prefixes, not exact Layer 2 neighbor port IDs. The effective remedy is to use show cdp neighbors detail on the local Cisco device.
CDP advertises Cisco-specific neighboring device identity and interface data on directly connected links. The statement addresses a different mechanism. Here the engineer specifically proposed run show ip route as proof of the physical neighboring switchport; the decisive limitation is that the routing table describes reachable IP prefixes, not exact Layer 2 neighbor port IDs.
DNS records do not necessarily describe the directly cabled interface. This observation would apply to another device or feature, not the proposed run show ip route as proof of the physical neighboring switchport. For this scenario, the routing table describes reachable IP prefixes, not exact Layer 2 neighbor port IDs is the direct cause.
An ICMP echo cannot prove a particular physical neighbor model and port. It concerns a different proposed change, not the change being evaluated.
At a research campus, the site engineer must exchange immediate-neighbor identity between a Cisco access switch and a third-party Ethernet phone. During review, someone proposes: "Rely only on Cisco CDP advertisements for a non-CDP endpoint." Which technical explanation most directly shows why this proposal does not solve the requirement?
CDP is proprietary and may not be supported on the third-party phone. The effective remedy is to enable LLDP on compatible devices and inspect the LLDP neighbor table.
IEEE LLDP is vendor-neutral Layer 2 discovery across interoperable devices. This observation would apply to another device or feature, not the proposed rely only on cisco cdp advertisements for a non-cdp endpoint. For this scenario, cDP is proprietary and may not be supported on the third-party phone is the direct cause.
ACL matching does not decode LLDP chassis and port IDs. It concerns a different proposed change, not the change being evaluated.
OSPF describes routing topology, not non-routing Ethernet phone neighbors. The statement addresses a different mechanism. Here the engineer specifically proposed rely only on cisco cdp advertisements for a non-cdp endpoint; the decisive limitation is that cDP is proprietary and may not be supported on the third-party phone.
At a factory, a network operations engineer sees a missing expected CDP neighbor on an access port even though the Ethernet link is up. During review, someone proposes: "Increase the DHCP address pool to restore CDP." Which technical explanation most directly shows why this proposal does not solve the requirement?
CDP does not require client DHCP assignment. The effective remedy is to check whether CDP is globally and per-interface enabled and supported on both ends.
VLAN changes do not directly enable proprietary discovery. A true general network fact is not necessarily the direct diagnosis. The named change was increase the dhcp address pool to restore cdp, whose relevant defect is that cDP does not require client DHCP assignment.
A link can be up with CDP disabled or unsupported. It concerns a different proposed change, not the change being evaluated.
CDP advertisements may be disabled on one side even with physical connectivity. The statement addresses a different mechanism. Here the engineer specifically proposed increase the dhcp address pool to restore cdp; the decisive limitation is that cDP does not require client DHCP assignment.
At a regional hospital, the on-call technician must stop sending neighbor identity on an untrusted public-facing interface while preserving internal discovery. During review, someone proposes: "Turn off all routed protocols throughout the campus." Which technical explanation most directly shows why this proposal does not solve the requirement?
Stopping OSPF everywhere is unnecessary and disrupts legitimate routing. The effective remedy is to disable CDP or LLDP transmission as appropriate on the exposed interface.
Discovery frames can reveal infrastructure metadata; limiting them on untrusted edges reduces disclosure. That distinction is technically relevant elsewhere, but it does not identify the failure of the proposed turn off all routed protocols throughout the campus. The actual issue is that stopping OSPF everywhere is unnecessary and disrupts legitimate routing.
Duplicate MACs create switching instability and do not prevent discovery leakage. It concerns a different proposed change, not the change being evaluated.
CDP is a Layer 2 neighbor discovery advertisement; default-route changes do not disable its per-interface transmission.
or Guarantee your success by buying the full version which covers the full latest pool of questions. (760 Questions, Last Updated on Nov 4, 2026)
Please check your mailbox for a message from support@examlabs.com and follow the directions.
