Cisco 300-540 Exam Dumps

Phase 1 of an IPsec tunnel (ISAKMP/IKE) must have matching proposals on both peers for:

Encryption algorithm

Hash (integrity) algorithm

Authentication method

DH group

The requirement states that AES and SHA-256 must be used. The current configuration uses:

encryption 3des incorrect (must be AES)

hash md5 incorrect (must be SHA-256)

To meet the requirement, we must modify the ISAKMP policy:

crypto isakmp policy 10

encryption aes change 3DES to AES

hash sha256 change MD5 to SHA-256

authentication pre-share

group 12

Therefore, the necessary commands on PE1 are:

encryption aes option B

hash sha256 option E

Options C and D are invalid syntax (encryption sha256 and hash aes are not supported). Changing the DH group (A) is not required by the problem statement and would not by itself fix the mismatch related to encryption and hash algorithms.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation

Infrastructure as Code (IaC) requires:

Declarative configuration

Automation

API-driven workflows

Multi-cloud capability

Integration with orchestration and provisioning tools

Terraform is a widely adopted IaC platform supporting:

Cloud automation (AWS, Azure, GCP, private clouds)

Cisco infrastructure provisioning (Nexus, ACI, IOS-XR, NSO, SD-WAN, etc.)

REST APIs and providers for programmability

Cisco provides official Terraform providers for multiple platforms, enabling full IaC operations. This aligns exactly with SP cloud automation design principles.

Other options:

Cloud-based sandboxes For testing, not IaC automation

ThousandEyes Monitoring and performance analytics

AppDynamics Application performance management

Router R2 is inside AS 100 and has three iBGP paths (via R3, R4, R5) toward AS 101. To perform iBGP multipath across these three equal-cost paths, BGP must:

Run the correct BGP process for AS 100

Allow installation of multiple iBGP paths in the routing table

This is done with:

router bgp 100

maximum-paths ibgp 3

router bgp 100 -- enters the BGP process for AS 100 (correct AS per diagram).

maximum-paths ibgp 3 -- tells BGP to keep up to 3 iBGP paths to the same destination, enabling CEF to load-share across them.

Other options:

ip load-sharing ibgp 3 -- not a valid command.

router bgp 101 -- wrong AS number.

ip load-sharing per-destination -- controls CEF hashing but does not enable BGP to install multiple iBGP paths by itself.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation

BGP Flowspec allows routers to distribute traffic-filtering rules using BGP NLRI.

To enable Flowspec, after neighbors are configured, the essential next step is:

Activate the Flowspec address-family under BGP

Example:

router bgp 65000

address-family ipv4 flowspec

neighbor X.X.X.X activate

exit-address-family

This enables:

FlowSpec NLRI exchange

Distribution of drop rules (rate-limit, redirect, null route, etc.)

Automatic ACL/class-map/policy-map generation on edge routers

Why the other options are incorrect:

B . Set BGP routing process already done when neighbors were configured

C . Activate neighbors only makes sense inside an address-family; flowspec AF must be enabled first

D . Configure route reflector optional and not required for Flowspec to operate

Thus, the correct next step is A. Configure Flowspec for the BGP address-family.

In Cisco data center and cloud-scale designs, a double-sided vPC (also called vPC-to-vPC) is used when both ends of a Layer 2 port channel are formed by a pair of switches that operate as vPC peers. In this model:

On the aggregation or leaf side, two switches (in this case, LEAF1 and LEAF2) form a vPC domain with a vPC peer-link and keepalive.

On the access or ToR side, two switches (in this case, TOR1 and TOR2) must also form their own vPC domain with a peer-link and vPC keepalive.

The port-channel that interconnects the two vPC domains is then configured as a vPC on both sides, creating a vPC-to-vPC topology.

The problem statement specifies that LEAF1 and LEAF2 are already configured as vPC peers. For a double-sided vPC to work, the other side (TOR1 and TOR2) must also behave as a single logical entity for the downstream Cisco UCS server and for the upstream vPC connection towards LEAF1 and LEAF2. This is only achieved when TOR1 and TOR2 are configured as vPC peers with:

A vPC domain ID

A vPC peer-link between TOR1 and TOR2

vPC member port-channels towards LEAF1 and LEAF2 and towards the Cisco UCS server

Therefore, the next required step is to configure a vPC between TOR1 and TOR2.

Evaluation of the options:

Option A, ''Add all the switches to the fabric,'' is generic and not specific to vPC configuration. It does not address the technical requirement to form a vPC domain on the ToR side.

Option B, ''Configure peering between LEAF1 and LEAF2 and TOR1 and TOR2,'' is incorrect because vPC peering is only configured between the two switches that form each vPC domain (LEAF1--LEAF2 and TOR1--TOR2), not across all four switches together.

Option C, ''Configure MSTP between TOR1 and TOR2,'' is not required for establishing a double-sided vPC. vPC designs rely on the vPC control plane and the peer-link, not on spanning-tree between the vPC peers for normal operation.

Option D, ''Configure a vPC between TOR1 and TOR2,'' correctly describes configuring TOR1 and TOR2 as a vPC pair (vPC domain with peer-link), which is the mandatory step to create a double-sided vPC topology with LEAF1 and LEAF2.