mediumMultiple Choice
300-410 Practice Question: Runs the following command to verify IPv6…
A network engineer runs the following command to verify IPv6 access-list hits:
R1# show ipv6 access-list FILTER | include matches
permit ipv6 2001:DB8:1::/48 any sequence 10 (10 matches)
deny ipv6 2001:DB8:2::/48 any sequence 20 (5 matches)
permit ipv6 any any sequence 30 (100 matches)What does this output indicate?
⚠ Common exam trap
Cisco often tests the misconception that hit counts on a deny entry mean the traffic was permitted, but in reality, the hit count indicates how many packets matched that deny rule and were dropped.
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
✓
5 packets from 2001:DB8:2::/48 have been denied, and 110 packets have been permitted.
The output shows the hit counts for each ACL entry: sequence 10 has permitted 10 packets from 2001:DB8:1::/48, sequence 30 has permitted 100 packets from any source, and sequence 20 has denied 5 packets from 2001:DB8:2::/48. The total permitted packets are 10 + 100 = 110, and the denied count is 5, matching the statement in A.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
5 packets from 2001:DB8:2::/48 have been denied, and 110 packets have been permitted.
Why this is correct
The match counters confirm the deny entry dropped five packets sourced from 2001:DB8:2::/48, while the two permit statements passed 10 and 100 packets respectively, totalling 110 permitted. This directly satisfies the stem's request to verify per-sequence IPv6 ACL hit counts.
- ✗
All packets from 2001:DB8:2::/48 have been permitted.
Why it's wrong here
Sequence 20 explicitly denies traffic from 2001:DB8:2::/48, and the five matches confirm that deny is being hit, so those packets are dropped, not permitted. The permit any any at sequence 30 is tempting, but it only applies to packets that were not already matched by the earlier deny.
- ✗
The access list has been applied to an interface but not used.
Why it's wrong here
The match counters (10, 5, 100) prove the ACL is actively filtering live traffic, so it cannot be unused. An unapplied or direction-less ACL would show zero matches on every sequence; here the counters increment, which is the whole point of running this verification command.
- ✗
The access list is invalid because of the order of entries.
Why it's wrong here
The ordering is deliberate and valid: specific permits and denies precede the catch-all permit, which is exactly how first-match IPv6 ACL processing should be structured. Reordering would change behaviour, not fix an error, so the list is functioning as intended rather than being invalid.
Visual reference
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every 300-410 question from scratch — 1,401 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This 300-410 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 300-410 exam.