B or D? I'd say B because 0.000000001 milliwatts is -90 dBm, not -65 dBm, so difference to -65 dBm is 15 dBm. But if they're assuming the noise floor is already -90 and not 0, maybe that's where D comes from. Kinda fuzzy on which number they want for 'noise floor' here, anyone else read it that way?
In the given topology, a pair of Aruba CX 8325 switches are in a VSX stack using the active gateway
What is the nature and behavior of the Virtual IP for the VSX pair if clients are connected to the
access switch using VSX as the default gateway?Had something like this in a mock. in other practice sets and option B fits since the Virtual IP is meant to float between the VSX switches if one fails. That's the whole point of active gateway in this Aruba setup: seamless failover for clients. I think this matches what the exam wants, but let me know if you see a different angle.
Yeah, B makes sense. The virtual IP is designed to float over to the secondary switch if the primary goes down, so clients keep their default gateway without even noticing a change. That’s basically the point of using an active gateway in a VSX setup. Pretty sure that’s what Aruba doc examples show too, but happy to hear counterpoints.
Looks like B is the right format for most Cisco gear: ip route 10.2.10.0 255.255.255.0 172.16.1.1. I picked B since it includes the mask and next hop, but not sure if the 'description aruba' at the end should be there for Aruba devices.
Tricky since the mask format isn't specified. If they were expecting traditional subnet mask style for static routes, D would work because ip route-static plus dotted decimal is legit in some HPE contexts. I'm mostly basing this on similar CLI from older HPE/Comware gear. Not 100 percent sure here though, could go either way if more context was given.
D
For me, A fits ArubaOS-CX since it uses the ip-route command with CIDR (/24), which is standard for static routes on these switches. D is more Comware style with the dotted mask, but that's not what they're asking for in this context. Not 100 percent sure if it's universal but for Aruba, A looks right. Anyone disagree?
I’m going with C here, regular static route syntax is what you need for in-band via SVI. The VRF mgmt one (option B) is only used for out-of-band management. Pretty sure that's how it works on Aruba CX, but let me know if I missed something.
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.
Option A is correct here. The Alerts and Events dashboard is what you use when you want to review and acknowledge issues in Aruba Central before taking further action. Tools dashboard is more for hands-on diagnostics, so not quite what the question asks. I think A matches the intent best, but happy to see other views if someone disagrees.
Agree with C and E here. UXI's main advantages are acting like a client (C) and checking real app performance like HTTP or Office 365 (E). D is more for dedicated coverage tools, not what UXI usually does. Pretty confident but open if I've missed anything.
Pretty sure the right combo is C and E for this one. UXI devices act as simulated clients (that's what C means) and they test real-world user apps like HTTP or Office 365, per E. D sounds more like a site survey tool, not what UXI is built for. Let me know if you see it differently!