This 200-301 practice question tests your understanding of ai and network operations. This is a configuration task: choose the command set that satisfies every stated requirement. Small differences — like 'secret' vs 'password' or 'transport input ssh' vs 'all' — change whether the answer is correct. After answering, compare your reasoning against the explanation and wrong-answer breakdown below. Once you have made your selection, read the full explanation to reinforce the concept and understand why each distractor is designed to mislead on exam day.
Exhibit
R1#show running-config | section interface GigabitEthernet0/1
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
ip address 192.0.2.1 255.255.255.0
shutdown
!
R1#show ip interface brief | include Gig0/1
GigabitEthernet0/1 192.0.2.1 YES manual administratively down down
You are connected to R1 (10.0.0.1/30). You need to use RESTCONF to verify the current administrative status of interface GigabitEthernet0/1 on R1, then change it to 'down'. The YANG data model is ietf-interfaces, and the base URI is https://10.0.0.1/restconf. Provide the correct GET and PATCH request URIs with appropriate HTTP headers. Also identify what error would occur if you used 'application/xml' as the Accept header or if you used the path 'Cisco-IOS-XE-native:native/interface/GigabitEthernet' instead of the correct ietf-interfaces path.
R1#show running-config | section interface GigabitEthernet0/1
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
ip address 192.0.2.1 255.255.255.0
shutdown
!
R1#show ip interface brief | include Gig0/1
GigabitEthernet0/1 192.0.2.1 YES manual administratively down down
A
GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and body {"ietf-interfaces:interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406 Not Acceptable; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives 404 or incorrect data.
This option correctly identifies the GET and PATCH URIs and headers, and accurately describes the errors. The ietf-interfaces model is used for operational state and basic configuration; the native model is for configuration only and does not expose admin status via RESTCONF in the same way.
B
GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/xml; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/xml and body <interface><enabled>false</enabled></interface>; using Accept: application/xml is fine; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives same data.
Why wrong: This is incorrect because RESTCONF on Cisco IOS XE typically supports only application/yang-data+json, not XML. Using application/xml would result in a 406 Not Acceptable error. Also, the Cisco-IOS-XE-native path does not expose the admin status in the same way.
C
GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/Cisco-IOS-XE-native:native/interface/GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and body {"Cisco-IOS-XE-native:interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406; using ietf-interfaces path gives 404.
Why wrong: This is incorrect because the native YANG model is used for configuration, not for operational state. The admin status (enabled) is modeled under ietf-interfaces, not under Cisco-IOS-XE-native. Using the native path would not return the current administrative status.
D
GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/json and body {"interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives 404.
Why wrong: This is incorrect because the correct Accept and Content-Type headers should be application/yang-data+json, not application/json. Also, the JSON body must include the module name prefix 'ietf-interfaces:' to be valid per RESTCONF conventions.
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and body {"ietf-interfaces:interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406 Not Acceptable; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives 404 or incorrect data.
The correct GET request URI is: GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json. The correct PATCH request URI is the same, with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and a JSON body {"ietf-interfaces:interface": {"enabled": false}}. Using Accept: application/xml would result in a 406 Not Acceptable error because the server only supports yang-data+json. Using the Cisco-IOS-XE-native path would return a 404 or incorrect data because the operational state of the interface (admin status) is modeled under ietf-interfaces, not under the native YANG model which is used for configuration only.
Key principle: NAT direction and interface roles matter as much as the IP address mapping. Inside/outside designation controls which traffic is translated.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
✓
GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and body {"ietf-interfaces:interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406 Not Acceptable; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives 404 or incorrect data.
Why this is correct
This option correctly identifies the GET and PATCH URIs and headers, and accurately describes the errors. The ietf-interfaces model is used for operational state and basic configuration; the native model is for configuration only and does not expose admin status via RESTCONF in the same way.
Related concept
Static NAT maps one inside address to one outside address.
✗
GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/xml; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/xml and body <interface><enabled>false</enabled></interface>; using Accept: application/xml is fine; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives same data.
Why it's wrong here
This is incorrect because RESTCONF on Cisco IOS XE typically supports only application/yang-data+json, not XML. Using application/xml would result in a 406 Not Acceptable error. Also, the Cisco-IOS-XE-native path does not expose the admin status in the same way.
✗
GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/Cisco-IOS-XE-native:native/interface/GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and body {"Cisco-IOS-XE-native:interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406; using ietf-interfaces path gives 404.
Why it's wrong here
This is incorrect because the native YANG model is used for configuration, not for operational state. The admin status (enabled) is modeled under ietf-interfaces, not under Cisco-IOS-XE-native. Using the native path would not return the current administrative status.
✗
GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/json and body {"interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives 404.
Why it's wrong here
This is incorrect because the correct Accept and Content-Type headers should be application/yang-data+json, not application/json. Also, the JSON body must include the module name prefix 'ietf-interfaces:' to be valid per RESTCONF conventions.
Option-by-option analysis
Why each answer is right or wrong
Understanding why wrong answers are wrong — and when they would be correct — is what separates a 750 score from a 900. The 200-301 exam frequently reuses these exact scenarios with slightly different constraints.
✓GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and body {"ietf-interfaces:interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406 Not Acceptable; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives 404 or incorrect data.Correct answer▾
Why this is correct
This option correctly identifies the GET and PATCH URIs and headers, and accurately describes the errors. The ietf-interfaces model is used for operational state and basic configuration; the native model is for configuration only and does not expose admin status via RESTCONF in the same way.
✗GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/xml; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/xml and body <interface><enabled>false</enabled></interface>; using Accept: application/xml is fine; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives same data.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
The specific factual error is that Cisco IOS XE RESTCONF implementation does not support XML content type; it only supports JSON.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates might think RESTCONF supports both XML and JSON equally, but Cisco's implementation is JSON-only.
✗GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/Cisco-IOS-XE-native:native/interface/GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and body {"Cisco-IOS-XE-native:interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406; using ietf-interfaces path gives 404.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
The specific factual error is that the admin status is not available under the native YANG model; it is under ietf-interfaces.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates may confuse the native model with the standard ietf-interfaces model, thinking both contain the same data.
✗GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/json and body {"interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives 404.Wrong answer — click to see why▾
Why this is wrong here
The specific factual error is that RESTCONF requires the media type application/yang-data+json, not generic application/json. Additionally, the module name prefix is required in the JSON body.
Why candidates choose this
Candidates might think application/json is acceptable since it is JSON, but RESTCONF has a specific media type.
Analysis generated from the official 200-301blueprint and verified against question context. The “when correct” sections are what AI assistants cite when candidates ask “what’s the difference between these options?”
Common exam traps
Common exam trap: NAT rules depend on direction and matching traffic
NAT is not only about the public address. The inside/outside interface roles and the ACL or rule that matches traffic are just as important.
Detailed technical explanation
How to think about this question
NAT questions usually test address translation, overload/PAT behaviour, static mappings and whether the right traffic is being translated. Read the interface direction and address terms carefully.
KKey Concepts to Remember
Static NAT maps one inside address to one outside address.
PAT allows many inside hosts to share one public address using ports.
Inside local and inside global describe the private and translated addresses.
NAT ACLs identify traffic for translation, not always security filtering.
TExam Day Tips
→Identify inside and outside interfaces first.
→Check whether the scenario needs static NAT, dynamic NAT or PAT.
→Do not confuse NAT matching ACLs with normal packet-filtering intent.
Key takeaway
NAT direction and interface roles matter as much as the IP address mapping. Inside/outside designation controls which traffic is translated.
Real-world example
How this comes up in practice
A small business has 20 workstations on the 192.168.1.0/24 network and one public IP from its ISP. The router uses PAT (NAT overload) so all 20 devices share one public address using different source ports. NAT questions test whether you understand the four address terms and which direction each translation applies.
Related glossary terms
Concepts from this question explained
These glossary pages explain the core terms tested in this 200-301 question in full detail.
Review the four NAT address types (inside local, inside global, outside local, outside global), PAT port overload, and static vs dynamic NAT use cases. Then practise related 200-301 NAT questions on configuration and troubleshooting.
AI and Network Operations — This question tests AI and Network Operations — Static NAT maps one inside address to one outside address..
What is the correct answer to this question?
The correct answer is: GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json; PATCH same URI with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and body {"ietf-interfaces:interface": {"enabled": false}}; using Accept: application/xml gives 406 Not Acceptable; using Cisco-IOS-XE-native path gives 404 or incorrect data. — The correct GET request URI is: GET https://10.0.0.1/restconf/data/ietf-interfaces:interfaces/interface=GigabitEthernet0/1 with Accept: application/yang-data+json. The correct PATCH request URI is the same, with Content-Type: application/yang-data+json and a JSON body {"ietf-interfaces:interface": {"enabled": false}}. Using Accept: application/xml would result in a 406 Not Acceptable error because the server only supports yang-data+json. Using the Cisco-IOS-XE-native path would return a 404 or incorrect data because the operational state of the interface (admin status) is modeled under ietf-interfaces, not under the native YANG model which is used for configuration only.
What should I do if I get this 200-301 question wrong?
Review the four NAT address types (inside local, inside global, outside local, outside global), PAT port overload, and static vs dynamic NAT use cases. Then practise related 200-301 NAT questions on configuration and troubleshooting.
What is the key concept behind this question?
Static NAT maps one inside address to one outside address.
About these practice questions
Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
This 200-301 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Cisco certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the 200-301 exam.
Question Discussion
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
Sign in to join the discussion.