Q: 6
An enterprise customer has these requirements: end-to-end QoS for the business-critical applications and VoIP services based on CoS marking. flexibility to offer services such as IPv6 and multicast without any reliance on the service provider. support for full-mesh connectivity at Layer 2. Which WAN connectivity option meets these requirements?
Options
Discussion
C
D imo. C looks tempting but DMVPN is L3 mesh only, VPLS is the only option matching end-to-end QoS with full-mesh at Layer 2. Trap for those missing the L2 part, agree?
What if "no reliance on the service provider" actually means running your own WAN? Wouldn’t C then make more sense?
I don’t see how C works here, since DMVPN doesn’t do full-mesh Layer 2. D fits the requirements best, even though "no reliance" is a bit tricky. The trap is thinking DMVPN covers L2 full-mesh just because it’s flexible.
A is wrong, D. VPLS gives you full-mesh Layer 2 and supports QoS and multicast, which matches everything they're asking for.
C/D? C (DMVPN) is tempting since it's flexible and doesn't depend on the provider, but the full-mesh L2 part really points to D (VPLS). CoS and multicast are also strong VPLS capabilities. I think some might pick C by mistake since DMVPN gets hyped for WAN flexibility, but VPLS checks every box here. Disagree?
C or D? DMVPN can do full-mesh L2 too, but I'm thinking C since VPLS usually needs provider config for some features.
Its D because VPLS is designed for full-mesh L2 connectivity and supports QoS with CoS markings, which matches the requirements. DMVPN is flexible but works at Layer 3, not true L2 mesh. I'm pretty sure about D but open if anyone thinks otherwise.
C or D for me. DMVPN (C) gives you flexibility, supports IPv6 and multicast, and you don't need to rely on the provider for L2/L3 VPN services. But not sure about full-mesh at true Layer 2 with it, which makes D tempting. Anyone else see this tested as C in practice questions?
Its D for VPLS. Official study material and practice labs usually highlight VPLS as the only one here supporting Layer 2 full-mesh with QoS end-to-end. Pretty sure that fits all the listed requirements.
Be respectful. No spam.
