Q: 7
You have been asked to onboard a new Aruba 6300M in a customer deployment You are working
remotely rather than on-site You have a colleague installing the switch The colleague has provided
you with a remote console session to configure the edge switch You have been asked to configure a
link aggregation going back to the cores using interfaces 1/1/51 and 1/1/52 The Senior Engineer of
the project has asked you to configure the switch and 1Q uplink with these guidelines
1. Add VLAN 20 to the local VLAN database with name Mgmt
2. Add L3 SVl on VLAN 20 for Management using address 10 in the 10.1.1 0/24 subnet 3. Add LAG 1
using LACP mode active for the uplink
4 use vlan 20 as the native vlan on the LAG 5. Make sure the interfaces are all ON.
Which configuration script will achieve the task?
Options
Discussion
I don’t think it’s B, gotta go with C. B misses 'no routing' before LACP and doesn't clearly link the interfaces to the LAG in proper Aruba style. C actually gets the sequence right: VLAN 20 with name, SVI on VLAN 20, lag config with native VLAN set, LACP active mode, and all ports enabled. Pretty sure that's what Aruba expects but feel free to disagree.
Probably C. The trap is B, since it configures a trunk but skips 'no routing' in the right place and order matters for LACP and VLAN native assignment. C checks off every guideline exactly, even if B could work in real life. Pretty sure this is what Aruba expects for onboarding configs, but let me know if you see something off.
Looks like C lines up best with the requirements.
I see why folks keep picking B but I think C is the safer choice for this scenario.
C tbh
C , since it checks off all the requirements: creates VLAN 20, sets up the SVI with the correct IP, uses LAG1 in active LACP mode, sets native VLAN on the uplink, and has 'no shut' to ensure ports are up. B is close but misses 'no routing.' Open to correction if I missed something.
B or C here, but I went with B. Interface order and 'no routing' get tricky on Aruba but B matches most steps if you go by the command layout in the official config guide. Saw similar syntax in some practice tests. If you have time, double check labs or the HPE guide to be sure!
If B misses 'no routing', can you even properly bind those interfaces to the LAG on Aruba that way?
Probably C. B looks tempting but skips 'no routing' and doesn't get the order quite right for attaching interfaces to LAG on Aruba. Seen similar question in practice, C fits the checklist best.
Its C for me, mostly because it lines up the sequence with Aruba best practices and adds that 'no routing' bit before LACP. B looks close but I think it skips a key step. Still a little unsure though since script order can trip you up.
Be respectful. No spam.
