All HPE7-A01 Test Inside HP Questions

The statements that are true regarding Aruba NAE agents are A and C.

A. A single NAE script can be used by multiple NAE agents. This means that you can create different instances of the same script with different parameters or settings. For example, you can use the same script to monitor different VLANs or interfaces on the switch1.

C. NAE agents will never consume more than 10% of switch processor resources. This is a built-in safeguard that prevents the agents from affecting the switch performance or stability. If an agent exceeds the 10% limit, it will be automatically disabled and an alert will be generated2.

The other options are incorrect because:

B. NAE agents are not active at all times. They can be enabled or disabled by the user, either manually or based on a schedule. They can also be disabled automatically if they encounter an error or exceed the resource limit1.

D. NAE scripts do not need to be reviewed and signed by Aruba before being used. You can create your own custom scripts using Python and upload them to the switch or Aruba Central. You can also use the scripts provided by Aruba or other sources, as long as they are compatible with the switch firmware version1.

E. A single NAE agent cannot be used by multiple NAE scripts. An agent is an instance of a script that runs on the switch. Each agent can only run one script at a time1.

The correct answer is C. Create a new SVI and use attach command.

To create a new SVI for a separate routing table, you need to use the attach command to associate the SVI with a VRF (Virtual Routing and Forwarding) instance. A VRF is a logical entity that allows multiple routing tables to coexist on the same switch. Each VRF has its own set of interfaces, routing protocols, and routes that are isolated from other VRFs.

According to the AOS-CX Virtual Switching Framework (VSF) Guide1, one of the steps to configure VRF-aware VSF is:

Configure the VRFs on each member switch and assign the SVIs to the respective VRFs using the attach command. For example:

switch(config)# vrf red

switch(config-vrf)# exit

switch(config)# interface vlan 10

switch(config-if-vlan)# ip address 10.1.1.1/24

switch(config-if-vlan)# attach vrf red

The above commands create a VRF named red and assign VLAN 10 SVI to it. The SVI has an IP address of 10.1.1.1/24.

The other options are incorrect because:

A. You cannot attach a VRF to a VLAN directly. You need to create an SVI for the VLAN and then attach the VRF to the SVI.

B. You cannot create a new routing table manually. You need to create a VRF and then use routing protocols or static routes to populate the routing table for the VRF.

D. You cannot attach a routing table to a VLAN directly. You need to create an SVI for the VLAN and then attach a VRF that has a routing table associated with it.

Two parts of the solution for these requirements are Option C and Option E.

Option C is a part of the solution because it defines a policy-based routing action list named route_test, which specifies the next hop IP address as 10.1.1.253 for the matching traffic. This is the new default route that the user wants to use for the subnet 10.2.250.0/24. The interface null parameter indicates that the traffic will be routed to the next hop without using a specific interface1.

Option E is a part of the solution because it applies the policy-based routing action list route_test to the VLAN interface 250, which has an IP address of 10.2.250.1/24. This is the subnet that the user wants to test the new default route for. The apply policy command enables policy-based routing on the interface and associates it with the action list2.

Option A is not a part of the solution because it defines a policy-based routing action list named route_test, but does not specify the next hop IP address as 10.1.1.253, which is the new default route that the user wants to use. Instead, it specifies a next hop IP address of 10.1.1.254, which is different from the requirement.

Option B is not a part of the solution because it defines a policy-based routing action list named route_test, but does not specify any next hop IP address at all, which is necessary for policy-based routing to work. Instead, it specifies an interface null parameter without any IP address, which is invalid.

Option D is not a part of the solution because it applies the policy-based routing action list route_test to the VLAN interface 200, which has an IP address of 10.2.200.1/24. This is not the subnet that the user wants to test the new default route for, but a different subnet that should not be affected by this change.