Pass the Juniper JNCIS-SP JN0-364 Questions and answers with CertsForce

In Juniper Networks Junos OS,Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)andIP-in-IP (IP-IP)are common tunneling mechanisms used to transport packets across a network by encapsulating them within another protocol. Understanding the header structure and the limitations of these protocols is essential for proper MTU (Maximum Transmission Unit) management and security design.

Overhead (Option A):

Both GRE and IP-IP tunnels operate by adding an additional IP header to the original packet. An IP-IP tunnel (Protocol 4) adds a20-byteIPv4 header. A GRE tunnel (Protocol 47) adds the same20-bytedelivery IP header plus a minimum4-byteGRE header (totaling 24 bytes, which can increase if keys or sequencing are used). Because these headers are added to the payload, the total size of the packet increases. This "overhead" means that if the original packet was already at the MTU limit (e.g., 1500 bytes), the encapsulated packet will exceed it, potentially leading to fragmentation or the need to adjust theTCP MSS (Maximum Segment Size).

Encryption (Option D):

Crucially, according to Juniper Service Provider documentation, neither GRE nor IP-IP provides nativeencryptionor data confidentiality. They are encapsulation protocols, not security protocols. The payload remains in cleartext and is visible to any device along the path. If security and encryption are required for data traversing these tunnels, they must be combined withIPsec (IP Security). While GRE is often used as the "carrier" for IPsec (to allow multicast or dynamic routing protocols which IPsec alone does not support), the GRE protocol itself remains an unencrypted delivery mechanism. Therefore, statements A and D accurately describe the architectural behavior of these tunnel types.

In theIS-IS (Intermediate System to Intermediate System)protocol as implemented in Junos OS, routers can operate at two hierarchical levels:Level 1 (L1)for intra-area routing andLevel 2 (L2)for inter-area backbone routing. By default, a Juniper router and its interfaces are configured to act asLevel 1/2, meaning they will attempt to form adjacencies at both levels simultaneously.

According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, the show isis interface command provides a granular view of how the protocol is interacting with specific local links. In the provided exhibit, we must examine theL (Level)column and theDR (Designated Router)status columns to understand R1's operational state.

Level Configuration:Under the L column for both the physical interface ge-0/0/0.0 and the loopback lo0.0, the value is strictly2. This indicates that these interfaces have been explicitly configured to operate only at Level 2.

Adjacency Capabilities:For the interface ge-0/0/0.0, the Level 1 DR field is marked asDisabled. This confirms that R1 is not participating in Level 1 operations on this link; it will not transmit Level 1 Hello PDUs, nor will it listen for them. Consequently, R1 is incapable of forming a Level 1 adjacency with R2 on this segment.

Metric Implications:The exhibit shows an L1/L2 Metric of100/100. In Junos, "narrow" metrics (the default) are limited to a maximum value of 63 per interface. A metric of 100 indicates thatwide metrics(wide-metrics-only) have been enabled. Therefore, option A is incorrect because the routerisusing wide metrics.

Since the prompt states the adjacency is "up," and the interface is restricted to Level 2, we can conclude thatR1 only forms a Level 2 adjacency with R2 (Option B). Even though an L1 metric of 100 is displayed in the table as a configured value, it is not actually "advertised" in a Link-State PDU because the Level 1 protocol is disabled on that interface.

In OSPF, loop prevention within a single area is achieved through the fundamental nature of its link-state architecture. Unlike distance-vector protocols that rely on "routing by rumor," OSPF ensures that every router within an area maintains an identicalLink-State Database (LSDB). This database acts as a complete map of the network topology.

Once the LSDB is synchronized, each router independently executes theShortest Path First (SPF) algorithm, which is formally known as theDijkstra algorithm. This mathematical process treats the local router as the "root" of a tree and calculates the shortest path to every other node (router) and prefix in the area based on the cumulative interface costs. Because every router uses the same synchronized map (the LSDB) and the same deterministic algorithm, they all arrive at a consistent, loop-free view of the best paths.

According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, the Dijkstra algorithm is superior to theBellman-Ford algorithm(used by distance-vector protocols like RIP) in this regard. Bellman-Ford is susceptible to "count-to-infinity" problems and loops because routers only know the distance and direction to a destination provided by their neighbors, rather than the full topology. In OSPF, even if a link fails, the updated Link-State Advertisement (LSA) is flooded rapidly, and the Dijkstra algorithm is re-run to find a new loop-free path.Routing policies(Option B) are used to manipulate path selection or filter routes but are not the primary mechanism for fundamental loop prevention in OSPF. Similarly,forwarding policies(Option D) govern how traffic is handled at the data plane level rather than determining the control plane's loop-free topology.

In the BGP finite state machine, theIdlestate is the "stop" or "start" point of the protocol. When a session is stuck in Idle, it means the BGP process is either administratively disabled or, more commonly, is unable to initiate the underlying TCP connection required for BGP.

According to Juniper Networks Service Provider documentation, the most common reason for a BGP session to remain in Idle is a lack ofrouting reachability. For BGP to move to theConnectstate, the Junos kernel must have a route to the IP address specified in the neighbor statement. If thepeer IP address is unreachable (Option A)—meaning there is no route in inet.0 (via OSPF, IS-IS, or static)—the router cannot initiate the TCP three-way handshake on port 179. Consequently, the state machine will never progress.

Analysis of incorrect options:

Option B:BGP does not care if the local AS is higher or lower than the peer's; it only cares if they match the configuration. AS numbers are identifiers, not priorities.

Option C:A mismatchedRouter IDdoes not prevent a session from leaving the Idle state. It would typically cause the session to reach theOpenConfirmstate, and then fail with a "Notification" message due to a collision or identification error.

Option D:While a mismatchedgroup type(internal vs. external) will cause the session to fail, it usually fails during theOpenmessage exchange (OpenSent state) because the AS numbers provided will not match the expected peer type (IBGP vs. EBGP).

Only the lack of a path to the neighbor (reachability) keeps the session at the very beginning of the process: theIdlestate.

In the Junos OS, routing policy behavior is governed bydefault import and export rulesthat vary significantly between different protocols. ForIS-IS (Intermediate System to Intermediate System), the default export policy is "reject all." This means that, by default, an IS-IS process willexport nothingfrom the routing table into the IS-IS database.

According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, IS-IS automatically advertises its own direct interfaces that are configured under the [edit protocols isis] hierarchy. However, it does not automatically redistribute routes learned from other sources—such asStatic routes,OSPF, orBGP—into the IS-IS domain. This is a safety mechanism designed to prevent accidental routing loops or the flooding of unnecessary prefixes into the link-state database (LSDB), which could impact the stability of the SPF (Shortest Path First) algorithm.

To move routes from the routing table (inet.0) into IS-IS, an administrator must explicitly create arouting policyand apply it as anexport policywithin the IS-IS configuration. For example:

Code snippet

set policy-options policy-statement REDIST-STATIC term 1 from protocol static

set policy-options policy-statement REDIST-STATIC term 1 then accept

set protocols isis export REDIST-STATIC

Without such a policy, the IS-IS LSPs (Link-State PDUs) will only contain information about the IS-IS enabled interfaces and the reachability of other IS-IS neighbors. This behavior contrasts with protocols like BGP, which has different default rules for exporting active BGP routes to EBGP peers. In the context of IS-IS in a Juniper environment, "export nothing" is the standard operational baseline.

In the context of Juniper Networks High Availability,Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)is a lightweight protocol designed to provide fast failure detection for the forwarding path. Unlike the slow "hello" mechanisms found in IGPs like OSPF or IS-IS, BFD can detect link or neighbor failures in sub-second intervals.

According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, BFD operates through a negotiation process. When two routers establish a BFD session, they exchange their locally configuredMinimum Transmit IntervalandMinimum Receive Intervalwithin the BFD control packets. The fundamental rule of BFD negotiation is that the routers must agree on a common timing value that accommodates the slower of the two devices to ensure stability and prevent "false positives" (detecting a failure when none exists simply because one router cannot keep up with the processing speed).

In this scenario, R1 expects to send at 300ms, while R2 is configured for 400ms. During the handshake, R1 informs R2 it is capable of 300ms, but R2 informs R1 it can only support a minimum of 400ms. Consequently, the routers will negotiate to use theslowest of the two rates (400ms). Specifically, the transmission interval of one router is matched to the receive interval of the other. By choosing the highest common denominator (the slowest rate), the BFD session ensures that both routers have sufficient time to process incoming control packets. This negotiation allows BFD to be highly flexible in heterogeneous environments where different hardware platforms may have varying CPU capabilities for handling rapid heartbeat packets.

In the BGP Finite State Machine (FSM), theIdlestate is the first stage of any BGP connection. When a BGP session is "stuck" in Idle, it typically indicates that the router is unable to even begin the process of establishing a TCP connection with its neighbor. According to Juniper Networks documentation, before BGP can transition to theConnectorActivestates, it must have a valid route to the neighbor's IP address in the routing table and be able to initiate a three-way TCP handshake on port 179.

If thepeer IP address is incorrect(Option D), the router may not have a route to that destination, or it may be attempting to connect to a non-existent or unreachable host. In many Junos configurations, if the underlying IGP (OSPF/IS-IS) or static routing cannot provide reachability to the neighbor address defined in the BGP configuration, the BGP process will remain in the Idle state and periodically retry the connection.

Regarding the other options:

The local AS number is missing (Option C):In Junos, you cannot commit a BGP configuration if the local autonomous system is not defined at either the [edit routing-options] level or within the BGP group itself. The commit check would fail before the session could even attempt to start.

The BGP group type (Option B):Having a mismatch in group type (internal vs. external) usually results in the session reaching theOpenSentorOpenConfirmstate before failing due to an "unacceptable AS" error in the OPEN message.

BGP hold time (Option A):Issues with hold timers or keepalives generally cause a session that is already in theEstablishedstate to drop; they do not prevent the session from leaving the Idle state.

In theOSPF (Open Shortest Path First)protocol, ensuring that all routers within an area have a synchronizedLink-State Database (LSDB)is fundamental to building a consistent loop-free topology. During the adjacency formation process—specifically when transitioning from theExStartstate to theExchangestate—routers must determine what information they are missing from their neighbors without sending the entire database at once, which would be highly inefficient.

TheDatabase Description (DBD)packet, also known as a DDP, is the mechanism used for this summary exchange. According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, the DBD packet does not contain full Link-State Advertisements (LSAs). Instead, it contains only theLSA headers, which include the LSA type, the ID of the advertising router, and the sequence number.

By exchanging these headers, a Juniper router can compare the neighbor's database summary against its own local LSDB. If the router identifies a header in the DBD packet that represents a newer or missing entry, it records that LSA in its "Link-State Request List." This collaborative "handshake" ensures that only the necessary, updated information is requested in the subsequentLink-State Request (LSR)phase. It is important to distinguish this from theLink-State PDU (LSP)mentioned in Option D, which is actually the term used in the IS-IS protocol, not OSPF. In OSPF, the functional unit is the LSA, and the transport vehicle for the initial summary is the DBD packet. This methodical synchronization is what allows OSPF to scale effectively in large service provider environments.

In theIS-IS (Intermediate System to Intermediate System)protocol as implemented in Junos OS, the output of operational commands uses specific numerical representations to denote the hierarchy levels of a neighbor adjacency. Understanding these values is crucial for troubleshooting peering relationships in a multi-level IS-IS network.

According to Juniper Networks technical documentation, the show isis adjacency command displays the status of the neighbors. The "L" column indicates the level of the adjacency:

Level 1:Indicates the adjacency is strictly for intra-area routing.

Level 2:Indicates the adjacency is strictly for backbone/inter-area routing.

Level 3:This is ashorthand representationused by Junos to indicate that a single adjacency has been established forboth Level 1 and Level 2 simultaneously.

The critical distinction in this question lies in the interface type. On abroadcast interface(such as standard Ethernet), IS-IS typically establishes and maintains separate adjacencies for Level 1 and Level 2. In the CLI output for a broadcast link, you would generally see two separate lines for the same neighbor—one for Level 1 and one for Level 2.

However, on apoint-to-point (P2P)interface, IS-IS can negotiate both levels within a single adjacency. When this occurs, Junos consolidates the output into a single entry and usesLevel 3to signify that the adjacency is functional for both levels. Since the exhibit shows ge-0/0/0.0 as Level 3, it confirms that the link is configured with a point-to-point encapsulation (either natively or via the interface-type p2p command) and is acting as a Level 1/2 adjacency.

Option B is incorrect as the number "3" refers to protocol levels, not the count of neighbors. Option C is a reference to data center architectures that does not influence IS-IS level nomenclature. Option D is incorrect because, as noted, broadcast interfaces display these levels separately rather than using the Level 3 shorthand.

In Junos OS, astatic routeis a manually configured entry in the routing table. Unlike dynamic routes, which have built-in timers and aging mechanisms, static routes are generally "permanent" as long as their conditions for validity are met.

1. Manual Removal (Option A):

Since static routes are explicitly defined by the administrator, the most direct way to remove one is through a configuration change. Using the delete routing-options static route command followed by a commit will immediately remove the route from the Routing Information Base (RIB).

2. Next-Hop Reachability (Option B):

For a static route to be "active" and installed in the forwarding table, itsnext-hop must be reachable. If a static route points to a specific physical interface or an IP address on a local segment, and thatoutbound interface becomes unavailable(e.g., the link goes "Down"), the Junos kernel detects that the next-hop is no longer viable. Consequently, the route is marked as "hidden" or "inactive" and is removed from the active forwarding table to prevent traffic from being black-holed.

Why other options are incorrect:

Aging (Option C):Static routes do not have an expiration timer based on traffic. Even if no packet is sent for years, the route remains as long as the interface is up.

Remote Reachability (Option D):Standard static routes only track the status of the local interface or the immediate next-hop. They do not possess "end-to-end" visibility. If a host two hops away fails, the local router has no way of knowing this via the static route itself. To achieve this level of tracking, features likeRPM (Real-time Performance Monitoring)orBFD (Bidirectional Forwarding Detection)must be linked to the static route.