300-420 Exam Dumps : Designing Cisco Enterprise Networks

Dual DMVPN with EIGRP routing is the correct solution because the requirements call for secure public-internet connectivity, redundant paths, automatic path selection, multicast support, and minimal remote-site configuration. DMVPN builds dynamic multipoint GRE tunnels protected by IPsec, allowing spoke sites to communicate securely through the public internet while supporting routing protocols and multicast over GRE. A dual DMVPN design provides redundancy through separate hubs, transports, or tunnel clouds, so a spoke can continue operating if one path fails. EIGRP can calculate alternate paths and react to metric changes, supporting automatic path selection based on failure and quality when engineered correctly. MPLS with BGP does not meet the public-internet and encryption requirements by itself. A full mesh of IPsec tunnels with OSPF or IS-IS would increase configuration complexity at every remote site and does not scale as well. DMVPN is specifically built to simplify deployment of secure, scalable, multipoint branch VPNs. Reference topics: DMVPN, IPsec, mGRE, EIGRP over DMVPN, WAN redundancy, multicast over GRE.

A migration from traditional IP-VPN service to Cisco SD-WAN commonly increases security and scalability. Cisco SD-WAN builds encrypted data-plane tunnels across supported transports, so the enterprise can use Internet, MPLS, or hybrid connectivity while maintaining secure site-to-site communication. The architecture also scales better operationally because policy, templates, onboarding, and routing control are centralized through the SD-WAN controllers and management plane. Increased solution complexity is not a desired characteristic; one of the design goals is to simplify operations through automation and centralized policy. Centralized application policies are also a major SD-WAN benefit, but when only two choices are selected, the stored answer emphasizes the two broad migration outcomes of security and scale. Distributed control plane is not correct because Cisco SD-WAN uses centralized control-plane logic with vSmart controllers distributing OMP routes and policies. A professional migration plan should validate transport diversity, controller redundancy, encryption policy, application-aware routing, and operational readiness. Reference topics: Cisco SD-WAN migration, encrypted overlay, scalability, centralized control plane, IP-VPN replacement.

Cisco SD-Access uses virtual networks as macro-segmentation boundaries, and those VNs are represented as VRF instances in the fabric. By design, separate VNs do not communicate directly inside the overlay unless the design introduces controlled inter-VN routing. Cisco SD-Access designs commonly use an external fusion router, firewall, or shared-services device to map fabric VNs to external VRFs and selectively exchange routes between them. That is the correct design because it preserves segmentation while allowing policy-controlled access to shared resources or selected networks. GRE tunnels between fabric edges are not the normal SD-Access inter-VN communication method and would bypass the intended fabric policy model. Security Group Tags provide microsegmentation within or across policy domains, but SGTs do not by themselves leak routes between separate virtual networks. Route leaking on fabric border nodes is not the recommended standalone answer here because inter-VN communication is normally provided through a fusion device or firewall outside the fabric. Therefore, the correct solution is external fusion routing with controlled VRF route exchange.