Separate failure detection helps peers distinguish link disruption from peer loss, reducing the risk of harmful split-brain behavior. Design and verify independent VSX peer keepalive connectivity relative to the inter-switch link. would address VSX keepalive isolation, but the reported facts instead point to VRRP gateway resilience. That change would leave the actual requirement unresolved.

The alternative targets multicast receiver handling, where IGMP membership information lets switches constrain Layer 2 multicast distribution instead of flooding traffic indiscriminately. It does not establish the intended VRRP gateway resilience behavior described in the scenario.

That action—Align trunk native VLAN expectations and avoid ambiguous untagged forwarding—is relevant to native VLAN alignment. When connected trunk ports disagree about how untagged frames are classified, management and user traffic can land in unintended segments. It does not correct the observed VRRP gateway resilience condition.

That result—The AP radio state uses legally permitted channels and clients connect under the intended local regulatory settings—concerns AP country-code and RF regulatory setting. Radio operation is constrained by regional rules, and an incorrect country or channel plan can prevent valid operation or break client support. It can be healthy even while the current new Central scoped inheritance problem remains.

This would validate central configuration audit, not new Central scoped inheritance. Management intent, synchronization status and the running device state are distinct; failed changes or local overrides can leave unintended effective configuration. It is therefore insufficient acceptance evidence for the reported condition.

OSPF adjacency depends on compatible peer parameters and reachable interfaces; a live link is insufficient when control-plane settings disagree. The indicated result—both routers report a stable Full neighbor state and the intended routes appear in the correct routing table—checks a different mechanism and would not confirm the required new Central scoped inheritance outcome.

That result—The change ticket links a verified baseline configuration and a tested restoration procedure—concerns configuration backup before changes. Reversible change management requires knowing the previous effective state, not merely retaining a screenshot of intended edits. It can be healthy even while the current NTP clock alignment problem remains.

This would validate configuration API idempotence, not NTP clock alignment. An idempotent workflow can be safely retried without proliferating duplicate objects or introducing inconsistent partial configuration. It is therefore insufficient acceptance evidence for the reported condition.

API access is a privileged operational interface; overbroad or leaked tokens can compromise configuration and monitoring data. The indicated result—a scoped automation token reads intended resources, fails prohibited write operations and is absent from code repositories—checks a different mechanism and would not confirm the required NTP clock alignment outcome.

That action—Provision the supported VSF stack topology, member roles and intermember links consistently—is relevant to VSF member management. VSF presents supported physical members as a virtual switch while retaining operational requirements for healthy stacking links and member state. It does not correct the observed OSPF passive interfaces condition.

VSX peers retain independent control planes and only designated supported feature sets synchronize; unchecked settings may diverge. Configure and verify explicit VSX synchronization for supported shared features while managing independent settings separately. would address VSX peer synchronization, but the reported facts instead point to OSPF passive interfaces. That change would leave the actual requirement unresolved.

The alternative targets VRF route-context configuration, where routes and interfaces are looked up within the relevant VRF; a default route in a different table cannot repair a missing path. It does not establish the intended OSPF passive interfaces behavior described in the scenario.

That result—The intended VRF shows both the subnet interface and reachable next-hop route while unrelated VRFs remain isolated—concerns VRF route-context configuration. Routes and interfaces are looked up within the relevant VRF; a default route in a different table cannot repair a missing path. It can be healthy even while the current device group selection problem remains.

Classic Central uses groups to distribute shared configuration while sites provide physical-location organization, so modifying location alone need not change running intent. The indicated result—the device has correct site metadata and independently verified group-level configuration assignments—checks a different mechanism and would not confirm the required device group selection outcome.

This would validate template variable rendering, not device group selection. Shared templates are reusable only when site-specific identity, address and port data are correctly substituted for each target device. It is therefore insufficient acceptance evidence for the reported condition.

Authentication success is not the same as authorization; WLAN roles and VLAN selection determine where the user can forward traffic. The indicated result—the authenticated test client receives the expected role or VLAN and reaches only approved application destinations—checks a different mechanism and would not confirm the required corporate EAP-TLS SSID outcome.

This would validate SSID-to-forwarding path consistency, not corporate EAP-TLS SSID. Wireless association is only the first hop; downstream tunnel, VLAN and gateway mappings must agree for application access. It is therefore insufficient acceptance evidence for the reported condition.

That result—The effective device configuration reflects documented scoped intent and any deliberate higher-priority exception—concerns new Central scoped inheritance. New Central includes global, collection, site and device scopes; more specific applicable configuration can override broader inherited values. It can be healthy even while the current corporate EAP-TLS SSID problem remains.

The alternative targets new Central scoped inheritance, where new Central includes global, collection, site and device scopes; more specific applicable configuration can override broader inherited values. It does not establish the intended central device inventory onboarding behavior described in the scenario.

That action—Inspect configuration audit and effective device state rather than assuming an issued change was applied—is relevant to central configuration audit. Management intent, synchronization status and the running device state are distinct; failed changes or local overrides can leave unintended effective configuration. It does not correct the observed central device inventory onboarding condition.

Edge ports should not accept topology-control messages from unauthorized bridges; BPDU Guard can protect the switching domain by restricting offending links. Enable suitable BPDU protection on ports intended only for endpoints. would address BPDU Guard at edge ports, but the reported facts instead point to central device inventory onboarding. That change would leave the actual requirement unresolved.

The alternative targets VSX keepalive isolation, where separate failure detection helps peers distinguish link disruption from peer loss, reducing the risk of harmful split-brain behavior. It does not establish the intended VSX peer synchronization behavior described in the scenario.

That action—Inspect New Central scope inheritance and device-level precedence before changing shared policy—is relevant to new Central scoped inheritance. New Central includes global, collection, site and device scopes; more specific applicable configuration can override broader inherited values. It does not correct the observed VSX peer synchronization condition.

IGMP membership information lets switches constrain Layer 2 multicast distribution instead of flooding traffic indiscriminately. Enable appropriate IGMP snooping and multicast forwarding behavior for subscriber VLANs. would address multicast receiver handling, but the reported facts instead point to VSX peer synchronization. That change would leave the actual requirement unresolved.

This would validate SSID role and VLAN assignment, not VSX peer synchronization. Authentication success is not the same as authorization; WLAN roles and VLAN selection determine where the user can forward traffic. It is therefore insufficient acceptance evidence for the reported condition.

A routing protocol's internal adjacency does not guarantee a usable route for unknown destinations; a valid and authorized default egress is needed. The indicated result—the intended device has an active default route toward the approved security edge and external test traffic uses it—checks a different mechanism and would not confirm the required VSX peer synchronization outcome.

That result—The stack reports the expected active members and resilient forwarding across an intended member failure—concerns VSF member management. VSF presents supported physical members as a virtual switch while retaining operational requirements for healthy stacking links and member state. It can be healthy even while the current VSX peer synchronization problem remains.

This would validate roaming voice latency, not legacy low-rate airtime overhead. Fast reliable handoff requires compatible client capabilities, adequate AP overlap and secure authentication continuity rather than just increasing bandwidth. It is therefore insufficient acceptance evidence for the reported condition.

That result—Spectrum observations isolate the interference source and the post-remediation error rate falls measurably—concerns interference spectrum diagnosis. Non-802.11 emitters can occupy channel energy without appearing as normal Wi-Fi neighbors; channel changes or source mitigation need measured evidence. It can be healthy even while the current legacy low-rate airtime overhead problem remains.

Resilience depends on recovery behavior, routing/bridging convergence and application tolerance, not the number of installed redundant devices. The indicated result—a forced component failure restores approved traffic within a measured recovery-time objective—checks a different mechanism and would not confirm the required legacy low-rate airtime overhead outcome.

That result—An unauthorized BPDU on the protected access port triggers the configured protective behavior without altering the campus root—concerns BPDU Guard at edge ports. Edge ports should not accept topology-control messages from unauthorized bridges; BPDU Guard can protect the switching domain by restricting offending links. It can be healthy even while the current SVI inter-VLAN gateway problem remains.

This would validate VSX peer synchronization, not SVI inter-VLAN gateway. VSX peers retain independent control planes and only designated supported feature sets synchronize; unchecked settings may diverge. It is therefore insufficient acceptance evidence for the reported condition.

Uncontrolled Ethernet loops replicate broadcasts and destabilize MAC learning; redundant links require a mechanism to block or logically aggregate unsafe cycles. The indicated result—STP topology is stable, with intentional root and port roles and no recurring MAC-flap or broadcast-storm indications—checks a different mechanism and would not confirm the required SVI inter-VLAN gateway outcome.