Last Attempt 300-110 Questions

This community bank design scenario requires precise alignment of EWC deployment scale, AAA integration, and traffic routing decisions with the stated constraints. With four APs per campus and a goal of local traffic handling, converting a single C9120 to EWC mode is optimal — converting two APs to EWC (Options B and C) on a four-AP campus wastes 50% of campus AP infrastructure for controller functions rather than client service. The single EWC AP serves as the active local controller for the remaining three client-serving APs. The HQ WLC set as N+1 backup ensures that if the branch EWC fails, the remaining APs fall back to the centralized controller. For the guest WLAN, local web authentication on the guest VLAN provides the locally routed guest access requirement without requiring WAN connectivity to HQ. For the employee WLAN, adding the HQ ISE AAA server to the EWC ' s RADIUS configuration enables 802.1x PEAP authentication to traverse the WAN to ISE at the time of client association. Once authenticated, traffic is locally switched — satisfying both the central authentication and local traffic routing requirements simultaneously. Option D ' s use of guest anchor for the employee WLAN is architecturally incorrect and would route traffic through HQ rather than locally. Reference: WLSD Study Guide — EWC Design, N+1 Redundancy, AAA Integration for Branch WLANs, Local Web Authentication.

Raising the minimum data rate to 24 Mbps reduces the effective coverage range of each AP because clients at the cell edge operating at low data rates are effectively excluded from the cell. This shrinks cell size, reducing channel overlap between neighboring APs on the same channel. Using directional antennas limits the coverage area of some APs by focusing RF energy in specific directions rather than radiating omnidirectionally, which directly reduces the lateral overlap between adjacent APs. Increasing AP transmit power (Option B) would worsen overlap, not reduce it. Allowing UNII-2e channels (Option C) provides more channel options but does not reduce the physical cell overlap — it only provides more channels to avoid co-channel interference. Power saving mode (Option E) is a client-side power management feature unrelated to AP cell sizing during a survey. Reference: WLSD Study Guide — Channel Overlap Mitigation, Data Rate Configuration, Directional Antenna Use Cases.

When eping (EoIP ping) fails between two Cisco Wireless LAN Controllers, it indicates that the data path of the mobility tunnel is blocked. In Cisco AireOS wireless networks, the mobility data path uses IP Protocol 97 (EtherIP — Ethernet-over-IP encapsulation) for tunneling client traffic between the anchor and foreign controllers. This is distinct from the control path, which uses UDP port 16666. When the mobility data path (IP Protocol 97) is blocked by a firewall or ACL between the two controllers ' networks, eping will fail because eping specifically tests the EoIP data encapsulation path. After a power cut, when clients disconnect and attempt to roam between APs on different controllers, the mobility tunnel must be operational for session continuity. If IP Protocol 97 is blocked, the mobility data plane cannot function, causing client disconnections during inter-controller roaming events. The other IP protocols listed (67, 77, 87) are not used for Cisco WLC mobility tunneling. Reference: WLSD Study Guide — Mobility Tunnel Data Path, IP Protocol 97 (EtherIP), eping Command and Troubleshooting.

In a wireless network design where anchor redundancy is required for guest access, setting different priorities for the anchor controllers ensures deterministic primary and backup behavior. Cisco anchor priority uses a lower numerical value to indicate higher preference — Priority 1 is the highest priority (most preferred) anchor, and Priority 3 is lower priority. Setting Anchor A to priority 1 (Option D) makes it the primary anchor controller — all new guest client sessions will preferentially anchor to Anchor A. Setting Anchor B to priority 3 makes it the standby anchor — guest clients will only be anchored to Anchor B when Anchor A is unavailable. This creates a clear primary/backup relationship with deterministic failover. Setting both anchors to the same priority (Options A and C) would result in load balancing between the two anchors rather than active/standby behavior. Option B incorrectly reverses the priorities, making Anchor B the primary and Anchor A the backup. Reference: WLSD Study Guide — Guest Anchor Redundancy Design, Anchor Priority Configuration, DMZ Anchor WLC Architecture.