Courseiva
ArchitecturehardMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

350-501 Architecture Practice Question

A large service provider operates a national MPLS backbone with over 200 P routers and 500 PE routers. They use IS-IS as the IGP with segment routing and have deployed TI-LFA for link and node protection. Recently, a core router (P1) suffered a complete failure, and during the failure, traffic for some prefixes was dropped for over 200ms. After the failure, the network recovered within seconds. The engineer suspects that TI-LFA did not provide the expected sub-50ms protection for some destinations. Further analysis reveals that the affected prefixes have their BGP next-hop on a router that is multiple hops away, and the P1 failure impacted both the primary path and the backup path computed by TI-LFA. The engineer reviews the TI-LFA configuration and finds that 'fast-reroute per-prefix ti-lfa' is enabled under router isis. The engineer also notes that P1 was not a protecting node for those prefixes. Which action should the engineer take to improve convergence time for these prefixes?

Answer choices

Why each option matters

Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.

Correct answer & explanation

Add the 'sr-protect' option under the fast-reroute configuration to enable node protection

For TI-LFA to provide node protection, the 'sr-protect' option should be configured, which forces the node to attempt to provide protection even for traffic that transits through the node. Option A is wrong because interface-level TI-LFA would not help; the issue is node-level. Option C is wrong because increasing IGP timers may cause slower convergence. Option D is wrong because there is no need for an additional LDP backup.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

  • Configure TI-LFA on all interfaces using 'fast-reroute per-prefix ti-lfa interface'

    Why it's wrong here

    Interface-level TI-LFA only protects against link failures, not node failures; the issue is node protection.

  • Add the 'sr-protect' option under the fast-reroute configuration to enable node protection

    Why this is correct

    The 'sr-protect' option ensures that the node acts as a protecting node for transit traffic, providing node protection even if the node itself is the failure point.

  • Reduce the IGP timers and enable incremental SPF to accelerate convergence

    Why it's wrong here

    Reducing timers may help but does not provide the sub-50ms protection that TI-LFA is designed for; the issue is that TI-LFA did not compute a backup path.

  • Deploy LDP as a fallback label distribution protocol to provide additional backup paths

    Why it's wrong here

    LDP does not provide fast reroute guarantees and would not achieve sub-50ms convergence.

About these practice questions

This 350-501 question is part of Courseiva's 971-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

JA

Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security

Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva

This 350-501 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 350-501 exam.